Trade wars rarely create winning outcomes. They raise costs, disrupt investment and inject unnecessary uncertainty into business decisions. The renewed US-Canada confrontation is no exception, and, in the near term, it is likely to weigh on Canadian growth. But the longer-term implications may actually be more constructive. For years, Canada has struggled to convert all its advantages, including abundant resources, political stability and enormous pools of institutional capital into stronger investment and productivity. Regulatory barriers, slow project approvals and heavy reliance on the neighbouring US marketplace have perpetually held the economy back. The current trade dispute may provide the pressure needed to make change.
Short-term shock, longer-term catalyst
The latest negotiations broke down after the terms of a potential agreement shifted late in the process. Ottawa ultimately walked away, arguing the proposed deal would weaken key industries and constrain Canada’s ability to diversify its trade relationships. The Trump administration then announced 50% tariffs on roughly US$20 billion of Canadian exports, prompting Canada to respond with matching counter-tariffs on US goods beginning September 8. The immediate economic impact should not be dismissed, but it also remains relatively contained. To be clear, the total impact is manageable. Roughly 85% of Canadian exports remain exempt under USMCA, while the newest tariffs affect approximately 5% of total exports. Trade uncertainty will likely delay some investment and weigh on growth, but this is not yet an economic disaster. Canada also has more fiscal capacity than many developed economies to cushion the near-term shock while supporting investment, and enters this trade war with relatively more subdued inflation.
What may matter more is how Canada responds. Prime Minister Carney entered office with an ambitious agenda to accelerate infrastructure and resource projects, reduce barriers to investment and attract significantly more private capital. The persistent question has been whether Canada could overcome the regulatory and political hurdles that have slowed major projects in the past.
This trade dispute could catalyze change. New pipelines, LNG infrastructure, critical-mineral projects and electricity transmission can increasingly be framed not simply as economic development, but as national resilience. Removing internal trade barriers becomes urgent when external trade is less dependable. In that sense, the dispute raises the cost of doing nothing. A unified political environment could give Ottawa the room to advance projects that have been discussed for years but rarely delivered upon.
The result is an unusual two-horizon outlook: weaker growth in the near term, but potentially stronger domestic investment and productivity over time.
Canada looks different from the outside
The global investment backdrop is also evolving as trade and capital flows become increasingly influenced by politics. Investors are paying more attention to institutional stability, access to resources and the reliability of counterparties. Against that backdrop, Canada’s relative strengths are becoming more valuable. There are tentative signs that international capital is becoming more receptive to Canada. Foreign direct investment reached just under C$26 billion in Q2, rising from the prior four-quarter average of C$21 billion. Foreign demand for Canadian financial assets has also been strong. Most of that buying has been in bonds, but foreign flows into Canadian equities have recently turned positive after several years of persistent selling (see Chart 1).
Chart 1 – Foreign flows in Canadian equities turn positive
Source: Statistics Canada
Canada has an unusually timely opportunity to capture more interest. In mid-September, Toronto will host the inaugural Canada Investment Summit, which was designed to attract capital into Canadian businesses and infrastructure. It now arrives as global investors are actively reconsidering geographic concentration and supply-chain exposure. Canada does not need to replace the US as a global investment destination. It simply can become more attractive at the margin.
The capital is already here
Canada also has an enormous domestic source of capital. The country’s major pension funds collectively manage roughly C$2.5 trillion, yet only about one-quarter of their assets are currently invested in Canada. A domestic investment case, however, cannot simply rest on a “Buy Canada” argument. It requires better opportunities. That is why policy reform and project development matter. Infrastructure, energy, power generation, critical minerals and transportation are long-duration assets that can be well suited to pension investors. If Canada can accelerate approvals and create more commercially attractive projects, greater domestic investment could follow because the opportunities themselves are compelling.
Making the most of the moment
The trade confrontation remains a near-term economic headwind, but it may also expose some of the structural weaknesses Canada has spent years discussing without fixing. That is the opportunity. There is no guarantee that Canada will convert this moment into lasting change. Project announcements still need to become actual projects, and regulatory reform still needs to produce lasting results. But the investment case has certainly become more interesting.
Portfolio strategy
Canadian markets have been notably resilient despite the escalation in trade tensions. Canadian equities have continued to perform well, with the S&P/TSX Composite Index outperforming the S&P500 on both a quarter-to-date (see Chart 2) and year-to-date basis (in local currency). Meanwhile, the Canadian dollar has held up better than expected since the trade war reignited, given what would normally be a significant negative shock to the domestic outlook. This resilience suggests investors may be looking beyond the immediate growth impact. At the same time, bond yields have moved higher globally, reflecting continued pressure from solid nominal GDP growth, fiscal spending and, perhaps most notably, the rising combination of public- and private-sector financing needs. In the US, the move in yields became significant enough (see Chart 3) that Treasury Secretary Bessent increased purchases of long-dated Treasuries through the buyback program. The direct flows were small relative to the market, but the signal was notable: Treasury officials are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with disorderly rises in long-term yields. Long bonds initially rallied, but the move faded quickly, suggesting policy intervention may not remove the underlying pressure on longer-term rates. At the same time, increasingly hawkish Fed communication, most recently from Chair Warsh at the Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium, suggests persistent US inflation could still force a tightening in monetary policy.
Chart 2 – Canadian equities outperform despite trade war
Source: Toronto Stock Exchange, S&P Global, MSCI, Nasdaq, Macrobond
Chart 3 – US 30-year yields reached highest level in nearly 20 years
Source: U.S. Department of Treasury, Macrobond
Against this backdrop, balanced portfolios maintain a broadly defensive stance, with flat equity exposure. Within equities, we have a preference for Canadian equities relative to global equities.
Within fixed income, softer Canadian growth and trade uncertainty provide some tactical support for duration, but continued pressure at the long end argues for caution. We currently see relatively attractive opportunities in Canadian yield curve steepening.
Fundamental equity portfolio strategy remains constructive, supported by positive earnings revisions and resilient economic activity. We continue to favour themes including AI infrastructure, rare earths and defence, while monitoring key risks including potential inflation pressures and any slowdown in AI capital spending.
