Canada’s industry minister says Ottawa is “considering all measures” after the U.S. announced it would be hiking tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and other related goods.
François-Philippe Champagne wouldn’t rule out Canada imposing similar tariffs during an interview with CBC News Network’s Power & Politics on Friday.
“It’s fair to say that everything is on the table to protect our industry and our workers,” Champagne told host David Cochrane.
“We’re working in sync with the United States of America.”
President Joe Biden announced earlier this week that the U.S. would be slapping new tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs), advanced batteries, solar cells, steel, aluminum and medical equipment.
The tariffs are to be phased in over the next three years; those that take effect in 2024 are covering EVs, solar cells, syringes, needles, steel and aluminum and more.
There are currently very few EVs from China in the U.S., but American officials worry that low-priced models made possible by Chinese government subsidies could soon start flooding the U.S. market.
In a separate interview on Tuesday, Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association, said “Canada has to” implement similar trade levies.
“Now that the Americans have put up a tariff wall, we can’t leave the side door open here,” Volpe told guest host John Paul Tasker.
Brian Kingston, president of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association, echoed Volpe’s argument in a post on X, formerly Twitter.
“Canada cannot be out of step with the U.S. on China. We need aligned policies that strengthen the North American auto supply chain,” he wrote.
Champagne insisted that Canada wouldn’t be a route for China to gain access to the North American EV market.
“Canada has never been and will never be a backdoor [for] China in the North American market and our U.S. friends understand that,” he said.
The federal government has partnered with provinces to attract investments from major automotive manufacturers to spur electric vehicle production in Canada.
The same day the U.S. announced its new tariffs, Asahi Kasei Corp., in partnership with Honda, announced the construction of a $1.6-billion electric vehicle battery plant in Port Colborne, Ont.
Volpe said domestic EV production could be held back if China floods the Canadian market with cheaper products.
“There’s no logic for Canada to force our market to electrify and then turn the market over to the Chinese,” he said.
China has maintained that the U.S. tariffs are a violation of international trade rules. It is not clear how the country will respond at this point.
Volpe suggested Beijing could retaliate by implementing export controls on its critical minerals that are used in EV battery manufacturing.
Champagne said it’s important for Canada to shore up its own critical mineral production.
On Thursday, Canada and the U.S. announced they would be co-investing in critical mineral producers for the first time as they work to boost regional supplies.
Natural Resources Canada and the U.S. Department of Defense are together putting about $32.5 million into Fortune Minerals Ltd. — which is working on a project with bismuth and cobalt in the Northwest Territories — and Lomiko Metals Inc., focused on a graphite project in Quebec.
Removed by mod
The reason the US and Canadian governments are doing this is to stop that $10k car from destroying the auto motive industry in North America resulting in layoffs that make the recent tech layoffs look like peanuts.
I agree we need cheaper EVs in North America, I want one too… There’s an Ars Technica article where Ford basically goes “we thought everyone wanted expensive trucks … we made those electric … we realize we missed the mark, we’re going to work on smaller, cheaper, EVs.” So, they are coming hopefully within the next couple of years.
I’m not sure how important manufacturing still is to the Canadian economy, but for the US economy … trying to protect domestic production is important (and we should’ve done it years ago instead of letting cheap Chinese imports destroy a large amount of the factories in North America).
These NA car companies always get bailed out. They should’ve been making kei trucks, and small electric cars for ages, but they don’t need to because they’ll just get bailed out if they fail.
These tariffs are another form of a bailout. Maybe instead of bailing these guys out we should nationalize them.
That reduces a lot of relevant context, like why they needed the 08 bailouts in the first place, how many times they’ve been bailed out, and the fact that China has heavily subsidized these cars to the point that even if they were making the same vehicle, it would be significantly more expensive.
The US manufacturers get bailed out every 30 years or so, so why there’s a specific reason the most recent time becomes less relevant. What makes BYD specifically so cheap isn’t the government subsidies, which NA manufacturers also get, but it’s vertical integration. BYD is a battery company that started to make cars. They can sell the batteries to the car side of the businesd below cost as long as the final product makes the larger corporation a profit. Tesla for example buys it’s batteries from Panasonic. Panasonic has to make a profit. That makes the Tesla much more expensive than it should be.
Transportation is a necessity, and I believe every inelastic market deserves a nationalized alternative to prevent price gouging. Like how the USPS keeps UPS and FEDEX in line. With that being said, nationalization doesn’t fix this particular problem.
China is run like a giant capitalist cartel (in all but name), and appropriately, their ultimate weapon in their hunt for global monopolies is the provision of slave labor. The number of slaves in Xinjiang alone is estimated in the hundreds of thousands, and their labor has been credibly linked to the production of cotton (face masks), polysilicon (solar panels), and aluminum and lithium (EVs).
It’s no coincidence that these are the industries being slapped with tariffs. No amount of subsidization or nationalization can level a playing field that’s been tilted by slavery. You don’t outcompete slavery, you either penalize goods suspected of involving it, or you go full John Brown.
I agree, but that’s a slippery slope. Lots of countries use slavery to make cheap goods. But yes. Slavery in all forms should be abolished
Removed by mod