Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Canada China Transportation

Canada Reverses Tariff On Chinese EVs (washingtontimes.com) 91

Posted by BeauHD from the would-you-look-at-that dept.
Longtime Slashdot reader hackingbear shares a report from the Washington Times: Breaking with the United States, Canada has agreed to cut its 100% tariff [back to 6.1%] on Chinese electric cars in return for lower tariffs on Canadian farm products, Prime Minister Mark Carney said Friday after meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. He said there would be an initial annual cap of 49,000 vehicles on Chinese EV exports to Canada, growing to about 70,000 over five years. Prior to the 100% tariff, China exported about 41,000 vehicles to Canada in 2023. In exchange, China will reduce its total tariff on canola seeds, a major Canadian export, from 84% to about 15%, he told reporters. Carney said China has become a more predictable partner to deal with than the U.S, the country's neighbor and longtime ally.

[hackingbear writes: "After helping the U.S. arrest Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, who was later released without admitting guilty by the Biden administration after bickering with China, Canada had followed the U.S. in putting tariffs of 100% on EVs from China and 25% on steel and aluminum under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Carney's predecessor."] China responded by imposing duties of 100% on Canadian canola oil and meal and 25% on pork and seafood. It added a 75.8% tariff on canola seeds last August. Collectively, the import taxes effectively closed the Chinese market to Canadian canola, an industry group has said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canada Reverses Tariff On Chinese EVs More

Canada Reverses Tariff On Chinese EVs

Comments Filter:

  • Stupidity (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Trading away long-term stability for short-term profits. If you don't understand how stupid that is, then your country is fucked.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by machineghost ( 622031 )

      You are absolutely correct: Trump *is* really stupid for fucking America over by chasing short-term profits (and xenophobia) over the country's long-term interests.

    • Re:Stupidity (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kernel Kurtz ( 182424 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @09:26PM (#65930476)

      Trading away long-term stability for short-term profits. If you don't understand how stupid that is, then your country is fucked.

      America used to be a long term stable trading partner, but they are not any longer, so what was your point again?

      • Re: Stupidity (Score:2, Troll)

        by jrnvk ( 4197967 )

        Something like 90% of the value of all Canadian exports to the US are exempt from tariffs. Most nations probably would not act so dramatically given the same situation, so it is objectively a very remarkable set of events that has transpired.

        • Re: Stupidity (Score:4, Informative)

          by Kernel Kurtz ( 182424 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @10:10PM (#65930550)

          Something like 90% of the value of all Canadian exports to the US are exempt from tariffs. Most nations probably would not act so dramatically given the same situation, so it is objectively a very remarkable set of events that has transpired.

          But it is no longer stable. It changes practically from day to day, depending on what the retard in the Whitehouse read on Twitter or whatever, instead of being based on predictable and respected agreements negotiated in good faith like normal countries do (and the US used to). The problem is Donald Trump's word is worth nothing at all, he actually negotiated most of the agreements with us that he's broken, so yeah. Agreements with him are like written on toilet paper anyway. China technically can't be any less honest. At worst they could be the same.

        • And Trump keeps saying repeatedly that he has no use for CUSMA and he could end it this year.

        • Most nations probably would not act so dramatically given the same situation,

          Most nations haven't received repeated and apparently credible threats of annexation buy the USA.

           

          it is objectively a very remarkable set of events that has transpired.

          You mean like threatening a NATO ally with war, or kidnapping a foreign head of state, or speculating that only financial force will be needed to annex Canada?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Previously: China, communism bad! Be more capitalism.
      Now: No!!! Not like that!!! We can't compete!!! **tarrifs** **sanctions**

    • Trading away long-term stability for short-term profits. If you don't understand how stupid that is, then your country is fucked.

      That's one way to look at it.

      Another is that our domestic auto manufacturing sector is in serious danger - as is our agri sector - due to our traditionally largest trading partner deciding they want the equitable, balanced, and fair trade to strongly favor them. We are viewing this is as an opportunity to relieve stress on the agri industry while opening up talks for future auto partnerships. Toyota - for instance - is actually our largest company outputting vehicles. If we can get China to partner up

    • That's laughable coming from the US... In the long term I see China as the better partner as the US has ever been, and don't blame everything on Trump as it already started before him, but he is now really making it the worst it has ever been.

  • Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @06:53PM (#65930270)

    Carney said China has become a more predictable partner to deal with than the U.S, the country's neighbor and longtime ally.

    I don't know what to say... more winning?

    The long-term damage Trump and his puppetmasters are doing to America is incalculable.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 0123456 ( 636235 )

      I would guess these are most likely to compete with Japanese cars like the Civic, not F150 trucks.

      • Re:Sigh... (Score:4, Informative)

        by vux984 ( 928602 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @07:22PM (#65930302)

        Or perhaps to compete with Tesla 3.

