tariff

TORONTO — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is heading to Europe in the middle of a trade war with President Trump, seeking a deeper relationship with the European Union that could give Canadians greater freedom to work and study there.

Canada will seek an arrangement that would allow Canadians to live and work in Europe without visas as part of a strategic partnership, according to a senior Canadian official familiar with the discussions.

The official said Ottawa is not seeking to replicate the arrangements Norway or Switzerland have with the EU and did not propose “associate membership,” a term used in a recent report. Canada instead wants a partnership tailored to its priorities, with investment at its core.

Roughly 70% of Canadian exports go to the United States. Europe is central to Carney’s effort to reduce that dependence.

Carney has ruled out EU membership, saying Canada instead wants “a unique security and economic alliance” with the bloc. He said formal discussions will begin next month.

Economics is only part of the push, Carney said Tuesday. “The core of this, yes, there is an economic component, but it is about greater sovereignty,” he said.

Canadian government officials have consulted provinces and labor groups but have not settled on what form the relationship should take. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the talks publicly.

Carney’s Trump challenge returns to Europe

Carney will attend European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s State of the Union address Wednesday as a guest of honor before addressing the European Parliament on Thursday.

Carney cautioned against expecting a major announcement in Europe, saying the “real deepening discussions” will begin at the Canada-EU summit in Montreal in late October.

The trip puts him back on the European stage as relations with Washington reel from tariffs, threats and personal attacks since trade talks collapsed.

Carney said Tuesday that economic integration, once viewed largely as an asset, is increasingly “being used as a weapon by certain countries,” making it more important for Canada to deepen ties with trusted partners. He is also carrying to Europe a message that has won praise there but that European governments have been reluctant to follow in dealing with the United States: Middle powers should resist economic coercion and be willing to walk away from a bad deal.

Carney’s Davos speech on middle powers in January drew a personal rebuke from Trump, and another forceful defense could raise the temperature again.

Canada has retaliated against U.S. tariffs and rejected terms Carney says would weaken its sovereignty. Europe, by contrast, shelved retaliation and accepted a deal leaving most EU exports to the U.S. facing tariffs of up to 15%.

That choice is striking given the EU’s economic weight as the world’s largest trading bloc.

At Davos in January, Carney urged middle powers to band together rather than bow to great powers. When countries negotiate alone with a hegemon, he said, “we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered.”

“This is not sovereignty,” Carney said. “It is the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.”

In a European Parliament debate in March, French lawmaker Chloe Ridel said Carney had “said out loud what many Europeans think quietly,” while German lawmaker Tobias Cremer urged Europe to “show the same courage as the Canadians have done in this moment of rupture.”

Tobias Gehrke of the European Council on Foreign Relations said Europe accepted economic pain in hopes of preserving U.S. support for NATO and Ukraine, but gained neither firm security commitments nor stable ties with Washington.

“European governments will be watching closely to see whether retaliation creates leverage or simply produces more escalation and an increasing bill,” Gehrke said.

Building a hedge against Washington

Canadian Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne rejected the idea that Canada’s push toward Europe is simply an effort to gain leverage over Washington, saying Ottawa intends to keep working with the United States even as it builds stronger partnerships elsewhere.

“It’s always about us,” Champagne told the Associated Press. “We will still do things with the United States.”

But Champagne also said the geopolitical landscape has fundamentally shifted. “The world has changed and America has changed,” he said. “And I think the world has taken notice.”

Carney’s trip follows his global investment summit in Toronto, part of a broader push to attract international capital and reduce dependence on the United States.

Canada and the EU already cooperate on trade, defense, energy, technology and critical minerals. Bilateral trade reached about $147 billion in 2025, making the EU Canada’s second-largest trading partner.

Europe moves closer to Canada too

Underscoring the push for closer ties, the European Parliament said Monday that it will open an office in Ottawa, its 10th outside the EU, with a regional mandate extending to the Arctic.

