Tuesday, September 29, 2026

What tariffs will really cost Canadians and Americans

 

The US and Canada have been locked in a bitter conflict since President Donald Trump launched his flagship trade policy on his return to the White House.

The latest escalation has seen tit-for-tat tariffs ramped up to outright bans on imports of certain products, with an easing of tensions looking unlikely anytime soon and further import taxes set to come into force.

Amid all the fierce political rhetoric, people are being impacted by the breakdown in relations between these North American neighbours.

Here's what will be affected most on both sides of the border.

Cars

If Trump's threat to raise tariffs on Canadian vehicles from 25% to 50% from 1 January 2027 becomes a reality, then that would deal a further blow to the automotive industry.

Cars, trucks and parts are among the main goods traded between the US, Canada and Mexico, with the manufacturing sector and supply chains stretching across borders.

Despite previous tariffs increasing costs for manufacturers, car dealerships have absorbed the "lion's share" to date, according to Bernard Yaros, lead economist at Oxford Economics.

"But that cushion is wearing thin," he adds. "The recently threatened 50% tariffs on Canadian autos, trucks, and car parts would feed through to consumer prices more readily than before."

Yaros thinks higher costs on imports to the US could accelerate a trend of manufacturers prioritising luxury cars, SUVs and pick-up trucks and push up prices in the used-car market if supplies of new but less-expensive vehicles becomes tight.

Carney has decided not to match Trump's 50% tariff threat so far, but a 25% import tax on certain American vehicles has been in place since last year.

Trump has also announced a ban on motorbikes, including mopeds, being imported from Canada, claiming the country was "discriminating" against the US. 

Homes

Construction materials such as steel, aluminium as well as lumber wood have had tariffs in place before the latest escalation, though Canada has now matched US rates on the metals at 50%.

Carney has also imposed import taxes on several US wood products, such as plywood, and even screws used to fix timber together.

That means building firms that import such materials will face higher costs and may choose to pass those on through higher prices - pushing up the cost of homes, for example.

The Forest Products Association of Canada says tariffs would "raise costs on both sides of the border", while on the US side, Bill Owens, chairman of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) urged Trump to make building materials exempt from his tariff agenda due to an "ongoing housing affordability crisis".

"Building material tariffs heighten market uncertainty, strain supply chains and increase construction costs," he says.

In 2024 the US imported $23bn (C$32bn, £17bn) worth of wood products, with almost half from Canada, according to a US Congress report.

But the so-called "lumber wars" between the nations on soft wood used in housebuilding are not new and stretch back decades.

Getty Images US President Donald Trump (left) speaks with Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney during a work lunch as part of the G7 summit, in Evian, eastern France, on June 16, 2026. Trump is sitting down while Carney is standing over but leaning into the conversation. Getty Images
Donald Trump and Mark Carney have both declared tariffs on each other's country

Household items

A key factor in this episode of the tariff war is the volume of household items that have been specifically targeted as opposed to raw materials.

Carpets, washing machines, furniture, fridges and even knives, forks and spoons are set to have tariffs applied by Canada.

While there is a risk prices on some of those goods being imported from the US could rise, the more likely scenario is that consumers will turn to domestic alternatives, according to Bradley Saunders, North America economist at Capital Economics.

He says Carney's latest move has intentionally targeted goods where Canadians can "shift to domestic suppliers instead".

"Like hair care products, you really can just buy that domestically instead," he adds.

Saunders explains Carney's response aims to "minimise the impact on Canadian households as much as possible by picking very fungible goods".

The Budget Lab at Yale, which monitors the impact of US government policy on the economy, says it anticipates seeing marginal increases in furnishing and other household equipment for Americans largely due to tariffs on lumber and other materials.

Alcohol

There may not be a material impact on alcohol prices, but it's clear the trade war has had an impact on Canadians' choice of drink.

Many provinces in the country banned US alcohol sales last year in response to previous tariffs, with the American wine and spirits industry saying exports to the country dropped more than 70%.

Carney asked the provinces to restore US alcohol to the shelves during trade talks, but now that they have collapsed, it's likely the ban will return.

Saunders says there's been a big push to "buy Canadian" from politicians and it has been successful when it comes to the strong stuff.

"That's really had an impact on the American alcohol industry," he adds.

Saskatchewan and Alberta are ​the only provinces that still sell ​American alcohol, but the former has announced its own 50% charge on US imported booze, which kicked in on 8 September, when the wider Canadian tariffs do.

However, the US has now announced an outright ban on non-alcoholic beer, a long list of wine, rum and vodka products as well as beer made from malt crossing its northern border.

Japanese brewer Sapporo has said it would move some beer production from Canada to the US by the first half of 2027 as a result of tariffs.

Jobs and wider economy

While tariffs can end up hitting consumers in the pocket, there are other impacts on households.

