Carney Told Premiers to Prepare for ‘Two-Plus Years’ of Trump Trade War, Kinew Says

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.

A trade dispute that once looked like something Canada might negotiate its way through in a matter of months is increasingly being treated as a much longer economic test. Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew says conversations with Prime Minister Mark Carney have focused on preparing governments for the “two-plus years” remaining in Donald Trump’s presidency, with support programs designed to act as a bridge beyond the current U.S. administration.

The comment offers an unusually clear glimpse into the time horizon Canadian governments may now be using behind closed doors. Ottawa has suspended trade negotiations, announced dollar-for-dollar retaliation and unveiled billions in assistance for workers and businesses. If Kinew’s account reflects the broader federal strategy, Canada is no longer planning simply for the next tariff deadline. It is preparing for the possibility that sustained trade friction becomes part of everyday economic policy.

Kinew’s Remark Reveals a Much Longer Planning Horizon

Kinew made the striking assessment while speaking to reporters in Manitoba on August 25. He said conversations with Carney had involved preparing for “two-plus years” and ensuring that economic programs could serve as a “bridge past the Trump administration.” CityNews separately reported essentially the same remarks. Importantly, the wording has been publicly attributed to Kinew’s account of his discussions with the prime minister; the federal government’s published readout of its August 22 first ministers’ meeting does not quote Carney using that exact phrase. That distinction matters when interpreting what was said privately versus what Ottawa has formally placed on the record.

Still, the public actions of both governments are consistent with planning for something more durable than a brief tariff shock. Manitoba convened its U.S. Trade Council after the latest escalation, bringing together representatives from business, labour, industry and Indigenous governments. Kinew has also said the province is studying Ottawa’s new worker and business supports before unveiling additional provincial measures. The emerging message is that government assistance may have to sustain affected employers and households through repeated rounds of uncertainty rather than simply cushion one difficult quarter.

The ‘Two-Plus Years’ Timeline Tracks the U.S. Political Calendar

There is a straightforward reason the phrase “two-plus years” carries so much weight. Under the U.S. Constitution’s 20th Amendment, presidential terms end at noon on January 20. Trump began his current term on January 20, 2025, meaning that in late August 2026 there are roughly 29 months remaining before the next presidential inauguration in January 2029. Kinew’s timeline therefore appears closely tied to the remaining duration of the administration rather than to a particular tariff expiration date.

That does not mean Canadian officials know the trade conflict will last exactly that long. Tariffs can be altered, suspended or removed before a presidency ends, and negotiations could restart if political or economic incentives change. Kinew himself has left room for diplomacy, while also suggesting U.S. domestic politics — including the midterm elections — could influence Washington’s approach. The practical implication is different: Canadian governments appear unwilling to build economic plans around the assumption that an imminent breakthrough will rescue exposed industries. Programs designed for a multi-year period require different budgets, eligibility rules and investment decisions than emergency measures expected to expire within a few months.

Ottawa Is Building a Financial Buffer Around the Trade Fight

The scale of the latest federal response helps explain why the language has shifted from managing a dispute to building a bridge. Washington imposed 50 per cent tariffs on $27.6 billion worth of Canadian goods effective August 22. Ottawa subsequently announced that Canada will retaliate dollar for dollar, imposing tariffs of 15, 25 and 50 per cent on $27.6 billion in U.S. imports beginning September 8. The products covered span areas including steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, and electronics. Ottawa has described the measures as targeted retaliation rather than a blanket tariff on everything entering Canada from the United States.

Alongside the counter-tariffs, the federal government announced $7.5 billion in new and enhanced assistance for Canadian workers and businesses. Measures include a $2-billion Canada Strong Diversification Fund, additional financing options through the Business Development Bank of Canada and billions in rapid-response support for workers and employers. Ottawa says the package builds on nearly $25 billion in previous supports introduced since U.S. tariffs began affecting Canadian industries. That cumulative scale illustrates the challenge of a prolonged conflict: the longer tariffs remain, the more policy has to move beyond compensation and toward keeping otherwise viable businesses investing, retaining workers and finding customers outside their traditional markets.

Manitoba Has a Particularly Strong Reason to Think in Years

For Manitoba, prolonged disruption to U.S. commerce is not a distant macroeconomic concern. The province’s 2026 budget reported that approximately 66 per cent of Manitoba’s exports in 2025 went to the United States. A Manitoba government trade initiative has highlighted products such as pork, seeds, public-transit vehicles and packaged medicines among the province’s important U.S.-bound exports. Those industries are spread across farms, factories and communities that may experience the tariff fight very differently, which is why Kinew has described the economic impact as likely to be uneven.

