CAN-USA Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

[Blackadder1916]

If the US said -
1) your wages are paid in USD
2) your income taxes now align with the US
3) HST is gone - back to only PST, no GST
4) your health care system remains untouched until a referendum sometime in the future
5) internal borders remain in place to ensure the current guns/drugs monitoring remains in place
6) your provincial laws remain in place
7) your labour laws remain in place
8) your university/college costs remain in place
9) metric system is gone
10) US airlines have complete access to Canada and existing Canadian airlines have complete access to the US
11) US cell/internet companies have complete access to Canada and existing Canadian cell/internet companies have complete access to the US
12) Quebec retains French within the Province - elsewhere French ceases to have any official status

Tell me a sizeable chunk of the CDN population wouldn't roll over.

Without adding other (absurd and depletable) 'benefits' to your list of American inducements to acceptance of annexation/invasion/overthrow/enslavement, most of those have about the level of guarantee as "the cheque is in the mail or I won't . . . ". And that would apply whether it was the current US administration or a future 'more progressive' executive. From the outside looking in, the current US administration appears to pay only lip service to existing US laws or constitutional restraint - almost making it up as they go along (with the apparent acquiescence of the Supreme Court). Once the barn door is open and the horse has bolted (i.e., the resources that the USA wants to steal from us as is their wont, as seen in other recent foreign adventures) any or all of your list would quickly evaporate as most of those guarantees would be contrary to existing US laws and constitution.

Tell me a sizeable chunk of the CDN population wouldn't roll over.

Re-reading (and parsing) the final sentence, got me thinking about a very unusual encounter I had on public transit (bus) today. By happenstance I used transit today (often do to go downtown - seniors' annual bus pass is one of the best benefits of getting older) and before heading back home I went to a part of the city I don't usually go (also a heavily immigrant area) for a meeting.

On the journey back, the bus was filled to standing room only; an individual moved the child who was with him and offered the seat to me. Once seated. he asked me an unusual question - "where are you from". I found it unusual because I was one of the few white (whitish?) faces amongst the passengers. The last time I was asked such a similar question (to which I thought the answer would be obvious because I looked like one who belonged there) was over 30 years ago in London, England when an English lady shepherding a flock of young children asked my then girlfriend and me if we spoke English because she was having difficulty getting directions.

Today's encounter was with a young (to me) man who was a recent immigrant to Canada from Pakistan (arrived six months ago). In addition to violating one of the modern rules of social interaction of not interacting with strangers, he tried to engage me in a discussion of religion. He was pleasant enough, but the whole encounter seemed a little odd. On reflecting on the final sentence of your post, I wonder how many of Canada's population (not citizens) would fall into categories not welcome in the United States (whether categorized as such by the current administration or previous/future administrations).

(edited to add)

Would it be a pro or con that submitting to the USA would include a requirement to round up the 'unwelcomed' for return to their home countries or another "s**thole" that would accept them?

 

[Altair]

Without adding other (absurd and depletable) 'benefits' to your list of American inducements to acceptance of annexation/invasion/overthrow/enslavement, most of those have about the level of guarantee as "the cheque is in the mail or I won't . . . ". And that would apply whether it was the current US administration or a future 'more progressive' executive. From the outside looking in, the current US administration appears to pay only lip service to existing US laws or constitutional restraint - almost making it up as they go along (with the apparent acquiescence of the Supreme Court). Once the barn door is open and the horse has bolted (i.e., the resources that the USA wants to steal from us as is their wont, as seen in other recent foreign adventures) any or all of your list would quickly evaporate as most of those guarantees would be contrary to existing US laws and constitution.



Re-reading (and parsing) the final sentence, got me thinking about a very unusual encounter I had on public transit (bus) today. By happenstance I used transit today (often do to go downtown - seniors' annual bus pass is one of the best benefits of getting older) and before heading back home I went to a part of the city I don't usually go (also a heavily immigrant area) for a meeting.

