Thursday, July 23, 2026

Why Trump Suddenly Slaps 50% Tariffs On Some Canadian Goods

 

Why Trump Suddenly Slaps 50% Tariffs On Some Canadian Goods



Pin It


Jul212026
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Pinterest
Linked In

Just when you thought Donald Trump was too busy with the Iran War, getting ready to bomb the Pickaxe Mountain believed to have been stashed with thousands of uranium-enrichment centrifuges, the U.S. president suddenly dropped started a new round of war. He announced an additional 50% tariff on certain goods from Canada, including wine, hockey sticks, cement, electrical equipment and machinery.

 

The White House said that the tariffs were a response to Canada’s “discriminatory treatment of American products.” Some sectors and goods, including energy, potash and fish or critical minerals, will be exempt from the new tariffs, the White House said. The tariffs will take effect 30 days after they are signed and affect about US$20 billion worth of Canadian goods.

 

Apparently, the Trump administration was upset about Canada’s discrimination of U.S. goods, including cars, dairy products, and alcohol. The White House said the U.S. opposed Canadian policies that require companies to invest in auto production in Canada, rather than the U.S., as well as bans some Canadian provinces have imposed on U.S. liquor products.

US-Canada Tariffs War

However, the good news is the U.S. imported a whopping US$383 billion of goods from Canada in 2025. Therefore, the newly announced tariffs would only affect a small slice of that total. According to research firm Capital Economics, only about 5% of Canadian imports would be affected by the new tariffs – or about 0.6% of total U.S. imports.

 

Still, Trump’s move would worsen the already tense relationship between the U.S. and Canada amid the struggle to renegotiate the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade pact Trump signed in his first term and which is under renegotiation this year. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said the new tariffs represented “the latest in a series of unilateral U.S. trade actions” to violate the USMCA.

 

“This trade dispute has raised costs for families, particularly in the U.S.” – Carney said. “Canada stands ready to engage intensively to address outstanding issues with the U.S. to the mutual benefit of our citizens.” But Ontario Premier Doug Ford went further, immediately encouraging Canada to retaliate. “If these tariffs proceed, Canada should respond tariff for tariff, dollar for dollar,” Ford said in a post on X.

United States - Canada - Sign Board

Trump has publicly threatened to terminate the USMCA, which the U.S. negotiated to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement, known as NAFTA. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has floated the idea of separating the three-nation agreement into two separate pacts – one with Mexico and one with Canada.

 

Trump last year imposed emergency levies on Canada over its alleged role in the fentanyl trade before the Supreme Court ruled in February that those tariffs were illegal. He has also levied so-called national security tariffs on steel, aluminum, auto parts and lumber from Canada, though the White House said that products covered by those earlier levies won’t be hit by this latest round.

 

Carney last year rolled back many of the counter-tariffs that Canada imposed on U.S. goods, but several provinces such as Ontario have kept their retaliatory bans on U.S. wine and spirits in place, drawing repeated complaints from U.S. officials. After the latest 50% tariffs, Prime Minister Mark Carney responded by saying Canada stood ready to “intensify” trade talks with the US in the coming weeks.

US-Canada Tariffs War - US President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney

The US has been maintaining active tariffs ranging from 15% to 50% on Canadian steel, aluminium, and copper. It also charges a 35% tariff on Canadian softwood lumber, alongside a 25% tax on non-U.S. parts in cars. Meanwhile, Canada has its own 25% counter-tariff on selected imports of American steel, aluminium and vehicles.

 

The new tariffs come after smoke from wildfires in Canada drifted into the U.S., blanketing cities including New York, Chicago and Washington. Trump threatened to impose steeper duties on America’s northern neighbour to compensate for the smoke’s impact. Days later, the president was seen speaking with Carney at Sunday’s World Cup Final. Trump told reporters that Canada needed to stop the wildfires.

 

Jeff Guignard, president and CEO of Wine Growers British Columbia, is calling on Canadians to support domestic producers after Trump’s latest tariff announcement. Guignard says he doesn’t understand the logic of the U.S. making Canadian alcohol more expensive and difficult for Americans to purchase, but says the move could hurt small producers in Canada. 