Import taxes can complicate trade for businesses that have cross-border supply. As well as the higher costs, the uncertainty created by the trade war could put off investment plans and stunt job creation.

Saunders suggests the biggest impact on households may not just be through prices, but job losses instead.

"If you're, let's say, a bespoke furniture producer in BC [British Columbia], you're now facing a 50% tariff on your exports to the US - that could really shut the business down. I think that would be more the direct impact on households as opposed to these retaliatory measures."

Canada's forest industry employs almost 200,000 people and has called on the government to boost domestic demand through federal housing programs to make greater use of Canadian wood, though it admits "no support package can replace reliable access to our largest export market".

When it comes to US, consumers are unlikely to see much of a difference in terms of the cost of living as result of this latest battle with Canada, but frictions to trade can have longer-term economic impacts.

Such tensions also feed into concerns over the free-trade agreement between Canada, the US and Mexico, known as the USMCA. Both Canada and Mexico have said they want the USMCA extended for another 16 years, but the US has said it will not renew in its current form.

Despite the deal remaining operational, tariffs risk putting off talks in the near future, creating more uncertainty for cross-border trade.

John Iselin, associate director at the Budget Lab at Yale, estimates the cost will only be about $3 per American household on average, but when taking into account Trump's wider trade war with the rest of the world, and particularly China, the added costs rise to about $1,000 for the average family.

"It's hard to view this particular instance with Canada in isolation because we've had similar interactions with a range of other countries, all of which makes doing business harder. It's just another in a series of tariff shocks."

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2z4dv6vn2o

Here’s How Much Aid the United States Has Sent Ukraine

 Eleven charts illustrate the extraordinary level of support the United States has provided Ukraine in recent years—though there has been no significant U.S. aid legislation since 2024, and combined European aid tops U.S. contributions.

Ukrainian soldier prepares a drone for flight at a training area on February 8, 2025 in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine. Roman Chop/Global Images Ukraine/Getty Images

As the war in Ukraine continues in its fifth year, CFR’s initiative on securing Ukraine’s future is tracking the conflict with timely analysis and policy recommendations.

After Russia’s invasion in February 2022, Ukraine became by far the top recipient of U.S. foreign aid, marking the first time a European country held the top spot since the Marshall Plan directed vast sums to rebuild the continent after World War II. Yet, U.S. commitment to Ukraine has been called into question under the second Trump administration and there has been no significant aid legislation since 2024.

How much aid has the United States provided Ukraine?

As of March 31, 2026, the U.S. Congress has made available $195 billion in spending related to the war in Ukraine, according to the U.S. Special Inspector General for Operation Atlantic Resolve. Of the $195 billion, $164 billion comes from five pieces of legislation, the last of which was passed in April 2024. The remainder comes from annual agency budgets and other appropriations ($27 billion), and from NATO contributions received to pay for the provision of U.S. arms (allies or partners provided $4 billion in funds, which could be counted as aid from those donors). 

In late 2024, the United States also provided the Ukrainian government with a $20 billion loan, not included in the $195 billion figure, provided via the World Bank and to be repaid by interest generated from frozen Russian assets.

It’s important to note that not all of the U.S. government spending related to the war directly aids the government of Ukraine, as shown in the chart below. The amount of U.S. aid directly supporting Ukraine is about $127 billion, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. Most of the remaining spending has funded various activities associated with the war such as the U.S. military presence in Europe, while a small portion has supported other affected countries in the region.

A large share of the money in the aid bills has been spent in the United States, paying for U.S. factories and workers to produce weapons that are either shipped to Ukraine or used to replenish stocks of U.S. weapons the Pentagon has sent to Ukraine during the war. A 2023 analysis by the American Enterprise Institute found that Ukraine aid spending was funding defense manufacturing in more than seventy U.S. cities.

Dozens of other countries, including most members of NATO and the European Union (EU), have also provided large aid packages to Ukraine. While the United States made no new aid commitments in 2025, European countries significantly increased their support, and collectively have provided more aid than the United States has since the start of the war (see below).

Is the United States still providing aid to Ukraine under President Donald Trump?

Since Trump  returned to office in January 2025, there has been no legislation or other authorizations of significant new aid to Ukraine. However, a substantial amount of the aid appropriated under the Biden administration is still in the pipeline, and deliveries of aid packages have continued, although on two occasions the Trump administration temporarily paused some deliveries. As of March 31, 2026, the U.S. had disbursed 59 percent of the $195 billion in spending related to the conflict (U.S. spending is first appropriated, then obligated, then disbursed). The lack of new aid commitments means that U.S. aid deliveries are running out.

In June 2026, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would provide new aid to Ukraine and place sanctions on Russia. The measure was supported by Democrats and a small number of Republicans, and would still need the support of the U.S. Senate and the president to become law.