On the journey back, the bus was filled to standing room only; an individual moved the child who was with him and offered the seat to me. Once seated. he asked me an unusual question - "where are you from". I found it unusual because I was one of the few white (whitish?) faces amongst the passengers. The last time I was asked such a similar question (to which I thought the answer would be obvious because I looked like one who belonged there) was over 30 years ago in London, England when an English lady shepherding a flock of young children asked my then girlfriend and me if we spoke English because she was having difficulty getting directions.

Today's encounter was with a young (to me) man who was a recent immigrant to Canada from Pakistan (arrived six months ago). In addition to violating one of the modern rules of social interaction of not interacting with strangers, he tried to engage me in a discussion of religion. He was pleasant enough, but the whole encounter seemed a little odd. On reflecting on the final sentence of your post, I wonder how many of Canada's population (not citizens) would fall into categories not welcome in the United States (whether categorized as such by the current administration or previous/future administrations).

I am a huge proponent of public transit, but I will rarely use it.

 

[Brad Sallows]

A country that has over 250million personal firearms, from .38 Specials to full auto AK47's, is more than 'slight neurotic'.

It is to laugh. Canada's so neurotic our firearm policy is in the hands of people who want to remove every means of spontaneous resistance. The irony runs deep: for Canadians to be able to irregularly resist a foreign invader, we'd first have to become part of the US to have a right to bear arms.

Meanwhile, if some Canadians did manage to successfully resist an invasion, the first people to crawl out of their hiding holes on Victory Day would be the anti-gun nuts to demand all munitions be turned in.

 

[lenaitch]

do provinces transfer money to the federal govt?
GST?

I've never been able to find an example of that. Provincial residents do for sure, but not the governments of the provinces. I've asked that in response to the rhetoric that 'Alberta sends $xBn to Ottawa'. For sure its residents, for sure its companies, but not the provincial coffers that I can find.

The GST is federal tax; PST is a provincial tax and HST - where it exists - is a combination. The federal government reimburses the provinces for the provincial portion of any HST collected. Similarly, in the provinces where residents submit a combined income tax return, the feds reimburse the provinces for provincial taxes owed.

 

[suffolkowner]

I've never been able to find an example of that. Provincial residents do for sure, but not the governments of the provinces. I've asked that in response to the rhetoric that 'Alberta sends $xBn to Ottawa'. For sure its residents, for sure its companies, but not the provincial coffers that I can find.

The GST is federal tax; PST is a provincial tax and HST - where it exists - is a combination. The federal government reimburses the provinces for the provincial portion of any HST collected. Similarly, in the provinces where residents submit a combined income tax return, the feds reimburse the provinces for provincial taxes owed.

ok but then the province paying GST on its purchases would be a transfer to the federal govt?

 

[Blackadder1916]

ok but then the province paying GST on its purchases would be a transfer to the federal govt?

What provincial entities? What purchases?

---

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/a6513a21-6383-408a-a009-34700d5c30d5/resource/c2f91422-27c7-481d-9eca-9285a0fbe490/download/tbf-gst-free-alberta-government-entities-2025-11-04.pdf

Goods and Services Tax-Free Government of Alberta Entities

Last updated: November 4, 2025

Overview

The following Government of Alberta entities, ministries, and offices (collectively, entities) are not liable to pay the federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) on purchases of taxable supplies and services in Canada. Similarly, the entities are not liable to pay the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) on purchases of taxable supplies and services in HST participating provinces. This list is maintained by Alberta Treasury Board and Finance, Tax and Revenue Administration (TRA).

---

Big list.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I've never been able to find an example of that. Provincial residents do for sure, but not the governments of the provinces. I've asked that in response to the rhetoric that 'Alberta sends $xBn to Ottawa'. For sure its residents, for sure its companies, but not the provincial coffers that I can find.

The GST is federal tax; PST is a provincial tax and HST - where it exists - is a combination. The federal government reimburses the provinces for the provincial portion of any HST collected. Similarly, in the provinces where residents submit a combined income tax return, the feds reimburse the provinces for provincial taxes owed.

