The Trump administration is being lobbied hard to spare Canada from planned tariffs on steel and aluminum, with even supporters of the U.S. president decrying the idea of penalties on the northern neighbour as ill-conceived and counter-productive.

News that Donald Trump is considering broad tariffs on the global steel and aluminum industry prompted members of his own party to warn of fractured alliances, rising costs for consumers, and unintended economic and geopolitical consequences.

He says final details are coming next week.

Read: Next up from the U.S.: potential steel tariffs

So far, he’s evincing a damn-the-torpedoes attitude: ”Trade wars are good, and easy to win,” the president tweeted Friday, arguing that the U.S. import-export deficit means it can afford to slow global trade.

But past and present U.S. military figures, a usually Trump-friendly editorial board, a supportive union, fellow Republicans and even companies that would otherwise benefit from tariffs, have urged Trump not to impose them on the U.S.’s No. 1 seller: Canada.

That includes the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal. Normally a Trump cheering corner, the opinion section of the pro-business newspaper ran an editorial titled, ”Trump’s Tariff Folly: His Tax On Aluminum and Steel Will Hurt The Economy And His Voters.”

It noted that Canada supplies more steel to the U.S. by orders of magnitude than China— the supposed target of this tariff.

”The tariffs will whack that menace to world peace known as Canada, which supplies 16% [of U.S. steel imports],” said the paper.

”Canada buys more American steel than any other country. […] Mr. Trump is punishing our largest trading partner in the middle of a NAFTA renegotiation that he claims will result in a much better deal. Instead he is taking a machete to America’s trade credibility.

”Why should Canada believe a word he says?”

Trump is hearing the same from the military.

The ostensible excuse for these tariffs is that foreign steel undermines U.S. national security, making emergency measures legitimate. Trump plans to use a provision in U.S. law that allows the president to impose tariffs if it’s a security matter. His administration has indeed declared it a security issue, and Trump says he’s leaning toward bigger penalties than many expected—a 25% global tariff on steel and 10% on aluminum.

But Trump’s own defense secretary, James Mattis, undermined the case for tariffs in a letter released several days ago. He said the military had more than enough steel for its needs, expressed concern broad tariffs would hurt key allies, and urged that any tariffs be narrowly focused.

Numerous Republican politicians have also urged the president to narrow his focus, from the broad tariff plans he has signaled.

The administration has been hearing this for months.

As it prepared its national-security study, witness after witness suggested Canada be exempted like it was from U.S. steel actions in the early 2000s and 1980s. Meanwhile, not one witness specifically called for tariffs on their northern neighbour.

A retired U.S. army brigadier-general, John Adams, an expert on the defense-industrial complex, testified that he supported tariffs, with one exception: ”The one supplier in whom I have complete confidence is Canada.” He added that Canada should bolster its monitoring of dumped imports.

Two of the people in the room with Trump when he announced his tariffs Thursday, and who mostly support his action, expressed similar pro-Canada views.

Michael Bless, chief executive of the Century Aluminum Company, said in his submission to the U.S. government: ”As a contiguous, friendly neighbor, Canada is a safe and reliable source of supply. In Century’s view, [these penalties] can be effective without applying it to Canada.”

John Lapides, president of a fourth-general family aluminum mill, said in his submission to the Department of Commerce study: ”We are in favor of international trade. Canada, for example, produces ingot and the slabs used for hot rolling essential to U.S. rolling mills and the downstream value chain.”

Both were in the cabinet room with Trump for the tariff announcement.

Other companies made such submissions to the U.S. government.

Bob Prusak, chief executive of Magnitude 7 Metals, testified that he opposed sanctions relief for anyone, with one exception: ”Other than Canada.”

Marco Palmieri of Novelis North America said the aluminum industries of the U.S. and Canada are intertwined, Canada plays a vital role in U.S. aluminum manufacturing efforts, and that, ”to ensure the viability of the U.S. aluminum industry, the Department should exclude Canada from any remedy recommendation made in its final report.”

The United Steelworkers union strongly favours tariffs—but not in Canada. The politically active union has members in both countries, and its president, Leo Gerard, is originally from Ontario.

Its written submission called for a Canadian exemption. Its statement following Trump’s preliminary announcement repeated the demand.

”All this BS,” Gerard said in an interview, when asked earlier this week about the prospect of Canada being targeted. ”Canada should just be excluded—period. We have an integrated economy. And if it gets undone, America will pay a heavy price.”

