Donald Trump’s trade war with the United States’ two closest neighbors would be easier to comprehend if the president himself could coherently explain it. Instead, the reasoning behind 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada, along with additional tariffs against China, have been accompanied by flawed and convoluted reasoning.
Along the way, Trump has undertaken actions that are particularly menacing for Washington. Often regarded as the nation’s most trade-dependent state, Washington’s vast export and import industries are damaged by Trump targeting major trading partners.
As the Washington Council on International Trade writes: “For Washington, which shares a 427-mile border with Canada, the economic impact would be severe. Canada, Mexico, and China account for nearly half of the state’s imports, totaling to $30 billion in 2024.”
For one example, the WCIT asserts that Washington imported $563 million worth of lumber from Canada in 2024, paying no tariffs. Trump’s tariffs would add $141 million to the cost of that lumber — a cost that will be passed along to consumers in the price of housing and wood pellets and other finished products.
In addition, the trade council writes, “Canada is Washington’s sole import source of live cattle, electrical energy, beef fat, and many other products. No existing relationships with potential alternative sources makes it more difficult for Washington businesses and families to avoid the $110 million in new tariff costs associated with these products.”
In attempting to justify these tariffs, Trump at times has focused on desires to spur American manufacturing, balance the budget, impose “fairness,” make child care more affordable and even protect “the soul of our country.”
These are specious and confusing arguments. Instead, Trump should emphasize the use of tariffs to help stem the trafficking of immigrants and fentanyl into the country. During an address to Congress on Tuesday, he said, “They’ve allowed fentanyl to come into our country at levels never seen before, killing hundreds of thousands of our citizens and many very young, beautiful people, destroying families.”
Using tariffs to coerce Mexico into controlling the scourge of fentanyl might make sense. Including Canada in the equation is nonsensical. During the last fiscal year, U.S. customs agents seized 21,100 pounds of fentanyl at the Mexican border, compared with 43 pounds at the Canadian border.
Meanwhile, he has suggested making Canada the 51st state, an absurd thought that only increases tension between the nations.
Trump, at times, has emphasized tariffs as a cudgel for boosting American manufacturing, writing on social media, “IF COMPANIES MOVE TO THE UNITED STATES, THERE ARE NO TARIFFS!!!”
That is a worthy goal, but one that will take years for corporate planning and construction and the development of a workforce. In the meantime, the damage done to financial markets and workers and American consumers will be vast. As Washington Post columnist George Will once wrote, “Protectionism slices through core conservative principles, including opposition to government industrial policy, government picking winners and losers, and crony capitalism elevated to an ethic.”
Trump should probably try to coherently explain that to the American people as he engages to increase inflation and hamper American manufacturing.