I would note that for some strange reason the Conservative Party has agreed more than once to suggestions that in Quebec, and only in Quebec, the province should collect all federal and provincial taxes of any kind and transfer any surplus to Ottawa. There must be a stipulation to that policy suggestion, but the only one I can find is “vote for us”.

 

[lenaitch]

I would note that for some strange reason the Conservative Party has agreed more than once to suggestions that in Quebec, and only in Quebec, the province should collect all federal and provincial taxes of any kind and transfer any surplus to Ottawa. There must be a stipulation to that policy suggestion, but the only one I can find is “vote for us”.

Ya, as far as I know, Quebec is the only province where you have to file two separate tax returns. Apparently Alberta has proposed the same thing.

ok but then the province paying GST on its purchases would be a transfer to the federal govt?

It's been way too long but I thought governments didn't tax other governments. I remember trying to explain to businesses that, as a provincial government employee, I had to pay my own government's tax (PST) but not the federal one (GST).

 

[Czech_pivo]

I think there is a point where economic pressure (weight) just becomes too much.

If Greenland goes under the US flag, the next step will be US warships and USCG ships traversing the Northwest passage on a regular basis (with those Icebreakers that we've so nicely agreed to help transfer knowledge/expertise to, along with the Finns), claiming that its an 'International passage', not part of the inland waters of Canada and that we really don't have any legal jurisdiction over it (please, don't site me any legalise because I'll just refer you to the US annexation of Greenland, if it does occur).

So now we'll have the US in Alaska to our west, the US to our east in Greenland and of course of our south. Anyone feeling like Czechoslovakia after the Sudetenland was given away?

I'm wondering if in 2026 we'll begin to hear political talk about the need to have our 3 Territories to become full on Provinces.... I think that the time is now for this talk to begin and a framework/timeline laid out.

 

[QV]

If Greenland goes under the US flag, the next step will be US warships and USCG ships traversing the Northwest passage on a regular basis (with those Icebreakers that we've so nicely agreed to help transfer knowledge/expertise to, along with the Finns), claiming that its an 'International passage', not part of the inland waters of Canada and that we really don't have any legal jurisdiction over it (please, don't site me any legalise because I'll just refer you to the US annexation of Greenland, if it does occur).

So now we'll have the US in Alaska to our west, the US to our east in Greenland and of course of our south. Anyone feeling like Czechoslovakia after the Sudetenland was given away?

I'm wondering if in 2026 we'll begin to hear political talk about the need to have our 3 Territories to become full on Provinces.... I think that the time is now for this talk to begin and a framework/timeline laid out.

I'm good with that. I'd like to avoid Russian or Chinese doing it and if that means it's the Americans instead, perfect. I'd also like to avoid CCP internal influence and infiltration, but I think that is a harder nut to crack.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I'm wondering if in 2026 we'll begin to hear political talk about the need to have our 3 Territories to become full on Provinces.... I think that the time is now for this talk to begin and a framework/timeline laid out.

Piling the responsibilities of provinces upon them might please their political/governing class, but likely not their mostly-just-taxpaying class. TRoC would be applying a not-guaranteed-to-achieve-anything solution for TRoC largely at the territories' expense.

If Canada or parts of it become part of the US, it'll be because Canada couldn't hold itself together. Our vital ground is internal dissatisfaction. Most of the dissatisfaction will continue to arise from our inability to become one country with exactly one status of citizenship in which regions and peoples are not treated differently, particularly on matters of money.