      • I would guess these are most likely to compete with Japanese cars like the Civic, not F150 trucks.

        I'd venture a guess the lower-end Chinese EVs would fill the void left by the discontinuation of the Nissan Versa, Hyundai Accent, and Mitsubishi Mirage. The Honda Civic might be a "cheap" car if you're staring down the lower end of a six figure income, but for those who don't earn that much - it's still a bit spendy.

        • I wouldn't count on it not gutting the high end as well. I'd consider the Xiaomi as a competitor for a Porsche. I recall one guy living in China who had a Panamera replace it with the Xiaomi. He felt it was a much better car for 1/2 the price. He was from Germany if I remember right.

          • I'd consider the Xiaomi as a competitor for a Porsche.

            Generally, people buy a Porsche because they want a Porsche. Once you start getting firmly into the realm of Veblen goods, it's not just about the technical specs.

            It's like Harley motorcycles. From the standpoint of performance, they're not actually all that great for what they cost. Even with better, cheaper Japanese bikes available, Harleys still sell, because it's a Harley.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by ukoda ( 537183 )
              The term you are looking for is "Status symbol". Porsche and Harley sell as status symbols so don't really have to worry to much about how good their value for money is. However only a handful brands fall into the status symbol class, for the rest they need to start worrying about competing with China real fast.
              • Recent news indicates that Porsche, at least, should be worried [ft.com]. There seem to be multiple factors at work here, but value and drop in sales to China are among them. Status symbols change over time.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by ukoda ( 537183 )
                  Yes, in particular China has different criteria for a status symbol for cars from many other countries. The traditional claim for status of a Porsche was the driving experience, but that was not the case in China. In China appeal was it was exotic and expensive.

                  Interestingly when I lived in China, circa 2013, people wanted American or European cars. I brought a BYD F0 and was the only staff member who owned a Chinese car. They were confused about why I chose it, as it lacked status. They didn't unde
            • I think you missed the point it was a German guy who was dissatisfied with the Porsche, saw/test drove the SU7, loved it and sold the Porsche. More embarrassing for Porsche is the SU7 is now faster round the ring. Which is part of that status thing of a Porsche. Who's the fastest round the ring. That ring thing was part of Tesla's problem amongst that crowd. Initially it couldn't make it round the ring without dying. A ford fiesta was faster. Since then they have tweaked the S to make it round.

        • Versa is not discontinued. They discontinued the manual transmission. For me and maybe you that's the same thing since the slush box is mediocre (4 speeds in the 2020s? Wtf) and the CVT is made of eggshells, but most people don't care.

    • Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Informative)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @07:36PM (#65930316)
      I think the headline is misleading, and Carney didn't compare China to the US, although a reporter prompted him to do so:

      "In terms of the way our relationship has progressed in recent months with China, it is more predictable, and you see results coming from that," Carney said in response to media queries whether it was a more predictable and reliable partner than the United States.

      To me it sounds like the reporter wanted him to compare the US to China, but his answer compares China now to China in the past.

      https://economictimes.indiatim... [indiatimes.com]

      None of which to say that the US has not been suddenly not only unreliable but antagonistic towards Canada (and Europe). But for the PM of Canada to publicly rank China over the US would be quite a thing.

      • Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by test321 ( 8891681 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @08:52PM (#65930442)

        To me it sounds like the reporter wanted him to compare the US to China, but his answer compares China now to China in the past.

        Which prompts to notice his diplomacy skills. He managed to not take the bait and deflect the question while still answering on the keywords he was given, not giving any inconvenient answer, and not making it sound he deflected to the casual listener. That's an art on its own; he's an old dog and knows plenty of tricks.

    • Carney said China has become a more predictable partner to deal with than the U.S, the country's neighbor and longtime ally.

      I don't know what to say... more winning?

      The long-term damage Trump and his puppetmasters are doing to America is incalculable.

      As a Canadian I've got a certain innate anti-American streak.

      But I have to admit that for the majority of the time since the end of WWII they've been a net good to the world (with the occasional epic disaster like the Iraq War).

      As much as I don't like the US it's unfortunate that Trump is bringing about the end of the US's golden age. I don't think the EU is cohesive enough to take the US's place, and I don't think the international system will do better under Chinese dominance.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        Here, let me fix that for you:

        As much as I don't like the US it's unfortunate that Trump brought about the end of the US's golden age.

        Even if trump died tomorrow and the democrats got back in on the promise to restore relations with the rest of the world the trust is gone and will take a long time to restore, if ever. The USA will never again be the respected world power it was prior to 2016.

    • Re:Sigh... (Score:4, Informative)

      by hackingbear ( 988354 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @11:47PM (#65930672)

      I don't know what to say... more winning?

