On Thursday, former President Donald Trump publicly declared that he was ending, with immediate effect, all ongoing trade negotiations with Canada. This abrupt announcement came in response to a newly launched advertising campaign by the government of Ontario—an initiative that openly criticized Trump’s tariff policies, portraying them as economically damaging and politically misguided. The decision marked an instant escalation in tensions between Washington and Canadian provincial leadership, reflecting how swiftly political messaging can translate into tangible diplomatic and economic consequences.
The advertisement in question, lasting roughly one minute, was disseminated on the social media platform X by Ontario’s Premier, Doug Ford, on October 16. The campaign incorporated archival footage of the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan, specifically drawn from a 1987 address, to underscore the supposed detrimental effects of tariffs on trade and economic growth. By highlighting Reagan’s philosophical opposition to protectionism and his endorsement of open markets, the ad sought to frame Trump’s economic strategy as regressive and harmful to both nations’ prosperity.
Responding rapidly and with characteristic forcefulness, Trump issued an extended statement on his platform Truth Social. He cited a pronouncement by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation, which stated that Canada had illegitimately appropriated Reagan’s likeness and words to craft what Trump described as a “fake” advertisement. In Trump’s words, “The Ronald Reagan Foundation has just announced that Canada has fraudulently used an advertisement, which is FAKE, featuring Ronald Reagan speaking negatively about tariffs.” He proceeded to emphasize his own position, declaring in emphatic capitalization that tariffs were integral to safeguarding both the national security and the broader economic interests of the United States. “Based on their egregious behavior,” Trump concluded, “all trade negotiations with Canada are hereby terminated.”
Representatives from the White House, the Office of the Canadian Prime Minister, and the Office of Ontario’s Premier all declined to provide any immediate comment when contacted by Business Insider, thereby leaving the public to speculate about the potential impact of this diplomatic rift on existing and future North American trade dynamics.
The Reagan speech at the center of the conflict originally aired on April 25, 1987, as part of a presidential radio address. In that address, Reagan discussed his policies regarding Japan, explaining the rationale for imposing certain tariffs before ultimately transitioning into a thoughtful reflection on the perils of excessive trade restrictions and the advantages of global exchange. While the full remarks presented a balanced view—acknowledging both the necessity and the limitations of tariffs—the Ontario advertisement deliberately showcased only the latter, more critical portion of his argument, thereby giving the impression that Reagan had taken an unequivocally anti-tariff stance.
The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute subsequently issued a formal statement, also distributed via Truth Social, asserting that the Ontario government’s use of the material “misrepresents the Presidential Radio Address.” The foundation further clarified that no formal permission had been requested or granted for the reproduction or editing of Reagan’s speech. It went on to reveal that the institution was “reviewing its legal options in this matter,” implying that it might pursue legal redress over the alleged misuse of Reagan’s intellectual and political legacy.
In response, a spokesperson for Premier Doug Ford issued a written statement to CBC News defending the advertisement’s legality. The spokesperson asserted that the campaign used “an unedited excerpt” from a Reagan speech that exists in the public domain and is therefore available for public use without formal authorization. Moreover, the Ontario government’s statement stressed that Reagan had explicitly addressed the American people about the negative effects tariffs could have on workers, families, and the overall U.S. economy. According to that defense, Reagan’s words demonstrated his enduring commitment to fostering fair, open, and cooperative trade relations between Canada and the United States—principles Ontario argued Trump’s recent policies had undermined.
Trump, however, expanded his accusations further on Truth Social, alleging that Canada had not merely sought to criticize his trade platform but had also attempted to “interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, and other courts.” The statement referred to the impending Supreme Court hearing scheduled for November 5, during which justices are set to consider the legality of Trump’s tariff actions. In a filing presented in September, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned that, should the Court invalidate Trump’s trade levies, the administration could be compelled to return up to one trillion dollars in tariff revenue to affected importers, a consequence that would have profound implications for federal finances and global commerce alike.
This most recent episode is not isolated. It follows a series of confrontations between Trump and Canadian authorities regarding trade practices. As recently as June 27, Trump declared—again on Truth Social—that he was “terminating ALL discussions on trade with Canada, effective immediately.” That declaration was triggered by Canada’s announcement that it intended to implement a digital services tax on U.S.-based technology firms. Within two days of Trump’s threat, however, the Canadian government reversed course, formally withdrawing the proposed measure and thereby opening the door for new negotiations to resume.
Canada remains the foremost purchaser of U.S. exports and stands as America’s second-largest trading partner overall, underscoring the significance of these recurrent disruptions. The economic relationship between the two nations came under renewed stress earlier in the year when, in March, Trump imposed a 25 percent tariff on Canadian goods. Ottawa retaliated in kind, introducing its own 25 percent levy on U.S. products. Trump justified his tariff strategy as a measure designed to pressure Canada into intensifying its efforts to combat cross-border drug trafficking and to enhance its border enforcement capabilities.
By July 31, Trump escalated the confrontation even further, elevating tariffs to 35 percent and attributing the decision to what he characterized as Canada’s “failure to cooperate in curbing the ongoing flood of fentanyl and other illicit drugs.” In contrast, on September 1, Canada eased some of its retaliatory measures, removing its 25 percent counter-tariff on most U.S. goods while leaving in place restrictions on specific sectors such as steel, aluminum, and automotive products. Despite these adjustments, mutual distrust and protectionist rhetoric have continued to loom large, leaving the future of bilateral trade increasingly uncertain.
In essence, the latest dispute—sparked by a politically charged advertisement and culminating in the abrupt suspension of trade discussions—serves as yet another chapter in a protracted saga of economic brinkmanship between Washington and Ottawa. The episode illustrates not only the fragility of modern trade diplomacy but also how swiftly symbolic gestures and political communication can reverberate through channels of real economic consequence.
Sourse: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-terminating-trade-talks-canada-over-reagan-ad-2025-10