Some Americans have been back-slapping themselves a bit lately (250th anniversary being imminent) over the notion they are a "creedal" country - that to become an American you just need to follow an idea, not belong to a particular culture. We don't have to have their particular creed to become a creedal country, but we probably should have one since we do not really have one dominant ancestral culture. And it can't be diluted with "well, there is this founding nation and that founding nation and that other nation" or any other nonsense like that. I doubt it can succeed without being exactly the same thing for everyone, with no-one entitled to hold his nose in the air (and especially not to make claims on public money) about some aspect of his family tree.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Enjoy this satire:

The arrest of Mark Carney will bring peace, prosperity, and freedom to North America - Halifax Examiner

As with the once-independent countries of Texas and California before it, Canada rightly should become a state under the flag of the United States.

www.halifaxexaminer.ca

The arrest of Mark Carney will bring peace, prosperity, and freedom to North America​

 

[QV]

Piling the responsibilities of provinces upon them might please their political/governing class, but likely not their mostly-just-taxpaying class. TRoC would be applying a not-guaranteed-to-achieve-anything solution for TRoC largely at the territories' expense.

If Canada or parts of it become part of the US, it'll be because Canada couldn't hold itself together. Our vital ground is internal dissatisfaction. Most of the dissatisfaction will continue to arise from our inability to become one country with exactly one status of citizenship in which regions and peoples are not treated differently, particularly on matters of money.

Some Americans have been back-slapping themselves a bit lately (250th anniversary being imminent) over the notion they are a "creedal" country - that to become an American you just need to follow an idea, not belong to a particular culture. We don't have to have their particular creed to become a creedal country, but we probably should have one since we do not really have one dominant ancestral culture. And it can't be diluted with "well, there is this founding nation and that founding nation and that other nation" or any other nonsense like that. I doubt it can succeed without being exactly the same thing for everyone, with no-one entitled to hold his nose in the air (and especially not to make claims on public money) about some aspect of his family tree.

This is the central issue.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I'm good with that. I'd like to avoid Russian or Chinese doing it and if that means it's the Americans instead, perfect. I'd also like to avoid CCP internal influence and infiltration, but I think that is a harder nut to crack.

You do understand that it will be the same premise as us sailing between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland. If the US 'decides' that the Northwest Passage is international waters, ANYONE has the right under the freedom of navigation laws to traverse end to end the North West Passage.

 

[brihard]

You do understand that it will be the same premise as us sailing between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland. If the US 'decides' that the Northwest Passage is international waters, ANYONE has the right under the freedom of navigation laws to traverse end to end the North West Passage.

It’s either an international strait or it’s not. “Internal waters” are not a light switch we can flick for one country but not for another.

 

[Czech_pivo]

It’s either an international strait or it’s not. “Internal waters” are not a light switch we can flick for one country but not for another.

I'm aware of that.

I'm merely pointing out that if the US acquires Greenland, then the next logic step if for them to state that the North West Passage is an International waterway as it gives them in essence unfettered ability to traverse from west-east and east-west to and from Alaska to Greenland without the need to 'consult' us.

 

[ModlrMike]

At some point, it might be worth reminding the Americans that Europe and Canada hold $3.5T worth of their debt.

 

[brihard]

I'm aware of that.

I'm merely pointing out that if the US acquires Greenland, then the next logic step if for them to state that the North West Passage is an International waterway as it gives them in essence unfettered ability to traverse from west-east and east-west to and from Alaska to Greenland without the need to 'consult' us.

Oh, I know. I was largely agreeing with you.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Oh, I know. I was largely agreeing with you.

I really hate the internet some times. Too difficult to 'see' who's agreeing with you and who's not sometimes.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Ya, as far as I know, Quebec is the only province where you have to file two separate tax returns. Apparently Alberta has proposed the same thing.


It's been way too long but I thought governments didn't tax other governments. I remember trying to explain to businesses that, as a provincial government employee, I had to pay my own government's tax (PST) but not the federal one (GST).

The QC Releve 1 are a nightmare; I got audited last year because CRA can't see my R1 so I had to actually mail it in (because my CRA online wasn't working). Lot of people in the NCR and other spots along the border live in one and work in the other so always creates a hassle, and the actual forms are confusing.

Glad to work on the ON side now, but wouldn't be surprised if I still get an R1 anyway because reasons.

When I filed taxes as a business it went to the CRA, and they distributed whatever was needed for the provincial side of things, so imagine transfers just go one way from fed to provincial and not the other way around.