“At a time when the world is becoming more unpredictable, like-minded partners need to work even more closely together,” European Parliament President Roberta Metsola said.

Canada this year became the first non-European country to join the EU’s $173-billion SAFE defense program, giving Canadian companies access to joint procurement.

Ian Lesser of the German Marshall Fund in Brussels said Trump’s tariffs and policies toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and his stated intention to acquire Greenland for the U.S. have accelerated efforts by Canada and Europe to diversify their economic and security ties.

“The sheer unpredictability emanating from Washington has given history a shove,” Lesser said. He said many in Brussels still prefer to accommodate Washington or “wait and see” whether November’s midterm elections produce a Congress able to constrain Trump.

Carney will also travel to Britain to meet Prime Minister Andy Burnham for the first time. Both men are supporters of Everton soccer club and are expected to meet at the team’s League Cup match against Wolverhampton on Wednesday.

Gillies writes for the Associated Press. AP reporter Sam McNeil in Brussels contributed to this report.

TORONTO — Ontario Premier Doug Ford said Thursday he hopes President Trump’s Republicans lose both the House and Senate in the midterm elections, saying voters should punish Trump politically for his escalating trade war with Canada.

“Hopefully he’s going to lose the Senate. He’s going to lose Congress. I hope so, and hold him accountable,” Ford said. “But we’ll see how that goes. We aren’t going to interfere in the U.S. election.”

Ford has emerged as one of Trump’s most outspoken Canadian critics, accusing him of trying to strip industry out of Ontario and move it south of the border as the two trade personal insults and threats.

Ford’s comments came two days after Washington escalated the dispute by banning some Canadian dairy products and motorcycles and most alcoholic beverages after Canadian retaliatory tariffs took effect on about $20 billion in U.S. goods. Trump also moved to shut Canadian products out of large, long-term U.S. government contracts.

“He’s not reliable at all,” Ford said. “He could make a deal today and then change his mind. And we’ve seen that over and over again.”

Still, Ford said he believes Trump wants an agreement before the midterms and that Canada should return to negotiations as soon as possible.

“I truly believe President Trump wants a deal before the midterms,” Ford said. “I could be wrong, but I think it’s best that we sit down and get a deal.”

Last year, Trump abruptly ended trade talks with Canada after Ford’s Ontario government aired an anti-tariff television ad in the United States using former President Ronald Reagan’s criticism of tariffs.

The feud repeatedly has turned personal. In an interview with the Associated Press last month, Ford mocked Trump for keeping a portrait of Reagan near his desk while pursuing tariffs the former president had criticized, saying Reagan would be “throwing up on him from the picture if he knew what was going on.”

Trump described him as “the less charismatic, intelligent, and overall unimpressive brother of the late, great, Rob Ford.”

Trump also signed an executive order directing the U.S. government to refer to Lake Ontario as “Lake America,” a name Canada does not recognize.

Ford said Thursday that Trump unintentionally strengthened Canada by forcing it to reduce its dependence on the United States.

“The only two good things Donald Trump has ever done for Canada,” Ford said, were that “he woke us up” and “he united the country like I’ve never seen before.”

Gillies writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — A trade war between the United States and Canada entered a new phase Tuesday as Ottawa’s retaliatory tariffs on American goods took effect, escalating a dispute that has steadily strained relations between the allies.

Canada’s tariffs, which came into force just after midnight, cover roughly $20 billion in U.S. goods and impose duties of as much as 50% on products, from steel and aluminum to farm equipment, clothing and electronics. The list also reaches into the everyday commerce that binds the two economies, including cheese, seafood and cosmetics.

It was the latest sign that relations between the two neighbors have reached their lowest point in decades, after Trump dismissed Canada as the 51st American state, moved to rename Lake Ontario and mocked its armed forces.

