Carney Says Trade Talks With Trump Are Making Progress but Canada Still Has No Deal

35,000+ smart investors are already getting financial news, market signals, and macro shifts in the economy that could impact their money next with our FREE weekly newsletter. Get ahead of what the crowd finds out too late. Click Here to Subscribe for FREE.

Canada’s long-running trade dispute with the United States may be moving toward a breakthrough, but Prime Minister Mark Carney is making one thing clear: progress at the negotiating table does not mean an agreement has been reached.

Speaking from Manila, Philippines, on November 14, 2026, Carney revealed that he had held substantial discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump and senior American officials. The conversations have raised hopes of a bilateral agreement that could ease tariffs and restore some stability to one of the world’s most important trading relationships.

However, significant questions remain about protecting Canadian industries, securing acceptable trade terms, and determining how much economic uncertainty businesses must continue to endure. With Canada simultaneously expanding its commercial relationships across Asia, the negotiations are becoming a defining test of the country’s economic strategy.

Progress, but no agreement

In Manila on November 14, Carney described his recent conversation with Trump as substantial and said a bilateral trade agreement remained possible. Crucially, he did not announce a completed deal. That distinction matters because constructive conversations cannot themselves reduce customs duties or settle disputes over market access. For a Canadian exporter preparing its next shipment, a hopeful statement in a news conference does not change the charges applied when goods cross the border.

The comments nevertheless marked a more encouraging tone after months of confrontation. Rather than presenting an inevitable breakthrough, Carney acknowledged that differences still separated the governments. His approach leaves room for compromise without promising relief that has not materialized. Businesses now have a clearer indication that leaders are talking seriously, but no firm basis for revising prices, reopening contracts or changing investment plans. The immediate story is diplomatic movement, not an economic settlement for Canadian companies today.

Senior Officials Joined Trump’s Conversation

Carney said the lengthy call occurred before he departed for his European and Asian trip. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and White House chief of staff Stephen Miller also took part, bringing senior American decision-makers into direct discussion with the president. Their involvement indicates that negotiations extend beyond exchanges between trade officials. It does not, however, establish that the two governments have agreed on the wording or scope of a package.

The distinction between discussing a bilateral arrangement and renewing North America’s broader trade framework is important. A deal between Ottawa and Washington might target immediate tariff disputes without resolving every question involving Mexico or the existing continental agreement. That possibility could deliver relief, but only if the final terms are workable. For businesses, the strongest signal would be a published agreement specifying which duties change and when, rather than the number or seniority of officials participating in a call.

August’s Breakdown Still Shapes the Negotiations

The renewed diplomacy follows an especially damaging breakdown in August. Canada suspended talks after Washington presented late demands that Ottawa considered unacceptable. On August 22, the United States imposed additional tariffs of 50 percent on approximately C$27.6 billion in Canadian goods. Some affected products were far removed from the factories typically associated with trade disputes, including furniture, clothing and sporting equipment. The scope made clear that the confrontation could reach many kinds of Canadian exporters.

Ottawa responded on September 8 with tariffs of 15, 25 or 50 percent on a comparable C$27.6 billion in American imports, depending on the product. Canadian countermeasures targeted sectors including steel, dairy, appliances and agricultural equipment. These were actual policy changes, not negotiating threats. For wholesalers, farmers and manufacturers on both sides of the long shared border, they complicated purchasing decisions and pricing. Any new understanding must now contend with the commercial damage already done.

Steel and Aluminum Remain Major Pressure Points

Tariff relief for metals is a potential gain from an agreement. U.S. duties on many Canadian steel and aluminum products have reached 50 percent, while some derivative products face different rates. The Bank of Canada reported in 2026 that steel exports to the American market had fallen sharply following the imposition of sectoral duties. Those figures explain producers’ attention to even modest signs of a diplomatic opening.

Conditions are not uniformly bleak. On November 13, steelmaker Stelco said it would recall 175 temporarily laid-off workers at its Hamilton operation and restart finishing lines after securing customer commitments. That decision is encouraging for affected households, but it is not proof that trade barriers have disappeared. Producers can recover some business through domestic orders while remaining exposed to U.S. duties. A durable settlement would offer something companies cannot obtain from contracts alone: greater certainty about future access to their largest nearby market.

The Auto Industry Is a Firm Canadian Priority

Carney has drawn a clear boundary around Canadian vehicle production, saying he would not accept an agreement that undermines the auto industry. Federal figures show that more than 90 percent of vehicles assembled in Canada and approximately 60 percent of Canadian-made auto parts are exported to the United States. In 2025, the country’s automotive manufacturing industry employed 121,587 people directly, according to government figures drawn from Statistics Canada.

The sector relies on tightly connected operations, from assembly plants to smaller parts and tooling businesses. Since April 2025, Canadian-built vehicles have faced a U.S. tariff of 25 percent on their non-American content, subject to applicable trade-rule provisions. Higher costs can influence where manufacturers schedule production or locate future investments. For workers in Ontario auto communities, the distinction between partial tariff relief and an agreement that protects long-term production is substantial. That helps explain Ottawa’s reluctance to trade away its industrial interests.

