
Trump ends trade talks with Canada over tax on U.S. tech firms
President Donald Trump said on Friday (June 27, 2025) he is calling off trade negotiations with Canada in retaliation for taxes impacting U.S. tech firms, adding that Ottawa will learn of their new tariff rate within a week.
Mr. Trump was referring to Canada's digital services tax, which was enacted last year and forecast to bring in Can$5.9 billion (US$4.2 billion) over five years.
While the measure is not new, U.S. service providers will be 'on the hook for a multi-billion dollar payment in Canada' come June 30, noted the Computer & Communications Industry Association recently.
The three percent tax applies to large or multinational companies such as Alphabet, Amazon and Meta that provide digital services to Canadians, and Washington has previously requested dispute settlement talks over the matter.
'Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately,' Mr. Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform Friday.
Canada may have been spared some of Trump's sweeping duties, but it faces a separate tariff regime.
Mr. Trump has also imposed steep levies on imports of steel, aluminum and autos.
Last week, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Ottawa will adjust its 25% counter tariffs on U.S. steel and aluminium — in response to a doubling of U.S. levies on the metals to 50% — if a bilateral trade deal was not reached in 30 days.
'We will continue to conduct these complex negotiations in the best interest of Canadians,' Mr. Carney said Friday, adding that he had not spoken to Mr. Trump on the day.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that Washington had hoped Carney's government would halt the tax 'as a sign of goodwill.'
He now expects U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer to start a probe to determine the harm stemming from Canada's digital tax.
China progress
Mr. Trump's salvo targeting Canada came shortly after Washington and Beijing confirmed finalising a framework to move forward on trade.
A priority for Washington in talks with Beijing had been ensuring the supply of the rare earths essential for products including electric vehicles, hard drives and national defence equipment.
China, which dominates global production of the elements, began requiring export licenses in early April, a move widely viewed as a response to Mr. Trump's blistering tariffs.
Both sides agreed after talks in Geneva in May to temporarily lower steep tit-for-tat duties on each other's products.
China also committed to easing some non-tariff countermeasures but U.S. officials later accused Beijing of violating the pact and slow-walking export license approvals for rare earths.
They eventually agreed on a framework to move forward with their Geneva consensus, following talks in London this month.
A White House official told AFP on Thursday that the Trump administration and China had 'agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement.'
This clarification came after the US president told an event that Washington had inked a deal relating to trade with China, without providing details.
Under the deal, China 'will review and approve applications for the export control items that meet the requirements in accordance with the law,' China's Commerce Ministry said.
'The U.S. side will correspondingly cancel a series of restrictive measures against China,' it added.
Upcoming deals?
Dozens of economies, although not China, face a July 9 deadline for steeper duties to kick in — rising from a current 10%.
It remains to be seen if countries will successfully reach agreements to avoid them before the deadline.
On talks with the European Union, for example, Mr. Trump told an event at the White House on Friday: 'We have the cards. We have the cards far more than they do.'
But Mr. Bessent said Washington could wrap up its agenda for trade deals by September, indicating more agreements could be concluded, although talks were likely to extend past July.
Mr. Bessent told Fox Business there are 18 key partners Washington is focused on pacts with.
'If we can ink 10 or 12 of the important 18, there are another important 20 relationships, then I think we could have trade wrapped up by Labor Day,' Mr. Bessent said, referring to the U.S. holiday on September 1.