Trump has allowed the sale of U.S. weapons to Ukraine through a plan known as the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), in which NATO allies pay for U.S. weapons and transfer them to Ukraine. The program is providing advanced U.S. weapons such as Patriot missiles and is supplying the majority of the missiles used in Ukraine’s air defense systems.

Why has the United States provided aid to Ukraine?

Much of the U.S. aid has gone toward providing weapons systems, training, and intelligence that Ukrainian commanders need to defend against Russia, which has one of the world’s most powerful militaries. Many Western analysts say the military aid provided by the United States and other allies has played a pivotal role in Ukraine’s defense and counteroffensive against Russia. Russia made incremental gains in 2024 and 2025, capturing some territory along the eastern front, but its progress has stalled in 2026.

During the Biden administration, the United States and top European allies considered Russia’s invasion an illegal war of aggression on NATO’s frontier that, if successful, would subjugate millions of Ukrainians; encourage Russian President Vladimir Putin’s revanchist aims; and invite similar aggression from other rival powers, especially China. But Trump has changed the U.S. position, at various times accusing Ukraine of starting and prolonging the war and presenting himself as an impartial broker looking to reach a peace deal in the near future.

Trump’s frustration with Putin has grown as ceasefire talks drag on unsuccessfully, and the United States levied tariffs on India for buying Russian oil before removing them in early 2026. The Trump administration has imposed far fewer sanctions than the Biden administration, although in October 2025 it did so on the Russian oil companies Rosneft and Lukoil. The administration temporarily lifted sanctions on Russian seaborne oil in March 2026 amid an increase in energy prices due to the Iran war, then reinstated the sanctions in June.

What weapons and equipment has the United States sent Ukraine?

Since Russia’s invasion in 2022, the United States has provided or agreed to provide Ukraine with a long list of defense capabilities, including widely used items such as artillery shells as well as more expensive systems.

NATO allies are particularly wary of being pulled directly into the hostilities, which could dramatically raise the risk of a nuclear war. However, as the fighting has progressed, many donor governments have shed their reluctance to give Ukraine more sophisticated assets, such as battle tanks and modern fighter aircraft. In the summer of 2023, the United States agreed to allow its European allies to provide Ukraine with U.S.-made F-16s. Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway have collectively pledged more than eighty F-16s, some of which have been delivered.

In early 2024, the Biden administration started supplying Ukraine with significant numbers of long-range precision missiles, known as ATACMS, that can strike targets nearly 200 miles (322 kilometers) away. After some initial restrictions, the Biden administration eventually permitted Ukraine to use ATACMS to strike inside Russian territory. The Trump administration initially blocked use of the missiles in 2025, though Ukraine announced their use later in the year. The Trump administration considered providing Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine, as requested by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but ultimately chose not to do so.

The weapons and equipment provided by the United States and others have been of critical importance, and Ukraine has continued to request aid. Following Russian bombardment of Kyiv on July 6, 2026, Zelenskyy expressed a dire need for interceptor missiles to defend against ballistic missiles. 

At the same time, Ukraine has over the course of the war become a leading military power in its own right, with innovations in drone warfare and a domestic industry that produces large quantities of munitions. Ukrainian expertise in air defense has been in particularly high demand as countries reckon with the rising use of cheap attack drones.

How does the aid to Ukraine compare to that for other recipients of U.S. assistance?

When compared to U.S. assistance to other top recipients in recent years, the extraordinary scale of the aid prior to 2025 comes into view. This data comes from ForeignAssistance.gov.

Looking back over the last several decades, aid to Ukraine also ranks among the largest relative to the size of the U.S. economy at the time.

However, the magnitude of U.S. aid to Ukraine can seem less remarkable in comparison to what the Pentagon budgets each year, or what the Treasury Department was authorized (via the Troubled Asset Relief Program) to bail out Wall Street banks, auto companies, and other sectors of the economy during the U.S. financial crisis.

How does U.S. aid to Ukraine compare to that from Europe?

Nearly all aid to Ukraine has come from the United States and Europe. The United States has provided more aid than any other country, although European countries have collectively provided more than the United States. While the U.S. made no new aid commitments in 2025, aid from Europe increased significantly during the year. 

European countries are providing aid individually and through the EU. EU members agreed on a loan of about $106 billion in late 2025 which is now being disbursed after Hungary temporarily blocked the measure.

Data comparing aid from different countries is from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, which tracks aid as “committed,” defined as declarations of support, and “allocated,” defined as delivered or specified for delivery.

When compared to individual countries, the U.S. contribution stands out, particularly in the case of military aid.

However, many European governments are making much larger contributions to Ukraine relative to the size of their economies.

Thirty-six countries made major arms transfers to Ukraine from 2022 to 2025. Nearly all were wealthy democracies.


https://www.cfr.org/articles/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine