This House of Commons Industry and Technology committee meeting studied the impact of U.S. tariffs, particularly the April 2026 changes to Section 232 tariffs, on Canadian metal and manufacturing industries. Appearing were Jason Bates (EMC Canada), Vincent Caron (Ontario Chamber of Commerce), Marc Lecours (Preferred CNC Inc.), Mathieu Lavigne and Hubert Rioux (Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec), Aaron Aalbers (Aalbers Tool and Mold Inc.), and Flavio Volpe (Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association).
Jason Bates relayed the experiences of two London, Ontario manufacturers. Great Lakes Copper, the last Canadian copper tube mill, lost 12% of sales under the original 232 tariff and now faces unprofitability on remaining U.S. business after the April change to taxing total invoice value; it seeks a Section 53 Customs Act remedy, government procurement preferences, and 15% capital funding for a $65-million modernization. Arctic Snowplows, with U.S. sales down 40% and soon to drop 90%, called for countertariffs to level the playing field, more flexible SR&ED credits, and delayed HST and income tax payments to generate capital without provoking U.S. retaliation.
Vincent Caron stated that the April 2 tariff change increased Ontario's effective tariff burden by over 50%, concentrated in fabricated metals and advanced manufacturing, with only 26% of firms planning to increase investment. He recommended immediate enhanced bridge measures for contracts signed before April 6, clear government guidance on classification and exemptions, intensified senior-level U.S. engagement to pursue exemptions for moulds and tooling, and treating the issue as a strategic industrial capacity problem to avoid long-term erosion of Canada's manufacturing base.
Marc Lecours testified that his Windsor mould-making shops face a "breaking point" from tariffs reaching 50%, with uncertainty over rules making it impossible to quote or plan. He stated his shop will not survive these tariffs, warned that losing Windsor's globally recognized mould-making expertise would be permanent, and urged immediate, decisive engagement with the United States to reach a fair agreement, emphasizing that the industries are strongest when working together.
Mathieu Lavigne and Hubert Rioux argued that applying ad valorem tariffs on total product value over-penalizes secondary processors, wiping out slim margins and making CUSMA inoperative. They called for avoiding new countertariffs on intermediate inputs, reinstating horizontal remissions on countertariffs for steel and aluminum imports, reversing the burden of proof for the remission process, better promoting the drawback program, relaunching the regional tariff response initiative, and reallocating all tariff revenue to support affected businesses.
Aaron Aalbers described how his 135-employee Windsor tool shop, after delaying projects last year, invested in expansion based on an understanding that using U.S. steel would exempt moulds from duty, only to have the April 2 change impose a 10% duty on total value regardless of steel origin, impacting over $15 million in contracts. He said long-term adaptation is possible if tariffs become consistent, but the current variability makes cost accounting impossible and threatens to freeze growth and put projects on hold.
Flavio Volpe broke the North American auto sector into four buckets—materials, tooling, parts, and final assembly—and warned that losing Canadian mould-making capacity, a top-five global cluster, would be the first domino to fall, making Chinese options more attractive. He noted that the American mould sector benefits short-term but will suffer long-term as the cluster erodes, and recommended using new defence spending to require or reward local tool purchases, while stressing that short-term liquidity support through EDC, BDC, and FedDev is needed to keep companies healthy through CUSMA renegotiations.
The committee debated a motion from MP Dancho calling on the Prime Minister to deliver an agreement ending tariffs, with Conservative members arguing for urgency given imminent job losses and Liberal members countering that rushing into a bad deal would be worse, citing ongoing diversification efforts, defence opportunities, and the need for a negotiated solution that does not capitulate to U.S. demands.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.