President Trump is testing a new method to impose tariffs – Section 338 of the Trade Act of 1930. The law grants the president the power to impose levies on countries that discriminate against U.S. companies, but it “hasn’t been used before” to impose tariffs and could attract legal challenges. If Trump’s use of Section 338 is upheld by the courts, it could become a useful weapon in future trade negotiations.

 

After the Supreme Court ruled in February that the president could not use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to implement sweeping tariffs globally, Trump imposed temporary, across-the-board 10% tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which are set to expire later this week. Last week, the US announced a new 25% tariff on many Brazilian imports under Section 301.

 

There’s another reason why Trump is targeting Canada. The White House said Canada was one of two countries that had chosen to retaliate against US tariffs rather than negotiate – the other country being China. And like Canada and China, Brazil has vowed to retaliate. Surprisingly, Trump told reporters that he and Chinese President Xi Jinping did not discuss tariffs at all during his visit to Beijing in May.

President Donald Trump Meets President Xi Jinping - China Has Stronger Hand

The first Trump administration’s trade war with China in 2018 – when the U.S.-China trade deficit hit its highest point of more than US$377 billion – marked a new decline in relations between the world’s two biggest economies. In his second term, Trump escalated his tariff threats as China imposed export controls on rare-earth minerals, which created a global supply shortage for the materials necessary to build most technologies.

 

Trump’s second administration began its trade war with China by slapping a 10% tariff on Chinese goods. Over the following months, China retaliated, resulting in the two countries rapidly escalating their tariffs on imported goods from each other. By April 2025, this reached a height of 145% tariffs on Chinese goods entering the United States, and a 125% tariff on U.S. imports to China.

 

President Donald Trump eventually reduced specific tariff rates on Chinese goods in late 2025 by halving the 20% “fentanyl” tariff down to 10%. This brought the overall average U.S. tariff rate on Chinese imports down from about 57% to roughly 47% in exchange for Chinese trade and law enforcement commitments.

Donald Trump Tariff On Canada, Mexico and China

Even though the U.S. Supreme Court overruled some of Trump’s proposed tariffs in February 2026, the bulk of the tariffs against China remain in place. After being delayed by the Iran war, Trump and Xi met in May 2026 – which marked the first visit to Beijing by a sitting U.S. president in nearly a decade. Trump was also the last president to make the trip, traveling there during his first term in 2017.

 

The use of a 1930 trade war now could be a tactical move to test the water – to see if the U.S. president has finally found his Holy Grail in tariff war with the world again. As a start, Trump wanted to use that Section 338 as a bargaining chip – to get some leverage over Canada.

Video of girl playing with giant python raises questions about whether snakes can truly be tamed





Video of girl playing with giant python raises questions about whether snakes can truly be tamed


By CS Ming
1 day ago




PARENTS often worry about their children spending too much time on screens. Others worry about junk food, strangers or crossing busy roads.

Then there are parents whose child is happily playing with a snake large enough to qualify as a minor tourist attraction. Parenting, it seems, comes in many forms.


This week’s viral sensation features a little girl happily playing with what appears to be a reticulated python.

Not a baby snake. Not the kind you see curled up in a terrarium at the local pet shop. This one looks large enough to qualify for its own postcode.

The snake appears to be about 16 or 17 times bigger than the child. The girl, however, doesn’t seem the least bit concerned.


She pats it, walks around it and treats it as though she’s spending the afternoon with an unusually long golden retriever.


Ni kalau jadi apa2 baru nak menyesal kot. Apa pun budak ni mmg berani. Pernah baca pasal ular sawa yg orang bela besar2 ni. Ada kajian dari pakar ular cakap, ular besar ni dia buat analisis pasal org yg paling dekt dgn dia, dia kaji saiz org tu sama ada ngam x dgn badan dia Show more
333
Reply
Copy link

Meanwhile, netizens are watching the video through their fingers. The clip naturally raises an interesting question: can snakes actually be tamed?

The short answer is yes, but not in the way most people imagine. Unlike dogs, horses or even cats, snakes have never been domesticated.

Dogs have spent thousands of years evolving alongside humans, gradually becoming companions that greet us enthusiastically after work, comfort us when we’re feeling down and occasionally pretend not to hear us when it’s bath time.

