The government announced the details of their dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs yesterday, and it was a fairly broad list, but largely focused on protecting domestic markets than extracting a price from the Americans—there is a whole explanation of defensive versus offensive tariffs here. In many cases, these are things where there are domestic alternatives available, which means that it creates a price incentive to buy the Canadian alternative, which is laudable. And there does seem to be some distribution where the effect of those retaliatory tariffs does seem to disproportionately impact swing states, which is also not a bad thing. Of course, that’s not to say that there isn’t a discussion to be had about whether we shouldn’t be trying to maximize the political price for the Americans, particularly as the midterms approach, whether that is export taxes or otherwise on things like potash or energy, which is particularly fraught, because it could invite even harsher retaliation from the Americans. However, if this is indeed an economic war and we are fighting for our sovereignty, that could mean using bigger economic guns, and ensuring that the burden faced by Canadians is more evenly shared than it is right now (especially by Alberta and Saskatchewan).
Where do Canadian retaliatory tariffs land? Based on all affected products on Sept 8 (including pre-existing tariffs), here's the value of exports times tariff rates as a share of each state's GDP. #cdnecon #cdnpoli
— Trevor Tombe (@trevortombe.bsky.social) 2026-08-25T18:50:14.657082Z
Also announced were some of the tweaks to EI to support workers, but it’s not a lot of tweaks as they do nothing about the hours worked requirements. I will also note that this government promised EI reform years ago, and did a lot of work on it (and I can personally say that a friend of mine worked on the file and did a tonne of work that has apparently never seen the light of day), and nothing came of it, whether it was because it was too politically unsaleable, or some other reason we don’t know.
These are the EI changes that have been announced today. Some of them address some of the more common reasons for otherwise eligible claims to be delayed (ie: separation pay) or denied (a voluntary separation before a layoff). These are long-standing. Source: www.canada.ca/en/departmen… 1/n
— Jennifer Robson 🇨🇦 (@jrobson.bsky.social) 2026-08-25T16:31:48.904Z
There's nothing here to adjust the hours threshold to qualify for regular benefits. I imagine that the internal analysis projected that most workers in affected sectors will already have the hours required to qualify. I think that's probably right in auto, steel, and aluminum. 2/n
— Jennifer Robson 🇨🇦 (@jrobson.bsky.social) 2026-08-25T16:31:48.905Z
Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre continues to demand that the “text” of the trade deal be released, when there may not have been a finalized text, and it’s a Cabinet confidence in any case, and shouldn’t be released because it can point to particular pain points in future negotiations. Poilievre is also calling for his economic “plan” to be adopted, with its tax cuts, environmental law repeal and his bizarre notion about zero tax on capital gains being reinvested in Canada, which I will remind you Jim Flaherty tried to implement in the Harper era and gave up because it was way too complex to manage. But Poilievre has one set of ideas (doubling-down on trickle-down), and he’s going to keep swinging that hammer for every problem under the sun, no matter how inappropriate it may be. And then there’s Danielle Smith who wants negotiations to resume right away, even though there is no trade deal to be had because the Americans are not interested in trade, only in subjugation. Unbelievable, but also unsurprising, that she is so keen to be a Vichy premier.
Pierre Poilievre demands that the PM adopt his economic plans, no matter how nonsensical they actually are. Because he has one set of solutions for all of Canada’s problems, and he will not be dissuaded.
— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-08-25T17:06:31.112Z
Ukraine Dispatch:
Ukraine has struck Russia’s Afipsky oil refinery. The head of the CIA is in Moscow for “meetings,” which is awfully curious.
Noteworthy:
- Here is a look at the trend of ever-longer Supreme Court of Canada decisions.
- Justing Ling uses the example of icebreakers for things that America needs that Canada produces (and Davie owns the Helsinki shipyard as well).
- Susan Delacourt remarks on the “call to arms” aspect of the new phase in the trade war now that we are in active hostilities.
The nice thing about being in The Satirical Arts is I can write the line, "Bring it on, fuckface. I’ll build an Austrian spa on your grave," and Doug Ford can't sue me
— Clare Blackwood (@clareblackwood.bsky.social) 2026-08-25T14:30:45.868Z
Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.