Donald Trump is using a 50% tariff to push Canada back to the negotiating table.

The obvious assumption is that Prime Minister Mark Carney now has a choice.

Make some concessions and get the tariffs removed.

Or refuse and accept the economic consequences.

But the more I look at what the United States is demanding, the more I wonder whether there is actually a complete agreement Carney is capable of signing.

Not because Canada has nothing it can offer.

And not necessarily because Carney is refusing to negotiate.

The problem is that some of the easiest concessions are controlled partly by the provinces, while the hardest concession is now protected by federal law.

The United States says Canada is discriminating against American businesses in several areas, including vehicles, alcohol and dairy.

Trump has announced a 50%0 tariff on roughly US$20 billion worth of Canadian products, scheduled to begin on August 19.

The tariff does not appear to cover Canadian vehicles. But the auto industry remains part of the wider trade dispute because Canadian retaliatory tariffs were introduced in response to earlier American measures.

That distinction matters.

Vehicles may be one of the more negotiable parts of the dispute.

Canada could offer to remove some retaliatory auto measures if the United States removes the tariffs that caused them.

That would not be simple, but there is at least the outline of a possible trade.

You remove yours.

We remove ours.

Alcohol is more complicated.

AI isn't just changing business—it's creating entirely new income opportunities. The Hustle's guide features 200+ ways to make money with AI, from beginner-friendly gigs to advanced ventures. Each comes with realistic income projections and resource requirements. Join 1.5M professionals getting daily insights on emerging tech and business opportunities.

Get the guide

Several Canadian provinces removed American alcohol from government-controlled stores in response to the trade conflict.

Trump views that as discriminatory treatment of American products.

But Carney cannot personally order every provincial liquor board to put American bourbon, wine and beer back on its shelves.

Alcohol distribution is largely controlled by provincial governments.

Carney can pressure the premiers.

He can ask them to coordinate with Ottawa.

The federal government could potentially make provincial cooperation part of a wider agreement.

But the final decision does not belong to Carney alone.

Several premiers have also said American alcohol should not return unless the United States removes its tariffs against Canada.

This creates a difficult negotiating problem.

Trump may expect Carney to arrive with a Canadian offer.

But Canada is a federation.

The prime minister cannot always deliver provincial policy changes by signing his name to an agreement.

And then we get to dairy.

Here’s where it gets interesting.

Canada protects dairy, poultry and egg farmers through supply management.

In simple terms, Canada controls production, supports stable producer prices and limits imports through tariff-rate quotas.

Supporters say this gives farmers predictable incomes and prevents the extreme price swings seen in other agricultural markets.

Critics say it limits competition, raises costs and makes it harder for foreign producers to sell into Canada.

The United States has pushed for greater access to Canada’s dairy market for years.

Previous trade agreements have already given foreign producers some additional access.

But in June 2025, Parliament passed Bill C-202.

That law prevents the foreign affairs minister from making certain new international trade commitments that would increase access to Canada’s supply-managed dairy, poultry and egg markets.

That changes the negotiating equation.

Carney cannot simply sit across from Trump and promise another piece of the Canadian dairy market under the law as it stands.

Parliament would first have to change or repeal the protection.

Technically, that is possible.

No Parliament can permanently prevent a future Parliament from changing the law.

But politically, it would be extremely difficult.

Supply management has strong support among dairy farmers and carries particular political importance in Quebec and Ontario.

Bill C-202 passed with broad parliamentary support, and dairy, poultry and egg producer organizations strongly backed it.

So when people say Carney should “just make a deal,” my question is simple:

What deal?

There is another side to this.

Trump may not expect Canada to surrender supply management entirely.

The dairy demand could be a negotiating position rather than a final requirement.

The United States may accept movement elsewhere, such as changes to how existing dairy import quotas are administered, reduced retaliatory measures, provincial action on alcohol or concessions in unrelated sectors.

Carney could also argue that Canada has already provided American dairy producers with market access through previous trade agreements.

And because Trump’s tariff affects a broader list of products, the final settlement may involve issues far beyond dairy.

In other words, the fact that Carney cannot easily offer more dairy access does not prove that an agreement is impossible.

But it does mean the public discussion is too simplistic.

This is not merely a contest between a tough American president and a Canadian prime minister deciding whether to stand firm.

Carney is negotiating with legal, constitutional and political limits.

Trump is negotiating with the threat of enormous economic pressure.

Those are not equal positions.

I think Trump is using the 50% tariff primarily as leverage.

The goal is to create enough economic pain, or enough fear of future pain, that Canada offers concessions before August 19.

That strategy may produce movement on vehicles.

It may produce discussions with the provinces about American alcohol.

It could produce compromises in other industries affected by the tariff.

But dairy is different.

If greater access to Canada’s supply-managed market is a firm American requirement, Carney may not have a complete deal available to him.

He would need Parliament to reverse a protection it adopted only last year.

He would need to confront some of the country’s most organized agricultural groups.

He would risk a major political fight in Quebec and Ontario.

And he would have to convince Canadians that weakening supply management was worth doing under the threat of an American tariff.

That is a much bigger decision than negotiating a lower tariff rate.

It would mean changing Canadian law and agricultural policy because the United States applied economic pressure.

You don’t have to buy OpenAI or Anthropic to invest in AI. Each large language model requires specialized technology to keep running and growing.

MarketBeat’s The Infrastructure’s Backbone: 10 Stocks Powering the AI Buildout report reveals 10 companies supplying the memory, storage, connectivity, fabrication, power, and cooling behind AI’s next phase.

Send My Free Report

Canada sends roughly 72% of its goods exports to the United States.

That dependence gives Trump enormous leverage, even when his demands are difficult or politically unacceptable.

The consequences will not remain inside government meeting rooms.

Canadian companies facing a 50% tariff could lose orders, delay investments or reduce production.

Workers could lose hours or jobs.

Prices and supply chains on both sides of the border could be affected.

But Canadians also need to understand that “make a deal” is not a complete strategy.

A deal requires both sides to identify concessions the other government can actually deliver.

Carney can negotiate.

He can offer movement in some areas.

He can try to bring the provinces with him.

But if Trump insists on dairy access that Canadian law currently prevents Carney from offering, negotiations may eventually hit a wall.

The most important question over the next few weeks is not simply whether Carney is willing to make a deal.

It is whether Trump is willing to accept a deal that leaves Canada’s supply-management protections largely intact.

That may determine whether the tariffs disappear on August 19, or whether Canada and the United States enter an even deeper trade conflict.

Thanks for reading.

Dean.

P.S. Do you think Canada should be willing to weaken supply management to secure a broader trade agreement with the United States? Hit reply and tell me why.