Ottawa’s latest measures are a response to tariffs imposed by President Trump last month on Canadian exports. The two governments had appeared close to a trade deal just a month ago. But talks broke down in dramatic fashion, leaving both sides aggrieved and accusing the other of negotiating in bad faith.

In a post Tuesday, Trump said Canada “has been ripping us off for years” and threatened to respond by removing access for Canadian businesses to key American markets.

“What many do not realize is that the Canadian Government, including Canadian Provinces, have banned American Small Businesses and Companies from selling into their Government Procurement Markets,” Trump wrote. “This is the case even though Canada gets broad access into the massive American Government Procurement Market, including those of our States.

“That is not reciprocity, it is a Canadian Trade Scam. From now on, NO RECIPROCITY — NO ACCESS!” he continued. “I am hereby directing the [General Services Administration], working with the [U.S. Trade Representative], to take all necessary steps to REMOVE Canadian-origin products from GSA’s Multiple Award Schedules unless Canada restores full and fair reciprocity for American Farmers and Companies.”

Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, has characterized the confrontation as more than a dispute over tariffs, arguing that demands by a bullying Trump administration threaten Canada’s economic independence.

In a video released Tuesday, Carney argued that in the past, the United States has tried to use tariffs to “break us,” only to have Canada’s economy grow stronger and more diversified. He urged Canadians to buy Canadian and break economic dependency from the United States.

“This won’t be easy, and I won’t pretend otherwise,” Carney said. “But Canadians have faced difficult stretches before, and what has carried us through has never ever been any one measure. It’s always been Canadians looking out for each other.”

Trump, meanwhile, has pressed Canada to make concessions on trade and has warned of further tariffs, including potentially higher duties on Canadian automobiles. He also threatened to ban the sale of aircraft from Canada’s Bombardier unless its products are manufactured in the United States.

“If they want our Market, they must build here, and stop treating America like a ‘piggybank,’” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday. “BUY AMERICAN. FLY ON AMERICAN AIRLINERS. ENJOY AMERICAN LIQUOR AND BEVERAGES. SAIL ON LAKE AMERICA. AMERICA FIRST!”

Earlier Monday, Trump posted an image showing Mexico, Canada, Central America, Greenland and Caribbean nations with the colors of the American flag. He also posted a caricature of him and Carney playing hockey in which Trump tells him: “Get up, Governor.”

Both sides stand to lose in a trade war poised to hurt businesses large and small across the world’s longest international border.

A prolonged economic conflict poses long-term risks for Canada, which faces price hikes and investment losses from the United States, by far its largest trading partner.

But Americans may also confront higher costs at a time when inflation is already a stubborn problem for the Trump administration. And the trade war may be felt most in northern border states set to hold midterm elections that could swing control of the U.S. Senate, becoming yet another political challenge for embattled Republican lawmakers.

In Maine, Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who is seeking reelection, has called Trump’s tariffs “a mistake.” In Michigan, Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed released a video Tuesday highlighting everyday goods that have risen more than 30% over the last year, including Tide Pods, toilet paper and Tim Hortons coffee, as the trade conflict and war in Iran drive up costs.

American alcohol has also been the target of boycotts imposed by several Canadian provinces since March 2025 in response to earlier tariffs on Canadian goods by Trump.

The boycotts since then have erased roughly $360 million in revenue for the U.S. wine industry, according to a Wine Institute report, which represents California wineries. Canada makes up more than 35% of the export market for U.S. wine, more than the EU, U.K. and China markets combined.

For some California winemakers, the impact was even greater. One Sonoma winery referenced in the report said Canada made up about 85% of its international sales. Multiple wineries have had to lay off employees because of hits to their business.

“It’s had a tremendous negative impact,” said Julie Berge, vice president of communications at the Wine Institute.

Wine is not the only California business that has taken a hit — tourism has also seen a sharp decline in arrivals from Canada. In 2025, visitors from the country dropped by 20%.

Canada also targeted the agriculture, electronics and transportation equipment industries with its tariffs announced Tuesday, all of which have a presence in California.