Wall Street's major indexes finished at fresh records as markets cheered progress in US-China trade while shrugging off concerns about Canada.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
38 minutes ago
- First Post
Supreme Court ruling sparks confusion over US birthright citizenship
On Friday, the court's conservative majority approved President Donald Trump's request to limit the authority of federal judges but did not rule on the legality of his attempt to restrict birthright citizenship read more The U.S. Supreme Court's decision related to birthright citizenship led to confusion and calls to attorneys as individuals potentially impacted worked to understand a complex legal ruling with significant humanitarian consequences. On Friday, the court's conservative majority approved President Donald Trump's request to limit the authority of federal judges but did not rule on the legality of his attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. This outcome has created more uncertainty than clarity around a right long interpreted as protected by the U.S. Constitution: that anyone born in the United States is a citizen at birth, regardless of their parents' citizenship or immigration status. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian asylum seeker who lives in Houston and is due to give birth in September, pored over media reports on Friday morning. She was looking for details about how her baby might be affected, but said she was left confused and worried. 'There are not many specifics,' said Lorena, who like others interviewed by Reuters asked to be identified by her first name out of fear for her safety. 'I don't understand it well.' She is concerned that her baby could end up with no nationality. 'I don't know if I can give her mine,' she said. 'I also don't know how it would work, if I can add her to my asylum case. I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality.' Trump, a Republican, issued an order after taking office in January that directed U.S. agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the U.S. who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident. The order was blocked by three separate U.S. district court judges, sending the case on a path to the Supreme Court. The resulting decision said Trump's policy could go into effect in 30 days but appeared to leave open the possibility of further proceedings in the lower courts that could keep the policy blocked. On Friday afternoon, plaintiffs filed an amended lawsuit in federal court in Maryland seeking to establish a nationwide class of people whose children could be denied citizenship. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD If they are not blocked nationwide, the restrictions could be applied in the 28 states that did not contest them in court, creating 'an extremely confusing patchwork' across the country, according to Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a policy analyst for the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute. 'Would individual doctors, individual hospitals be having to try to figure out how to determine the citizenship of babies and their parents?' she said. The drive to restrict birthright citizenship is part of Trump's broader immigration crackdown, and he has framed automatic citizenship as a magnet for people to come to give birth. 'Hundreds of thousands of people are pouring into our country under birthright citizenship, and it wasn't meant for that reason,' he said during a White House press briefing on Friday. Worried calls Immigration advocates and lawyers in some Republican-led states said they received calls from a wide range of pregnant immigrants and their partners following the ruling. They were grappling with how to explain it to clients who could be dramatically affected, given all the unknowns of how future litigation would play out or how the executive order would be implemented state by state. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Lynn Tramonte, director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance said she got a call on Friday from an East Asian temporary visa holder with a pregnant wife. He was anxious because Ohio is not one of the plaintiff states and wanted to know how he could protect his child's rights. 'He kept stressing that he was very interested in the rights included in the Constitution,' she said. Advocates underscored the gravity of Trump's restrictions, which would block an estimated 150,000 children born in the U.S. annually from receiving automatic citizenship. 'It really creates different classes of people in the country with different types of rights,' said Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a spokesperson for the immigrant rights organization United We Dream. 'That is really chaotic.' Adding uncertainty, the Supreme Court ruled that members of two plaintiff groups in the litigation - CASA, an immigrant advocacy service in Maryland, and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project - would still be covered by lower court blocks on the policy. Whether someone in a state where Trump's policy could go into effect could join one of the organizations to avoid the restrictions or how state or federal officials would check for membership remained unclear. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Betsy, a U.S. citizen who recently graduated from high school in Virginia and a CASA member, said both of her parents came to the U.S. from El Salvador two decades ago and lacked legal status when she was born. 'I feel like it targets these innocent kids who haven't even been born,' she said, declining to give her last name for concerns over her family's safety. Nivida, a Honduran asylum seeker in Louisiana, is a member of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and recently gave birth. She heard on Friday from a friend without legal status who is pregnant and wonders about the situation under Louisiana's Republican governor, since the state is not one of those fighting Trump's order. 'She called me very worried and asked what's going to happen,' she said. 'If her child is born in Louisiana … is the baby going to be a citizen?'


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
ETtech Explainer: Inside Amazon's victory against Future Group in Reliance deal