Several countries, including Canada, have hinted at retaliation if the U.S. imposes tariffs.

Some trade-watchers say that’s the biggest danger here: not simply that prices might rise for goods in the U.S., and fall on commodities elsewhere, but that turning national-security excuses into a trade weapon will prompt other countries to follow suit, and lead to escalating feuds that tear at the post-Second World War trading order.

Read: A ‘banner year’ for global trade in 2017: National Bank economist

Will China follow through on retaliation threats?

China had no immediate reaction Friday to U.S. President Donald Trump’s vow to impose high tariffs on steel and aluminum, which he followed up by insisting that trade wars “are good, and easy to win.”

Chinese leaders have threatened in the past to retaliate if Trump raises trade barriers, but now need to weigh whether to back up those threats with action and risk jeopardizing U.S. market access for smartphones and other exports that matter more to their economy than metals.

“China will definitely respond. It doesn’t want to be seen as weak. But it will be relatively restrained,” said economist Louis Kuijs of Oxford Economics. “They don’t want to be seen as a party that is wrecking the international trading system.”

Read: Country of the month: China

Global stock markets fell sharply Friday over worries of a possible trade war following Trump’s announcement that he will levy tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum.

Beijing has accused Trump of undermining global trade regulation by taking action over steel, technology policy and other disputes under U.S. law instead of through the World Trade Organization.

Chinese officials have appealed to the White House since last March to avoid hurting both sides by disrupting aluminum trade. Their tone hardened after Trump launched a probe in August of whether Beijing improperly pressures companies to hand over technology and in January raised duties on Chinese solar modules and washing machines.

“China will take necessary measures to defend its interests,” a Commerce Ministry official, Wang Hejun, said in a statement this week.

Japan and South Korea, both U.S. allies and major exporters of steel and aluminum, said they would ask for exemptions from the tariff hike, which Trump justified in part on national security grounds.

“We don’t think imports from Japan, an ally, have any effect at all on U.S. national security,” said Japan’s trade and industry minister, Hiroshige Seko, at a news conference.

A South Korean trade envoy, Kim Hyun-chong, met with Trump’s chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn, and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to “strongly demand” they keep the impact on South Korean companies to a minimum, according to a trade ministry statement.

The president of the European Union’s governing body, Jean-Claude Juncker, said the 28-nation trade bloc will retaliate if Trump follows through.

“Risks of trade wars are rising, but should be contained for now,” said Cesar Rojas and Ebrahim Rahbari of Citigroup in a report. “We expect U.S. major trade partners’ reaction to be moderate, including by taking cases to the WTO.”

Adding to the political stakes in China, Trump’s announcement came ahead of next week’s meeting of its ceremonial legislature, the year’s most prominent political event. Action against American companies or goods would compete for attention with the National People’s Congress, which the ruling Communist Party uses to showcase its economic plans.

Beijing has an array of high-profile targets for retaliation including suppliers of soybeans, the biggest American export to China. A curb on purchases could hurt farm state voters who supported Trump.

“We’ve clearly heard from the Chinese [that soybeans] are definitely one of the largest things that could be targeted,” said Jake Parker, vice-president for China operations for the U.S.-China Business Council.

However, Parker said, soybeans might be held for use later on a bigger issue such as the “301” investigation into Beijing’s technology policy, which could have a broader impact.

Trade makes up a smaller share of China’s economy than it did a decade ago. But export-driven industries support millions of jobs, raising the potential political cost of any disruption.

The United States, China’s second-largest trade partner after the EU, buys about 20% of Chinese exports but allows Beijing to run multibillion-dollar surpluses that offset its deficits with other partners.

Last year, China exported goods worth $2.80 to the United States for every $1 of American goods it bought, according to Chinese data. Its trade surplus of $275.8 billion with the United States was equal to 65% of its global total.

“That makes China the more vulnerable partner in this,” said Kuijs.

Also Friday, the Commerce Ministry expressed “grave concern” about a trade policy report sent to the U.S. Congress by the White House this week that accuses China of moving away from market principles. It pledges to prevent Beijing from disrupting global trade.

The ministry said Beijing has satisfied its trade obligations and appealed to Washington to settle market access and subsidy disputes through negotiation.

Originally published on
Add a comment

Have your say on this topic! Comments are moderated and may be edited or removed by
site admin as per our Comment Policy. Thanks!