The province’s response is therefore being developed around both employers and employees. After meeting its U.S. Trade Council, Kinew said federal support contained useful assistance for businesses as well as employment-related measures aimed directly at workers, and suggested Manitoba could adopt a similar balance. Provincial officials have also promoted buying Canadian, trade diversification and closer economic connections within Canada. None provides an instant substitute for established U.S. customers. A food processor, manufacturer or transportation-equipment producer cannot simply redirect years of supply-chain relationships overnight. But a multi-year support window gives firms more opportunity to secure financing, change suppliers, pursue new markets and avoid shedding skilled employees during temporary disruptions.

Canada Is Diversifying, but the U.S. Market Is Still Enormous

Canada has already made measurable progress in reducing its concentration on the American market. Statistics Canada reported that 71.7 per cent of Canadian merchandise exports went to the United States in 2025, down from 75.9 per cent in 2024. Merchandise exports to the U.S. declined 5.8 per cent during the year, while exports to countries other than the United States increased 17.2 per cent. Those figures demonstrate that trade can shift when conditions change, but they also reveal just how large the remaining dependence is: more than seven dollars out of every ten in Canadian merchandise exports were still destined for the U.S.

The wider North American relationship is even larger when services are included. Global Affairs Canada says Canada and the United States exchanged nearly $3.5 billion in goods and services every day in 2025. That level of integration explains why prolonged tariffs can reach far beyond companies whose products appear directly on customs lists. Manufacturers purchase components from one another, transportation companies move goods repeatedly across borders, retailers depend on regional distribution networks and investment decisions are often made with access to the entire continental market in mind. Diversification can reduce vulnerability, but replacing a commercial relationship of that scale is a structural project measured in years rather than months.

The Latest Escalation Adds New Risk to an Already Fragile Outlook

Even before the newest tariffs arrived, the Bank of Canada was treating U.S. trade policy as a persistent economic headwind. Its July 2026 Monetary Policy Report assumed that trade-policy uncertainty would ease only gradually. The Bank estimated potential output growth of 1.1 per cent in 2026, citing both slower population growth and the effect of U.S. trade policy. It also noted that sectors directly hit by tariffs were still exporting less than they had before the trade conflict intensified.

There is another important detail: the Bank’s July outlook incorporated tariff information available only through July 10. Its projection therefore predates the latest round of 50 per cent U.S. tariffs that took effect on August 22 and Canada’s subsequent retaliation. That does not automatically mean the Bank’s overall forecast will deteriorate sharply; economic impacts depend on which products are affected, exemptions, corporate responses and how long measures remain in force. But it reinforces the logic behind contingency planning. Governments deciding how long to fund liquidity programs, employment assistance or industrial investment cannot assume an economic forecast made before the newest escalation fully captures the risks they now face.

The Strategy Is Moving From Retaliation Toward Resilience

Ottawa’s August 22 meeting with premiers offers perhaps the clearest official evidence of this broader approach. The prime minister discussed dollar-for-dollar counter-tariffs and additional worker and business support, but the meeting also covered export diversification, nation-building projects and removing internal Canadian trade barriers. Those initiatives have little to do with winning a single negotiating round. They are intended to make the Canadian economy less vulnerable if access to the U.S. market becomes more unpredictable for an extended period.

That distinction changes what success looks like. In a short trade dispute, success might mean negotiating tariff relief quickly. In a longer confrontation, governments also have to ask whether companies can remain liquid, whether displaced workers can transition without leaving their industries entirely, whether Canadian procurement can create alternative demand and whether projects can connect exporters with domestic or overseas customers. Kinew’s reference to a bridge captures that shift unusually well. The objective is not simply to reimburse losses created by tariffs. It is to prevent temporary political decisions in Washington from causing permanent closures, cancelled investment or lost industrial capacity in Canada before the political environment changes.

‘Bridging Past Trump’ Does Not Mean Canada Can Simply Wait

The biggest danger in interpreting Kinew’s comments would be assuming Canada merely intends to endure the next two-plus years and expect normal trade to resume automatically in 2029. There is no guarantee a future U.S. administration would reverse every tariff, nor that changes now being made to North American supply chains would instantly unwind. Companies make plant locations, sourcing contracts and investment decisions years in advance. Once production leaves a community or a supplier relationship disappears, rebuilding it can be much harder than protecting it in the first place.

There is also a legal framework extending well beyond Trump’s current term. Canada’s government says CUSMA remains in force until 2036 unless the agreement’s review and termination provisions eventually change that trajectory. The review mechanism therefore should not be confused with an automatic expiration of continental free trade. Ottawa can simultaneously prepare for prolonged political confrontation, keep diplomatic channels open and defend the existing trade architecture. In that sense, Kinew’s “two-plus years” comment may be less a prediction about precisely when the trade war ends than a statement about risk management: Canada is increasingly planning as though it cannot afford to depend on Washington changing course soon.

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.