Soon after the World Cup brought positive international attention and tourists to the United States, Trump escalated trade tensions with Canada.

“You went from this really high, exciting moment for the U.S. in terms of international attention, to the next week, it’s negative again,” Deborah Friedland, a hospitality consultant at financial services firm Eisner Advisory Group, told the Associated Press. “It’s one step forward and two steps back.”

Times staff writers Wilner and Ceballos reported from Washington and Duneja from Los Angeles.

WASHINGTON — Republicans appeared to have a firm grip on the Senate heading into the final two years of President Trump’s term. But with less than two months until Election Day, control of the chamber is now up for grabs.

Democrats have found themselves competing in states that once seemed beyond their reach as Trump’s slipping approval ratings and voters’ dissatisfaction with the economy create a difficult political environment for Republicans. But races Democrats once counted on winning have also become more complicated.

It’s a battle that’s expected to exceed $3.4 billion in spending across all races during the midterm campaign. The implications are huge for Trump’s agenda and his ability to fill administration jobs and open court seats for the remainder of his term, as the Senate is empowered to confirm or block presidential nominees.

Republicans say it’s unlikely for everything to break in Democrats’ favor, but they acknowledge they’re facing a difficult landscape. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told South Dakota’s KELOLAND News last week that he does “worry” about losing the chamber.

“I’m a realist,” Thune said. “I don’t ever try and sugarcoat things. I think it’s a competitive environment right now.”

Democrats face a scrambled path to the majority

Democrats need to net four seats to win the majority. The original path had been to hold Michigan, Georgia and New Hampshire while winning back Republican-held seats in Alaska, Maine, North Carolina and Ohio. But things have changed.

“We now have multiple paths for the majority,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said last month. “We found new states — Iowa, Texas — which people a year ago weren’t even paying attention to.”

Some of the states where Democrats were feeling most optimistic at the start of the election cycle, such as Michigan and Maine, have grown murkier.

In Michigan, where there’s an open seat this fall, no GOP candidate has won a Senate race since 1994. But Democrats are struggling to unite behind nominee Abdul El-Sayed. The favorite of progressives narrowly defeated moderate U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens in the August primary, and feelings remain raw from a bruising contest that saw nearly $70 million spent against El-Sayed.

Republicans believe Mike Rogers, who lost the 2024 Senate race by fewer than 20,000 votes, has an improved shot against El-Sayed. The Senate Leadership Fund — Senate Republicans’ spending PAC — added $6 million to its Michigan advertising investment after El-Sayed won, bringing their total spending to $51 million, the third-highest total.

Democrats also saw a prime opportunity to finally defeat five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins in Maine, where Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris won more votes than Trump in 2024.

Progressive Graham Platner easily won the nomination in June, but he left the race the next month over a sexual assault allegation that he denies. Democratic delegates in late July chose Troy Jackson, a lesser-known former state legislative leader, to replace him.

Jackson has been forced to play catch-up. Collins and aligned super PACs have spent almost $80 million so far, according to the ad-tracking firm AdImpact, while Jackson and Democratic-aligned groups have spent and reserved close to $45 million since he became the nominee.

As one path narrowed for Democrats, others widened

Democrats increasingly see a real possibility in Texas, a state that has been an elusive goal for decades, and other GOP-led states including Iowa, Alaska and Ohio.

In Texas, Democrat James Talarico faces state Attorney General Ken Paxton, who ousted four-term incumbent Republican Sen. John Cornyn to win the GOP nomination. Senate GOP leadership backed Cornyn, seeing him as the stronger general election candidate.

Paxton has been shadowed for decades by legal and ethical questions, including indictments for securities fraud, though he was not convicted.