      No, you should instead admit that the so-called western "democracies" are actually more evil than you are told to. You should ask why the western democracies have decayed into populism and probably soon Nazi

      Example 1: relating to Huawei and Canada, China detained two Canadians after the "kidnapping" of Huawei CFO and accused them spying. The western governments and media widely criticized Chinese government for falsifying charges and taking hostages (even though arguably the US+Canada were the one first doing that.) But after these two Canadian returned to Canada, they sued their government for leaking the fact that they spied for Canada and the Canadian government settled the case with C$1m [theguardian.com]. So what do you see? The Chinese government was actually not making up the charges, Canada was not clean, and the western media was totally biased.

      (I tried to post this which is totally relvant to /. but got rejected and even its entry was removed from my submission list. Go figure.)

      Example 2: this was what I tried to post on /. but got rejected:

      Ex-South Korea President found to Provoke Pyongyang with Drones

      Former President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea, a democratic nation, tried to provoke North Korea [reuters.com], an authoritarian state, into mounting an armed aggression to justify his December 2024 martial law declaration and eliminate political opponents, a special prosecutor said on Monday. The prosecutor has confirmed an elaborate scheme allegedly masterminded by Yoon and his defense minister, Kim Yong-hyun, going back to October 2023 to suspend the powers of parliament and replace it with an emergency legislative body. "To create justification for declaring martial law, they tried to lure North Korea into mounting an armed aggression, but failed as North Korea did not respond militarily," special prosecutor, Cho Eun-seok said. The South Korean military flew drones over Pyongyang in October at the order of then Defense Minister Kim. North Korea responded the provocation by blowing up a symbolic road to the South to avoid starting a war. Yoon may have been compelled to act in part because of the unrelenting political pressure he was under stemming from allegations of bribery against his wife, but there was no evidence to suspect Kim was involved in the conspiracy, Park Ji-young, a spokesperson for the special prosecutor's team, said. North Korea has for long time been labeled North Korea as a great threat to world peace.

      So you see: the "democratically elected" president of a so-called democratic country SK was trying to provoke a so-called authoritarian regime NK to attack SK, and only stopped by the so-called dictator Kim Jong Un. The Nobel Peace prize should be awarded to Kim but instead awarded to someone who is now trying hard to kiss the ass of a real dictator [cnn.com].
       

      • TL/DR: you think that western democracies are evil and that Kim Jong Un is a white-haired boy who deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. That, and you really like to use the phrase "so-called."

        The widely-documented totalitarian excesses of North Korea hardly need to be repeated here. Your fanboyism and sycophancy to its leader make me think seriously that you are operating from there.

        And Kim Jong Un does not deserve a Nobel Peace Prize because he decided not to respond to provocation. Now, if there's an award for

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by 0xG ( 712423 )

        President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea,

        This was not the action of 'a western democracy' but the action of a criminal, which said western democracy is now prosecuting him for. So what's your point?

        • This was not the action of 'a western democracy' but the action of a criminal, which said western democracy is now prosecuting him for.

          If he succeed to provoke NK to attack and the war broke, then nobody will charge him -- that's his whole plot. It is Kim who stopped the plot and led Yoon to be charged.

          Oh... every time the west done something terrible, it is the fault of some individuals or a few companies, whereas NK, China, Russia etc did (or didn't actualy do but accused of doing) were the fault of the regime, the country, and their culture.

          Considered these:

          1. millions of Native Americans were killed under the laws of US which has been

    • Re:Sigh... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TheDarkMaster ( 1292526 ) on Saturday January 17, 2026 @01:41AM (#65930830)
      Look at the situation from a South American perspective. China has been proposing trade partnerships in exchange for access to the region's resources. What does the US offer? The US sticks a gun to your head and demands that you only do “business” with them, where the terms of the "agreement" only benefit the US.

      Imagine which partner we here in the South will prefer?

  • Cheap Chinese EV and 0% financing? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by klipclop ( 6724090 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @07:03PM (#65930280)
    If these EVs are cheap and 0% financing, I would consider buying one. The Canadian car manufacturing is dead, and hopefully the west coast can encourage some of these Chinese EV manufacturers to build some manufacturing in western Canada and flip the bird at Ontario and the legacy car manufacturing industry and unions.

    • Re:Cheap Chinese EV and 0% financing? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 16, 2026 @07:13PM (#65930288)

      The unions aren't the problem. The problem is Ford who suckered people into thinking paying $100,000 for a truck is normal. Not so long ago that was Mercedes S class money. Now it's emotional support vehicles that never get a scratch on the bed.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by Powercntrl ( 458442 )

        The problem is Ford who suckered people into thinking paying $100,000 for a truck is normal.

