Canadians Are Rethinking U.S. Travel Amid Politics, Tariffs, and Border Scrutiny—and It Could Cost America Billions
Many point to the recent tariffs on Canadian goods as the breaking point, creating frustration and resentment among citizens who view these taxes as both unnecessarily punitive and damaging. This economic sting has turned what has historically been a friendly relationship into a politically charged decision in many Canadian households.
This tension, along with visible, heated political divisions in American news and social media, has many Canadians rethinking their travels, whether it be a routine cross-border Target shopping runs or vacation planning.
Canadian airlines—such as Air Canada, WestJet and Porter—are rerouting previously American bound aircrafts to Canadian destinations, and even shelving Canadian-U.S. routes due to a lack of demand. (Canadian Flair Airlines terminated its flights to Nashville; Air Canada and Air Transat reduced flights to the U.S.; and Sunwing Airlines ended all flights to the U.S., to name a few.)
'We are mindful of the overall sentiment of travelers as it relates to U.S. tariffs," Edmond Eldebs, the chief commercial officer of Porter Airlines, told Travel + Leisure. 'Our goal is to fly where our customers want to travel, and this is a moment when Canada is at the top of many people's list. We are adding routes and increasing flights in regions across the country to meet this demand.'
Small American border towns that depend on Canadian shoppers have reported customer drops of near 43 percent, and popular Florida vacation rentals note a surprising number of last-minute cancellations from northern visitors. According to the U.S. Travel Association (USTA), the U.S. states that see the most Canadian travelers are Florida, California, Nevada, New York, and Texas.
Canadians make up the biggest group of international visitors to the U.S. and spent $20.5 billion in 2024, which supported some 140,000 American jobs, reports the USTA. What's more, just a 10 percent dip in Canadian travel could impact 14,000 jobs and result in a loss of $2.1 billion.
Travel experts believe this isn't just a temporary blip, and signals Canadians deliberately choosing destinations where they feel more valued and their business appreciated.
'Canadian travelers are increasingly interested in summer travel to destinations like Europe, Japan and beach getaways such as Mexico and the Dominican Republic,' Melanie Fish, the head of Expedia Brand Group's public relations, told T+L. 'We've also seen Canadian travelers rediscovering the charm of their own country, leading to a renewed interest in domestic travel. Popular destinations searched on Expedia include Vancouver, Calgary, Montreal and Toronto, with top trending spots being Tofino, St. John's, Nanaimo, and Gaspésie."
For many Canadians, this will be a summer of indulging in our own beautiful country, from British Columbia's majestic Rocky Mountains to the enticing beaches of Nova Scotia's sparkling Atlantic coast.
Related | The 21 Most Beautiful Places in Canada | Learn More
Read the original article on Travel & Leisure
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bond ETFs Outshine Equities In Weekly Flows As Rate Cut Bets Build
U.S.-listed ETFs attracted nearly $19 billion during the week ended Aug. 8, with fixed income approaches decisively leading investor allocations, according to data from Bond ETFs lured $15.3 billion, which was approximately seven times more than the $2.2 billion invested in equities. This pattern mirrored an unmistakable desire for defensive positioning as market sentiment for Federal Reserve rate cutting intensifies. SGOV ETF is seeing remarkable inflows. Track its prices live. Rate Cut Bets Take Center Stage The move follows growing belief that the Fed will start to ease monetary policy as early as September. Information from the CME FedWatch tool indicates futures markets now giving over a 94% chance of a quarter-point rate cut. Investors are seen front-running that choice, with fixed income instruments, particularly short-term Treasury exposure, hugely benefiting from a lower-rate scenario. Invest in Gold American Hartford Gold: #1 Precious Metals Dealer in the Nation Priority Gold: Up to $15k in Free Silver + Zero Account Fees on Qualifying Purchase Thor Metals Group: Best Overall Gold IRA Bond yields were mostly unchanged during the week, with the 10-year Treasury yield sitting in the mid-3% area and short-term yields elevated but stable. A policy rate cut would tend to close the spread between short- and long-term yields to the advantage of Treasuries and corresponding ETF holders. Also Read: Short-Duration Treasuries in Demand Top fixed income inflows were the iShares 0–3 Month Treasury Bond ETF (NYSE:SGOV), with $2.3 billion, and the SPDR Bloomberg 1–3 Month T-Bill ETF (NYSE:BIL), with $1.6 billion. Both of these funds are popular with investors that want liquidity and stability without extreme interest rate risk. These products are frequently being employed as cash management tools, with yields that still capture the Fed's high policy rate but circumvent price volatility associated with longer-term maturities. Other fixed income winners of note were the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (NASDAQ:TLT), which has been all over the map lately but keeps raking in money from investors hoping to capitalize on capital gains if long-term yields drop following a Fed turn. Selective Equity Buying Though most of the flows were directed into bonds, some equity ETFs continued to enjoy attention. The Communication Services Select Sector SPDR Fund (NYSE:XLC) led all equity products with $3.8 billion in new money. Sector strength has been fueled by ongoing strength in heavyweight members Meta Platforms Inc (NASDAQ:META) and Alphabet Inc (NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG), both of which have enjoyed strong advertising revenue and AI-fueled growth stories. The Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (NYSE:VOO) was next with $3.3 billion of inflows, indicating that investors are still ready to put money into broad equity exposure even as they move into a defensive tilt on overall allocations. The S&P 500 toyed with record highs for the week but was just short of breaking through. Conversely, some well-known equity ETFs suffered redemptions, especially in the small-cap and emerging markets space, which are more vulnerable to concerns about global growth and changes in interest rate policy. Macro Backdrop Reinforces Defensive Tilt The bond preference over stock in last week's flows is a sign of larger market caution. While major indexes trade at or near historic peaks, geopolitical tensions, uneven economic readings, and the uncertain trajectory of inflation still hang over the outlook. A September rate cut would represent a shift away from the Fed's tight policy, which has been in effect for over two years. While cheap borrowing may add a tailwind to risk assets, the action would also indicate that the central bank believes there is a necessity to prop up growth, perhaps as a response to a weakening labor market or other economic challenges. In this context, short Treasuries and other low-duration fixed income strategies are seen as a means of getting favorable yields today while still having flexibility for portfolio rebalancing if market conditions change. If the Fed does cut as most anticipate, fixed-income ETFs, especially those with longer duration, might profit from price appreciation, and equities might experience renewed support from declining discount rates. If the central bank does decide to stand pat, the trade might reverse rather promptly, emphasizing the event-driven nature of the current positioning. Read Next: Photo: Shutterstock UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Bond ETFs Outshine Equities In Weekly Flows As Rate Cut Bets Build originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Los Angeles Times
23 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Tariff ‘Mission Accomplished' hype is just that
On May 1, 2003, George W. Bush announced, 'Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.' He was standing below a giant banner that read, 'Mission Accomplished.' At the risk of inviting charges of understatement, subsequent events didn't cooperate. But it took a while for that to be widely accepted. We're in a similar place when it comes to President Trump's experiment with a new global trading order. 'Tariffs are making our country Strong and Rich!!!' proclaims Trump, making him not only the first Republican president in living memory to brag about raising taxes on Americans, but also the first to insist that raising taxes on Americans makes us richer. MAGA's mission-accomplished groupthink relies primarily on three arguments. The first is that Trump has successfully concluded a slew of beneficial trade deals. The truth is that some of those deals are simply 'frameworks' that will take a long time to be ironed out. But Trump got the headlines he wanted. The second argument is a kind of populism-infused sleight of hand. The 'experts' — their scare quotes, not mine — are wrong once again. The White House social media account crows, 'In April, 'experts' called tariffs 'the biggest policy mistake in 95 years.' By July, they generated OVER $100 BILLION in revenue. Facts expose the haters: tariffs WORK. Trust in Trump.' But the high-fivers are leaving things out. The most-dire predictions of economic catastrophe were based on the scheme Trump announced on April 2, a.k.a. 'Liberation Day.' Trump quickly backed off that plan ('chickened out' in Wall Street parlance) in response to a bond and stock market implosion. Saying the experts were wrong under those circumstances is like saying experts opposed to defenestration were wrong when they successfully convinced a man not to jump out a window. The third argument, made by the White House and many others — that tariffs are working because they're raising money — is a response to a claim no one made. To my knowledge, no expert claimed tariffs wouldn't raise money. The estimates of these revenues from Trump world are stratospheric. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick expects somewhere between $700 billion and $1 trillion per year. Last month, the government collected $29 billion. It's likely this number will significantly increase as more tariffs come online and businesses run down the inventory they stockpiled earlier this year in anticipation of more tariffs to come. Normally, Republicans don't exult over massive revenues from tax hikes. But Trump's defenders get around this problem by insisting that money is 'pouring' and 'flowing' into America from someplace else. It's true that tariff revenue is pouring into the Treasury, but that money is coming out of American bank accounts, because American importers pay the tariff. Even Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent cannot deny this when pressed. So yes, tariffs are 'working' the way they're supposed to; the problem is Trump thinks tariffs work differently than they do. It's possible some foreign exporters might lower prices to maintain market share, and some American businesses might absorb the costs — for now — to avoid sticker shock for inflation-beleaguered consumers, but what revenue is generated still comes from Americans. Ultimately it means higher prices paid here, reduced profits for businesses here or reduced U.S. trade overall. Sometimes, when pressed, defenders of the administration will concede the true source of the revenues, but then they say the pain is necessary to force manufacturers and other businesses to build and produce in the United States. It's backdoor industrial policy masquerading as trade policy. That, too, might 'work.' But all of this will take time, no matter what. And, if it works, that will have costs, too. Manufacturing in America is more expensive — that's why we manufacture so much stuff abroad in the first place. If this 'reshoring' happens, our goods will be more expensive, and less money will 'pour in' from tariffs. It's difficult to exaggerate how well-understood all of this was on the American right until very recently. But the need to grab any argument available to declare Trump's experiment a success has a lot of people not only abandoning their previous dogma but leaping to the conclusion that the dogma was wrong all along. Maybe it was, though I don't think so. The evidence so far suggests that problems are looming. The dollar is weakening. Prices continue to rise. The job market is reeling. The stock market (an unreliable metric, according to MAGA, when it plummeted after Liberation Day) is holding on, thanks to tech stocks. The truth is we won't have real evidence for a while. It's worth remembering that Americans don't live by headlines and press releases and they don't live in the macro economy either. Declaring 'Mission Accomplished' for the macro economy won't convince people they're better off in their own micro-economies when they're not. @JonahDispatch
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jerome Powell's job just got a whole lot easier as inflation data sidesteps disaster
July inflation data suggests the FOMC's dual mandate may not be in as much of a pickle as economists had previously feared. CPI rose 0.2% month-on-month in July. It was 2.7% year-on-year, the same level as the month before. Core inflation edged up to 3.1%, however, keeping it above the Fed's 2% target. Flatter headline inflation and falling energy prices bolstered expectations for a September rate cut, though analysts warned that sticky service costs and potential tariff impacts could limit further easing in 2025. Markets rallied on the data, but Fed officials are likely to remain focused on upcoming jobs reports before committing to additional cuts. July's inflation report went about as well as the Fed (and the White House) could have hoped for. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) summary released Tuesday reported inflation notched up 0.2% in July, that's down compared to the 0.3% increase in June. Over the past 12 months, this brings the headline inflation rate to 2.7%—admittedly still comfortably ahead of the Federal Reserve's 2% target but the same level as it was in June. Shelter was the primary factor for the overall rise, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) said, rising 0.2% in July. Meanwhile, key categories such as the food index were largely unchanged, with food at home falling 0.1% and food away from home rising 0.3%. Elsewhere, the energy index fell 1.1% while gasoline costs were also reduced by 2.2%. Supporters of Trump 2.0 will use the relatively flat report as ammunition to urge U.S. Federal Reserve Jerome Powell to cut the base interest rate, arguing that tariffs are not (yet) proving as inflationary as many economists previously feared. Indeed, President Trump wrote on Truth Social moments after the data was released: 'Jerome 'Too Late' Powell must NOW lower the rate. Steve 'Manouychin' really gave me a 'beauty' when he pushed this loser. The damage he has done by always being Too Late is incalculable. Fortunately, the economy is sooo good that we've blown through Powell and the complacent board.' When the White House announced its tariff regime, particularly following its 'Liberation Day' announcements in April, analysts and investors feared