Snakes skipped that entire evolutionary journey. A reticulated python today is fundamentally no different from one living deep in the rainforest.

While captive-bred snakes can become accustomed to human handling and may appear calm around their owners, that doesn’t mean they have formed an emotional bond.

Animal behaviourists generally describe this as habituation rather than taming. The snake simply learns that the large human approaching its enclosure usually brings food instead of trouble. It’s tolerance, not affection.

That’s an important distinction. Your dog misses you when you’re away. Your python simply notices that the food delivery service is running late.

Reticulated pythons, which are native to Southeast Asia, are particularly impressive animals. They’re powerful constrictors capable of overpowering deer, wild boar and other surprisingly large prey.

And let’s get to the most important point, that they are physically capable of killing and swallowing a human, and even more, a toddler.

Our netizens get the point too. Take it from @SilencerMuto who said that it was alright as long they don’t enter the news.

“It’s fun to record. One day the child dies. Record it when it’s time to bury the dead body of the child,” said @Rainism08 in a biting comment.

Also, @Canteen33978132 believes people can make report to Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat.

However, snake whisperer @AmyCourier81 claimed that there are techniques to rear such serpents. Apparently the owner should never give it live feed.

Regardless, we still think that these magnificent reptiles are best admired with a healthy dose of respect, and preferably from a distance where the only thing they can wrap around is your imagination.—July 21, 2026

Main image: @kongsiviralje (X)


***


Irresponsible parents - reticulated pythons are known as man-eaters - the kid will just be a mouthful to the snake - the kid should be taken away from such stupid parents.

The public should be denied keeping certain animals, reptiles and fish as domestic pets, eg: snakes, carnivorous wild animals (tigers, leopards, wild cats) and dangerous fish such as piranhas. Whilst the python is not venomous its teeth are frigging infectious.


PAS and UMNO not fundamental towards preservation of Malay rights, claims a netizen





PAS and UMNO not fundamental towards preservation of Malay rights, claims a netizen


By CS Ming
1 day ago




YOU know your political party has done a good marketing campaign when your voters easily identify you with a certain feature.

When PAS is mentioned, Malays recall a religious party that runs fully on the concept of Islam.


UMNO, on the other hand, brings thoughts of Malay rights and supremacy to the forefront. In other words, voters vote for PAS if they seek passage into eternal heaven.

Voters vote for UMNO if they give weight to the material world. But is it possible for Malaysians Malays to be Malays and Muslims without the need of any of these two parties?

Are their presence so fundamental towards the spiritual and material wellbeing of the Malays that their departure would mean catastrophe to the average Malaysian Malay?


According to @adamyusuf88, the answer is a huge no and he sums up the situation with these words, “Without PAS we are still Islam. Without UMNO we are still Malays. Understand?”


Faham ke faham? Negeri Sembilan elok dah #KekalHarapan
709
Reply
Copy link

When fiery statements such as these are uttered, expect a heated discussion to happen, and our local netizens do not disappoint.

“That’s true, but there are also those who identify as Malay and Muslim yet subscribe to liberal and socialist ideologies,” said @an_anonymo38142.

Another netizen felt that it was icky to vote for a non-Malay who prayed to a “kafir” as their religion.

The comment section is becoming more and more religious by the moment.

Then there was @MHDNR80 claiming that more roads and places will have DAP names.

Check out the photo comments too:



Also, @Asurama74348559 believed the Malays will not realise their bumiputera rights are slowly vanishing from Malaysia.

@Muhammadiz54733 in a word play said that without PH, we are still citizens of Malaysia who love peace and stability.

As always, Malaysian politics proves that the comment section can be more entertaining than Parliament itself.

Whether one agrees with the statement or not, the debate serves as a reminder that political identities are rarely as simple as party slogans. After all, being Malay or Muslim is an identity, while supporting a political party is ultimately a choice made at the ballot box.

Love them or loathe them, PAS and UMNO remain two of the most recognisable political brands in Malaysia. Judging from the thousands of comments, they also continue to live rent-free in many Malaysians’ minds.—July 21, 2026