        Well yeah, if you wore a $100k piece of jewelry and took the train instead, you'd probably get mugged. The truck is a much safer way of flaunting your wealth. Plus, you can put one of those Costco-sized packs of toilet paper in the back, too. Do you know how hard that would be to carry on public transit? Win-win.

  • If its good enough for the Ford CEO, maybe all 49,000 imports should be that model. Should bring the price down even more.

  • Crazy (Score:3)

    by TwistedGreen ( 80055 ) on Friday January 16, 2026 @09:28PM (#65930478)

    You know what's funny? Given how "connected" cars are these days, I'd rather the Chinese government be tracking me than some American corporation. How did we end up in this situation?

    • There was that story awhile back how GM was selling telemetry data to a data broker, which was then in turn selling it to insurance companies. I guess nothing is really stopping the Chinese from doing something similar, but the take away is that sketchy companies are going to do sketchy shit in the pursuit of greater profits, regardless of whether they're American or Chinese.

  • The USA is an unreliable trading partner, so naturally Canada has to start diversifying.

    Problem is, China is a reliable trading partner... it will reliably screw us over. So as long as Trump is in power, Canada-China trade is probably a good idea just to have options, but I don't see China as a long-term solution for Canada to compensate for the shitshow that is the USA.

    We should be expanding trade with reliable partners like the EU, Japan, Australia, Mexico, and Taiwan. And maybe to some extent India

    • There is only so much trade that can be done, especially for a small market like Canada. The US simply cannot be replaced or even largely diminished in terms of trade volume, even in the long term.

      Even assuming Canada made favorable deals like this one with every other nation on Earth, you would still be magnitudes away from achieving any type of financial independence that actually mattered for risk mitigation purposes.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        I don't think the USA has anything to offer Canada that they couldn't get from another country. The reason for the past high volume of trade between them was simple geography. However with the USA putting up trade and cultural barriers it is perfectly reasonable to expect Canada to pivot away from the USA to, pretty much anywhere else.

        • Re: Unreliable trading partner (Score:4, Insightful)

          by jrnvk ( 4197967 ) on Saturday January 17, 2026 @09:31AM (#65931166)

          > I don't think the USA has anything to offer Canada that they couldn't get from another country.

          About 90% of Canadian oil exports transit the US to get to their final destination today, and all talks of bigger domestic Canadian pipelines and infrastructure to bypass the US have essentially stalled. One pipeline did finally open in 2024 after 11 years of planning and construction, but its capacity pales in comparison to the existing US links, and cannot sustain the industry alone.

          Along with the recent events in Venezuela, Canadian oil is in a precarious position here. Other nations already get their supply elsewhere for cheaper.

          To say the US does not offer something that others cannot provide is a bit like ignoring reality - others simply cannot give Canada the same economic opportunity that the US currently does, even if they were willing.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by ukoda ( 537183 )
            To be clear when I say "I don't think the USA has anything to offer Canada that they couldn't get from another country." I am talking about exports from the USA that Canada imports.

            Oil is an interesting problem. That 90% can be changed to 0%, it just takes time, money and motivation. The USA has provided the motivation. The interesting part is we are passing peak oil in some countries with the long term demand dropping to needs for plastics and lubricants. There will remain a healthy demand for sever

      • Well, the EU has repeatedly put their hands up to take our Aluminum if the US doesn't want it...

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by dskoll ( 99328 )

        We don't have a choice, though. We either have to find a way to survive without being completely dependent on the USA, or we lose our sovereignty.

        For most of history, Canada and the USA had no free trade agreement and indeed the USA imposed high tariffs on us. We survived. And we'll survive this... there's no choice.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        I think the average person in the USA is unaware just how much of the thinking, like CANZUK, is happening in business world wide right now. The company I'm doing work for is in the process of doing a global launch of a new product and the USA is an afterthought in that process i.e. we will sell it to them if they want but we are not marketing anything there, not worth the effort.

    • Canada is making a choice for the less of 2 evils. It should really diversify WAY beyond both the USA and China.

      • Canada is making a choice for the less of 2 evils. It should really diversify WAY beyond both the USA and China.

        Canada's actually doing more than that; Carney has been strengthening trade ties with the EU as well, and building a better relationship with India. What is obvious to us in Canada is that we must diversify, and no single partner can be trusted over the long term to behave in a friendly and reasonable way. We did behave up to now as though the US was a trusted and reasonable partner, which could at least be expected to behave in its own interest; the shocking reversal has been to discover that they're now o

  • In a sense that trade will be predictably weaponized. Better than Trump's unpredictability, but I doubt the end result would be much better.

  • Carney selling Canada down the river to spite Trump. We'll show'em who's boss, eh?

Slashdot Top Deals

God help those who do not help themselves. -- Wilson Mizner

Close