Talarico and allied groups have spent nearly $30 million on advertising since the May runoff, compared to less than $3 million by pro-Paxton groups. The political fund associated with Trump last week spent $10 million on TV and digital ads to help Paxton — the first major general election investment by MAGA Inc. for the midterms. Senate GOP leaders had petitioned Trump’s political team to spend some of the more than $400 million it had last month to help Paxton.

Democrats have also upped their spending in Alaska, Iowa, Ohio and North Carolina, all states currently held by Republicans. The GOP, meanwhile, is feeling more optimistic about New Hampshire as well as Michigan, while spending more to defend seats in Iowa and Alaska.

The expanded map has upped the anticipated total spending this cycle. AdImpact in June projected $3.4 billion in advertising spending on Senate races, a significant increase from the $2.8 billion the ad spending firm projected in the fall of 2025.

Why more states are in play than expected

Democrats’ path has widened in part because of Trump’s slumping job approval, notably on handling the economy, which was at 32% according to an AP-NORC poll in July — down from 40% in March 2025, shortly after he took office.

Trump’s trade policies and the war in Iran, with its corresponding inflated fuel costs, have added to the economic uncertainty for voters less than two months before Election Day.

“Things still cost too much. And so we’ve got to work on that issue,” Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio told The Associated Press. “We understand that and we know that’s real.”

Ohio Sen. Jon Husted heard the concern firsthand at a roundtable last month. Husted is looking to fend off a comeback from former Sen. Sherrod Brown in another key matchup for both parties.

During the discussion on housing, one attendee told Husted that costs were “skyrocketing” in part because of uncertainty around tariffs.

“Uncertainty is the killer to this economy,” said Dean Windham, a real estate developer who previously ran for office as a Republican.

Some Republican Senate candidates have defended Trump’s policies while confronting concerns about their economic impact.

In Michigan, where Trump’s tariffs on Canada have become a central issue, Rogers has backed the president’s approach while leaving room for disagreement.

“President Trump is right to put America First — and tariffs are necessary, but are not a one-size-fits-all solution,” Rogers said in a recent statement.

Republicans believe the math still favors them

Even if Democrats hold every seat they currently control, they would need to flip at least two seats in states Trump carried by double digits in 2024 to win the majority.

Republicans are betting that those underlying advantages will matter more as Election Day approaches — particularly as Trump and the party turn their attention toward mobilizing voters who helped return him to the White House.

Trump told reporters last week that he will “be making a lot of stops” in the last 30 days before the election.

This week, Republicans will hold a midterm convention in Texas, where Trump is set to speak and top Senate candidates including Rogers and Husted are expected to attend.

But Republicans acknowledge they have work to do.

“Politics is local,” Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said. He pointed to Trump’s decision to import beef, which he said made farmers and ranchers “feel just like the administration pulled the rug right off from underneath” them.

“They’re hurt,” Rounds said. “They feel like they’ve been let down.”

Cappelletti, Beaumont and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. Beaumont reported from Des Moines, Iowa.

TORONTO — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told the Trump administration Tuesday to “stop doing memes, stop throwing shade and stop trying to be tough,” as he pushed back against a fresh wave of attacks from Washington.

Carney said U.S.-Canada trade talks could resume if Washington became serious about negotiations, but he also accused the United States of pursuing terms that he said could leave Canadian industries “gradually wound down in Canada and wiped out.”

“When the Americans stop doing memes, stop throwing shade and stop trying to be tough, and start being serious about having those discussions, we can have those discussions,” Carney said. “It’s not constructive, but that’s their democracy.”

His comments came after a new barrage from Washington since trade talks collapsed Aug. 21, including Trump’s move to rename Lake Ontario “Lake America” and social media posts taunting Canada. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also said Canada could not go “tit for tat” with a U.S. economy 13 times larger, while U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth mocked female Canadian cadets online.

Hegseth on Monday posted an image from a cadet training center in British Columbia showing two young women in uniform, adding “this is real” alongside a Canadian flag. Carney called the post “beneath their office.”