Language, Culture and Sovereignty Remain Non-Negotiable

Disputes from August appear to have eased. On November 3, Carney said the United States had retreated from positions affecting Canadian language protections, cultural policy and the country’s ability to negotiate trade agreements with other partners. He described Washington as asking for less and offering more, though significant problems still remained. This was a meaningful change from August, when Ottawa rejected demands it believed compromised Canada’s sovereignty.

For Canada, these issues extend well beyond the fine print of a tariff schedule. Rules protecting French-language services and cultural programming reflect domestic choices, while the freedom to negotiate trade deals matters to Canada’s effort to diversify exports. Progress on those points could remove significant obstacles to an agreement. It does not automatically settle disagreements over automobiles, metals or market access. A successful deal would have to combine commercially useful concessions with assurances that Canada remains free to make decisions in sovereign areas.

CUSMA Is Still in Force, Despite Renewal Uncertainty

The negotiations sit beside a bigger question about continental trade rules. On July 1, the United States declined to extend the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement in its existing form during the pact’s scheduled six-year review. That decision did not terminate CUSMA. The agreement remains in effect, with its current term running to July 2036 unless the three countries agree to an extension or another legal change occurs.

Under the review provisions, the partners must return to annual joint reviews until they agree to extend the agreement or its term expires. This distinction matters to businesses that depend on established rules of origin and preferential access across North America. A separate Canada–U.S. tariff arrangement could ease immediate costs while leaving the framework unresolved. Conversely, a bilateral breakthrough would not by itself amount to a renewed three-country pact. Investors must watch two processes rather than assume that progress in one settles the other.

Washington’s Political Calendar Adds Uncertainty

Trump has repeatedly suggested that an agreement with Canada was close, including ahead of the November 3 U.S. midterm elections. Yet optimistic predictions have not produced a signed settlement. The election also changed the political landscape in Washington, with Democrats winning congressional majorities and signaling plans to challenge the administration’s tariffs. For Ottawa, that introduces another possible source of pressure on U.S. trade policy, without guaranteeing immediate changes at the border.

Carney said on November 10 that the White House would remain Canada’s main negotiating counterpart despite the election results. His calculation reflects a practical constraint: a congressional vote seeking to overturn tariffs could face a presidential veto. The choice is therefore not between accepting a deal now and watching lawmakers remove every duty later. Canada must weigh the benefits of negotiated relief against the risk that tariffs survive months of political conflict, leaving exporters and workers in continued uncertainty.

Canada Is Making Progress With Asia at the Same Time

Carney delivered his update on U.S. negotiations while announcing major progress in Southeast Asia. On November 14, Ottawa said it had substantially concluded free-trade negotiations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and completed separate negotiations with the Philippines. ASEAN represents almost 700 million people. The Canadian government estimates that an implemented ASEAN agreement could add nearly C$2 billion to national GDP and support almost 14,000 jobs, especially in agriculture and manufacturing.

The Philippines agreement is also significant. Canada and the Philippines recorded C$3.4 billion in bilateral merchandise trade in 2025, and Ottawa says the proposed pact could help Canadian exports to that market grow as much as threefold by 2035. Both agreements are targeted for signature in 2027; neither is yet in force. They cannot realistically replace U.S. demand overnight, but they demonstrate a strategy of developing additional customers while Ottawa tries to stabilize its most important existing relationship.

Trade Uncertainty Carries Measurable Economic Costs

The price of prolonged uncertainty extends beyond the industries named in tariff announcements. In October, Canada’s Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that trade measures introduced since early 2025 could leave real GDP 1.4 percent below a pre-tariff baseline after five years if they persist. The same assessment estimated a possible employment decline of as many as 185,000 jobs at the peak impact. These are modeled effects, not losses that have already occurred.

Trade data show why the consequences are uneven. Scotiabank economists reported that approximately 26 percent of Canadian goods entering the United States faced tariffs in September 2026, meaning most continued to enter without duties. Yet businesses exposed to the measures can experience an outsized shock when their margins are narrow or alternative buyers are scarce. A deal could improve planning and confidence, but its economic value will depend on the actual tariff reductions, exceptions and durability of the agreement.

What to Watch Before Calling It a Breakthrough

The next meaningful development would be more specific than another declaration that talks are improving. Negotiators would need to identify which tariffs would be reduced or removed, whether automotive protections are adequate, and when any changes would take effect. Reports in October suggested a narrower agreement focused on steel and automobiles was possible, rather than a comprehensive trade reset. By November 14, Carney had confirmed progress but still had no finalized agreement to announce publicly.

Timing matters as well. Trump has threatened higher tariffs on Canadian autos and related products from January 1, 2027, although a threat is not the same as an enacted increase. Meanwhile, the United States has begun preparations for the next annual CUSMA review, including a January 12, 2027 deadline for public comments. Businesses need to distinguish proposed measures, existing duties and signed commitments. Until governments provide enforceable terms, the diplomatic thaw remains welcome but incomplete.

This Options Discord Chat is The Real Deal

While the internet is scoured with trading chat rooms, many of which even charge upwards of thousands of dollars to join, this smaller options trading discord chatroom is the real deal and actually providing valuable trade setups, education, and community without the noise and spam of the larger more expensive rooms. With a incredibly low-cost monthly fee, Options Trading Club (click here to see their reviews) requires an application to join ensuring that every member is dedicated and serious about taking their trading to the next level. If you are looking for a change in your trading strategies, then click here to apply for a membership.