Particle.news
Get it on Google Play
Download on the App Store
6 ARTICLES
·
11h ago

Canada to Impose $28 Billion Countertariffs on U.S. Goods

Ottawa says the duties are retaliation for U.S. Section 338 tariffs, aimed at protecting Canadian firms, increasing political pressure in U.S. swing states, limiting domestic disruption

View of downtown Detroit from the Gordie Howe International Bridge, connecting Windsor, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan, on September 6, 2025. Canada announced on August 25, 2026 counter-tariffs on US goods ranging between 15 and 50 percent, intensifying the trade war between the historically close allies. Ottawa's retaliation will take effect September 8, a timeframe earlier outlined by Prime Minister Mark Carney after US President Donald Trump's 50-percent duties came into place August 22, 2026. (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY / AFP via Getty Images)
Steel coils at a Cleveland Cliff facility Middletown, Ohio, last month. Ohio will be particularly affected by Canada's countertariffs, which are due to come into effect early on Tuesday.
Image
Image

Overview

  • Canada will put dollar‑for‑dollar countertariffs on about $27.6–$28 billion of U.S. imports at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 8, covering hundreds of items including steel, aluminum, motorcycles and other industrial and consumer goods.
  • The tariff list was adjusted after industry feedback when Ottawa removed more than 200 seafood codes and added six other items to keep near parity with the U.S. measures.
  • Canadian officials say the measures are meant to shield domestic firms hit by U.S. 50% Section 338 duties and to apply political pressure on manufacturers in swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
  • The moves come with talks between Ottawa and Washington frozen and U.S. officials pledging further retaliation, with U.S. options reportedly under consideration that could target Canadian alcohol, dairy or steel imports.
  • Economists warn the duties could raise Canada’s effective tariff rate to roughly 3.2%, risk supply‑chain disruption and higher costs for businesses and consumers, and prompt likely legal challenges under the rarely used 1930s Section 338 authority.