The Pentagon stood by it Tuesday, with deputy press secretary Jacob Bliss saying, “The X post speaks for itself.”

Carney said the U.S. approach in the talks would have left Canadian industries effectively as subsidiaries of American companies or imposed terms under which they would be “gradually wound down in Canada and wiped out.”

“We’re not going to — of course, we’re not going to accept those terms,” Carney said.

Carney said Washington sought an “uncompetitive” deal for key industries, including autos, while pushing changes affecting French-language and cultural protections. He said any of those issues was enough to block an agreement.

Carney said Washington also sought limits on Canada’s future trade deals. “Canada is a sovereign state. We will strike free trade deals with the countries we wish to strike free trade deals,” he said.

Carney was also buoyed by Monday’s Liberal sweep of three special elections, including a decisive win in Chicoutimi-Le Fjord, Quebec, where the Conservatives fell to third place.

The victories brought the Liberals to 173 seats in the 343-seat House of Commons and reinforced Carney’s position as he confronts Trump over trade and Canadian sovereignty.

Nelson Wiseman, a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Toronto, said Trump’s annexation threats carry particular weight in Quebec. “Quebecers have the most to lose in an apocalyptic scenario where the U.S. absorbs Canada, and the status of the French language disappears,” he said.

U.S.-Canada trade talks collapsed after the two sides failed to reach a deal, and Trump imposed 50% tariffs on roughly $20 billion in Canadian goods. Canada responded with plans for tariffs on U.S. products.

Trump has repeatedly talked about making Canada the 51st state.

Gillies writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — In firing up a trade war with Canada, President Trump turned to a 96-year-old statute so obscure that many trade lawyers didn’t even know it was still on the books.

Trump invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 on Aug. 24 to slap a 50% tax on $20 billion worth of Canadian imports. The move prompted dollar-for-dollar retaliation from Ottawa and strained already-tense relations between the neighbors and longtime allies.

The president’s Section 338 tariff authority has never been used, let alone tested in court. “This law is literally a blank canvas because it’s never been litigated,’’ said Ryan Majerus, a partner at law firm King & Spalding and a former U.S. trade official.

So it’s unclear whether Trump’s latest Canada tariffs could survive a legal challenge, and some lawyers argue that the Depression-era law has been rendered obsolete by more recent trade laws.

Trump raises Section 338 from the dead

To sanction Canada allegedly for discriminating against U.S. dairy, auto and alcoholic beverage exports this summer, the Trump administration reached back to the Great Depression.

The 1930 tariff legislation is known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act after its congressional sponsors. With the U.S. and world economies in collapse, Congress raised tariffs on hundreds of imports in an attempt to protect American farmers and manufacturers.

The tariffs are notorious among economists and historians for shutting down world commerce and making the Great Depression worse. (Trump, who proudly calls himself “Tariff Man,” has a different view, arguing that the Smoot-Hawley levies simply came too late to rescue the American economy.)

In addition to raising tariffs themselves, lawmakers in 1930 gave the president new power to impose them himself: Section 338 authorizes presidential tariffs of up to 50% on imports from countries that have discriminated against U.S. businesses.

Before Trump, no president had actually used the statute.

“Until Trump’s second term, few trade lawyers were aware that Section 338 remained on the books or understood what it did,” legal scholars Peter Harrell and Jennifer Hillman of Georgetown University wrote this month in the libertarian magazine Reason.

Harrell and Hillman cite State Department records to show that the U.S. considered using Section 338 in trade disputes — against Spain in 1932 and against newly communist China in 1949 — but never did. After the Depression, U.S. policy focused more on using negotiations — rather than sanctions — to open foreign markets.

So Section 338 sat moldering in the law books.

Other laws take hold

As the years went by, the United States passed new trade laws. Some of them ceded to the president tariff power, which the Constitution originally granted to Congress. But the new laws also limited the president’s authority to certain circumstances — including dealing with national security threats and foreign currency crises — and required the government to carry out investigations and meet other procedural requirements beforehand.