The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) ruled in favour of Amazon on Thursday, confirming that Future Group violated the contract by making a deal to sell its retail business to Reliance in takes a close look at the long-standing legal battle between Kishore Biyani-led Future Group and Amazon that was awarded only Rs 23.7 crore in damages after the Thursday ruling, which is far less than the Rs 1,436 crore it in 2020, Future Group, which owns major retail players like Big Bazaar, Food Bazaar, and Easyday, agreed to sell assets worth $3.4 billion to Amazon rival Reliance Industries as the business was hit hard during the ecommerce giant Amazon had previously invested $200 million in Future Group and had a contractual right to block such a acquired a 49% stake in Future Coupons , a promoter of Future Group that holds a 9.82% stake in the group's retail arm, Future Retail . The deal implied Amazon indirectly having a 4.81% stake in Future Retail Ltd (FRL).In October 2020, Amazon approached SIAC and obtained a stay on the Future-Reliance deal from the emergency arbitrator. The order was followed by a slew of petitions and counter-petitions between Amazon and Future Group in the Delhi High Court and in the Supreme is an arbitration centre based in Singapore that handles international disputes, including those involving Indian companies. Emergency arbitration ruling is a temporary relief mechanism to hear urgent matters before the main arbitration panel is even set objected to the Future Group and Reliance deal on the grounds that its investment in FCPL made it mandatory for FRL to take its consent before parting with any of its assets. Amazon has said that in its agreement with Future, Reliance Retail was specifically named as one of the entities to whom the Indian retailer could not sell its Retail further alleged that Amazon interfered with the Rs 23,000 crore deal with Reliance Industries and misused SIAC's interim Competition Commission of India (CCI) in December 2021 suspended its approval of Amazon's 2019 dea l with Future, denting the US ecommerce giant's attempts to block the sale of Future's retail assets to Reliance Group accused Amazon of violating Indian foreign investment laws and the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) by misrepresenting facts. CCI later made a statement that Amazon suppressed information while seeking clearances for the deal. ET had reported in November 2021 that Amazon had asked Future Group to withdraw its applications with the CCI. Amazon later filed an appeal against the CCI suspension decision at the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).Next year in February, Reliance, which had not played a public role in the dispute, suddenly took control of hundreds of Future stores, citing non-payment of rent that was Future denies any wrongdoing , saying Amazon was illegally seeking to exert control over Future's retail business and said it would face liquidation if the Reliance deal fell has invested $6.5 billion in India. The Future partnership had helped Amazon to boost its online portfolio of grocery deliveries by integrating the Indian company's stores on its website. The recent ruling by the SIAC in favour of Amazon has hit Reliance's growth plans in India's retail market. In a confidential legal filing, Amazon said that Reliance's consolidated position with Future "will further restrict competition in the Indian retail market."Amazon India's legal head, Rakesh Bakshi, had asked Future Group for generous compensation in return for withdrawing its objections to the Reliance a final award issued late Thursday night, the three-member tribunal said that the Future-Reliance deal is a breach of the Shareholders' Agreement (SHA) and Share Subscription Agreement (SSA) signed between Amazon and Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) in the tribunal found that even if all contractual agreements had been fully performed, Amazon would not have recovered its entire investment due to the declining financial condition of FRL.


Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
‘Good luck with that': Trump's border czar hits back at Mamdani's anti-ICE plan for NYC
US President Donald Trump's immigration chief Tom Homan has issued a fiery challenge to Zohran Mamdani, the newly victorious NYC mayoral primary candidate, after Mamdani vowed to 'kick the fascist ICE out of New York City.' Responding on Fox Business' Kudlow a day after Mamdani's win, Homan scoffed, 'Good luck with that,' before adding: 'Federal law trumps him every day, every hour of every minute.' 'We're going to be in New York City, matter of fact, because it's a sanctuary city and President Trump made it clear a week and a half ago, we're going to double down and triple down on sanctuary cities.' he said. Homan, tapped by Trump to spearhead his border crackdown, said agents would focus on areas 'releasing public safety threats and national security threats back to the street.' Trump's border czar asserted that if immigration enforcement officials can't arrest people in jail, they would 'find them' in neighbourhoods or work sites, adding, 'so game on, we're coming.' New: 🚨 Border Czar Tom Homan on Zohran Mamdani for wanting to protect illegal aliens who are p*dos and r*pists. 'Good luck. Federal law trumps him every day, hour, and minute. We're going to be tripling down in NYC.' 👊🏻 — Jay 🇺🇸 Rapid Response Guy (@RapidResponseXY) June 25, 2025 The warning comes amid rising tensions over immigration enforcement in the Big Apple. Mamdani, a Democratic socialist and Queens assemblyman, declared victory in the June 24 Democratic primary with a pledge to 'Trump-proof' the city. His campaign criticised Trump's use of ICE to target immigrant families, and he pledged sweeping changes to protect undocumented New Yorkers. But Homan made clear the administration has other plans: 'Not only are we going to send more agents to the neighborhood, we are going to increase worksite enforcement tenfold.' In contrast, Homan praised current Mayor Eric Adams for cooperating with ICE on 'significant public safety threats' and helping trace the 300,000 missing children trafficked across the US. He described Adams as a law-and-order mayor whose 'hands are tied in many ways.' Mamdani has clashed with Homan before. In March, he confronted him at the New York state Capitol and posted video of the encounter during his campaign. The Astoria politician was protesting ICE's arrest of anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil, detained for allegedly lying on his visa application. Today I confronted 'border czar' Tom Homan who came to Albany to do Trump's bidding — push for mass deportations, carry out the assault on working class New Yorkers, and justify the unjustifiable detention of legal permanent resident and father-to-be, Mahmoud Khalil. — Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@ZohranKMamdani) March 12, 2025 Now, Homan says, the fight over immigration enforcement in New York City is far from over: 'We don't have this problem in Florida… so we're going to double up and triple up on New York.' Meanwhile, Trump posted to Truth Social on Wednesday: 'It's finally happened, the Democrats have crossed the line. Zohran Mamdani, a 100% Communist Lunatic, has just won the Dem Primary, and is on his way to becoming Mayor. We've had Radical Lefties before, but this is getting a little ridiculous.' Trump continued: 'He looks TERRIBLE, his voice is grating, he's not very smart, he's got AOC+3, Dummies ALL, backing him, and even our Great Palestinian Senator, Cryin' Chuck Schumer, is groveling over him. Yes, this is a big moment in the History of our Country!'