the significant added costs to global trade would be passed to American consumers. Surveys indicate that this is the intention of the majority of businesses: To pass the increased levies on to the public, thus pushing up inflation. But with various agreements with key partners now made, and delays with the likes of China to boot, economists are now beginning to wonder when (or if) the sharpest end of the tariff agenda will be felt. The report is likely to have eased some of the friction members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) were readying themselves for. For many months, the FOMC had been warning it was mindful of the two sides of its mandate when making decisions about the base rate. Those two sides are maximizing employment and keeping inflation to 2%. With a shocking and negative update on the labor market from earlier this month, a spiking inflation report for July would have put those two factors at even greater odds. As it is, many analysts are seeing the inflation report as another tick in the box for a cut at the FOMC's next meeting in September. After all, they believe it means Powell and the FOMC can breathe easier about tariffs and give the economy and employment market a boost by lowering interest. At the opening bell investors certainly seemed to think so: The S&P 500 was up 0.65%, the Dow Jones up 0.6%, the Nasdaq up 0.76%. However, while headline inflation stayed below 3%, core inflation (excluding the often volatile food and energy categories) rose to 3.1% over the past 12 months. Seema Shah, chief global strategist at Principal Asset Management, wrote in a note seen by Fortune that July inflation data isn't hot enough to 'derail the Fed from cutting rates in September. There is some sign of tariff pass through to consumer prices but, at this stage, it is not significant enough to ring alarm bells.' But Shah added that further cuts in 2025 are not a foregone conclusion: 'The concern for the Fed is that with inventory run-down, the tariff-induced boost to inflation is likely to grow over the coming months, meaning that inflationary pressures are likely to pick up just as the Fed starts to resume rate cuts. Markets like today's inflation print as it means the Fed can lower rates unheeded next month – rate cut decisions in October, December and beyond may well be more complicated.' Don't count your cuts While Powell has been fending off criticism from the White House, analysts are warning against baking in further and significant cuts for the remainder of the year. The FOMC have their next meeting in September, followed by two more in October and December, and one member, Michelle Bowman, has already confirmed she would be open to such a trajectory. Indeed, UBS's Ulrike Hoffmann-Burchardi, CIO Americas and global head of equities, wrote in a note to clients: 'With overall inflation likely under control amid a slowing economy, our base case remains that the Fed will resume rate cuts at the September meeting and continue cutting for a total of 100bps.' Indeed, CME's FedWatch shows more than 94% of the market expect a cut at the next meeting. But analysts are wary to be overly confident beyond the next meeting. Elyse Ausenbaugh, head of investment strategy at J.P. Morgan Wealth Management, wrote in a note to clients that while she was still expecting a 0.5% cut in rates by the end of the year, 'It seems fair to say that the Fed could be considering a move in September, but I don't think a cut at that meeting is as much of a given as market pricing is implying. We will get plenty of data between now and then that could give the Fed pause one more time before taking action in the fourth quarter.' Michael Pearce, deputy chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, wrote in a note to Fortune that the details of the CPI report don't even guarantee a September cut. 'The larger rise in core prices in July provides mixed evidence around the tariff boost to inflation. For the Federal Reserve, inflation is much further from its target than the unemployment rate, which is why we expect them to hold off rate cuts another few months. However, another weak set of jobs data in August would force their hand early,' Pearce wrote. 'Core inflation edged up to 3.0% in July and we expect it will rise further to a peak of 3.8% by the end of the year as tariffs bleed through more fully to consumer prices. 'In our view, the upside risks to inflation will keep the majority of the FOMC preferring to sit on the sidelines for a few more months. The large downward revisions included in the July employment report heightened concerns around the labor market, and another weak report in August could tip the odds in favor of a September rate cut.' Pearce was echoed by Bill Adams, chief economist for Comerica Bank, who said the Fed is now less likely to cut because the inflationary factors in the July report came from sticky service prices as opposed to tariff-related goods. Adams said: 'Jobs data scheduled for release in early September will have more sway over the Fed's next decision than this inflation report.' This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