“There is a very strong argument that [Section 338] was superseded,” said Sara Albrecht, chief executive of the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian advocacy group that represented businesses that successfully challenged the earlier Trump tariffs with the Supreme Court.

If Congress wanted the president to retain Section 338 power, Albrecht asks, why did lawmakers pass the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allowed for national security tariffs? And the Trade Act of 1974, which gives the president power to go after other countries’ unfair trade practices?

Battling over Canada’s dairy market

Legal experts see other weaknesses in the Section 338 tariffs.

Harrell and Hillman, for instance, write in Reason that Section 338 authorizes only tariffs that “offset” the harm that a foreign country’s trade practices do to American companies. But in targeting Canada, they note, the Trump administration made no attempt to calculate the dollar amount of damage arising from discrimination against U.S. farmers, automakers and marketers of alcoholic beverages. And the U.S. went after Canadian imports unconnected to those trouble spots, including hockey sticks and cement.

Harrell and Hillman also say that Canada’s protection of its dairy market does not single out U.S. farmers for discrimination; the rules apply to many other Canadian trading partners as well.

Moreover, the United States agreed to the Canadian system — in which Canada imposes stiff tariffs on dairy imports that exceed a quota — in a North America trade pact Trump himself negotiated with Canada and Mexico in his first term. Harrell and Hillman write that it is “incongruous, to say the least, for the United States to denounce as discriminatory the very terms it agreed to.”

But John Veroneau, former general counsel for the U.S. Trade Representative, said the Section 338 tariffs are straightforward: They are justified when another country discriminates against U.S. imports by taxing them more than it taxes imports from other countries.

And in a “perverse irony,” Veroneau said, Canada did just that when it responded to tariffs Trump imposed on Canadian products last year with its own retaliatory tariffs on U.S. imports. “Courts will rightly feel obliged in the face of any challenge [to decide]: Are the statutory requirements met or are they not met, however ludicrous the broader context might be,” said Veroneau, adjunct professor at the University of Maine School of Law.

Plaintiffs are so far hard to find

Trump’s other tools to impose his protectionist agenda already have floundered in court. The Supreme Court in February threw out his boldest gambit: invoking a 1977 national security law to hit almost every country on Earth last year with double-digit tariffs.

When Trump tried to replace the revenue lost to the Supreme Court defeat with a new set of tariffs, a specialized trade court in New York rejected those too — though the government was allowed to continue collecting the import taxes while the case works its way through the court system.

No one has filed a lawsuit challenging the Section 338 tariffs. The Liberty Justice Center has been looking for businesses willing to sue the government over the levies.

“I haven’t had a lot of response from plaintiffs,” Albrecht said. “Anytime you want to sue the government, it’s a hard proposition.” The Section 338 tariffs on Canada are also far smaller — just 5% of Canadian imports — than Trump’s 2025 worldwide tariffs, meaning that fewer companies have to pay them and can claim to have been injured by them.

There’s also a chance, Albrecht said, that the two countries will resume the talks they broke off Aug. 21 and reach a compromise to end a standoff neither country wants. “I’m hopeful that somebody blinks, that they come to some agreement and it all goes away,” she said.

TORONTO — Canada struck back at the United States on Tuesday with retaliatory tariffs on about $20 billion worth of American goods, including steel, dairy products, appliances and farm equipment, as the trade war between the once-friendly neighbors escalated sharply.

The tension threatened one of the world’s largest trading relationships. The new tariffs extended well beyond industrial goods, hitting everyday purchases such as seafood, cheese, clothing, cosmetics and toilet paper, with some facing duties as high as 50%.

“We did not choose this conflict, but when our economic integration is used as a weapon rather than the foundation for a win-win partnership, we need to stand up,” Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said in French, calling the situation “an unprecedented challenge imposed on Canada.”

Canada’s retaliation came after the Trump administration imposed 50% tariffs over the weekend on Canadian goods following the collapse of trade negotiations. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney accused Washington of trying to subordinate Canada and said U.S. demands during the failed talks showed that Americans wanted to “destroy our major industries.”

President Trump intensified the confrontation Monday, telling Canadian leaders to “fall in line” or face consequences “far WORSE” than existing tariffs and threatening new 50% tariffs on Canadian vehicles, auto parts and steel.

Trump added another provocation Tuesday, saying the United States was giving “serious consideration” to renaming Lake Ontario “Lake America” in a feud with Ontario Premier Doug Ford. Such a change would be reminiscent of the Republican president’s unilateral action last year by executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

The tariffs will take effect Sept. 8 at rates of 15%, 25% and 50%, with Canada matching the corresponding U.S. tariff rate on more than 700 products such as pulp and paper and electronics. The tariffs on many American products would double from 25% to 50%, with the largest share of the new measures affecting steel and aluminum.

Canadian officials said the goal is not to raise revenue but to protect Canadian companies and reduce U.S. imports.

U.S. steel imports, for example, have already fallen 30% since Canada imposed a 25% tariff, and the new 50% rate is expected to cut them further, Canadian officials said.

Goods facing 50% tariffs include some steel and aluminum products, furniture and clothing. Appliances, dairy products including cheese, fish and seafood, and certain steel and aluminum derivatives will face 25% tariffs. Existing Canadian countertariffs on U.S. autos will remain in place.

Canada also announced a support package for workers and businesses affected by the dispute worth $7.5 billion in Canadian dollars ($5.4 billion in U.S. dollars).

Canadian officials acknowledged the counter tariffs will raise costs for some businesses and consumers but said they expect the overall economic effects to be moderate.

They said the government has provided more than $30 billion Canadian dollars (US$21.7 billion) in tariff-related support since the beginning of 2025 — far more than it has collected in retaliatory duties — as it tries to cushion the blow from the trade fight.

Canada and the United States have deeply integrated supply chains across autos, energy, agriculture and manufacturing, making a prolonged trade fight potentially costly for businesses and workers on both sides of the border.

Businesses and consumers are caught in the middle, facing uncertainty about how much prices may increase.

Michael Howard II, owner of a furniture business in Warren, Michigan, outside Detroit, said the tariffs will hamper the “ability for us to put food on the table for our family” and affect “the ability for us to give back to our community.”

Howard and his wife started their business a decade ago. They make and sell everything from dining room tables to bookcases.

“To say that we don’t need Canada is just disingenuous,” he said. “It’s dishonest. And it’s just absolutely not truthful. We need our neighbor, but also they need us.”

Carney said Monday that Canada may need to move away from matching U.S. tariffs dollar for dollar and instead use more targeted retaliation aimed at protecting Canadian workers and businesses.

“An attitude at the negotiation table that Canada is a subsidiary of the United States” is “not something we’re going to accept,” Carney said.

Carney was even more blunt in French.

“We learned during the negotiations that the Americans want to destroy our major industries, including autos, steel and aluminum,” Carney said. “That was one of the main reasons we said no. It was a bad deal.”

On Monday, Carney said U.S. negotiators had raised the discoverability of French-language content on streaming platforms, along with French-language labeling rules, as trade irritants. He rejected the idea that those protections were negotiable, saying in French: “For the Americans, questions about the French language, Quebec culture, francophone culture and Canadian culture are irritants. Here in Quebec, here in Canada, they are rights.”

In a social media post early Tuesday, Trump wrote: “I would never interfere with Canadians speaking French! In fact, I have never even thought of doing such a stupid thing. This lie was made up by a weak and ineffective Prime Minister in an attempt to gain political support, which he has totally lost, from the people of Quebec. I love French Canadians!”

Gillies writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Seung Min Kim in Washington and Mike Householder in Warren, Mich., contributed to this report.