What is Canada's digital services tax — and why does Trump dislike it so much?
In the last few weeks and months, U.S. President Donald Trump has given a number of rationales for escalating the trade dispute between Canada and the United States. On Friday, he zeroed in on Canada's digital services tax — a new levy expected to cost the largest American tech giants billions of dollars in the coming years after it kicks in on Monday.
International trade lawyer William Pellerin was only shocked the U.S. president didn't bring it up sooner.
"It's actually quite surprising that it took them this long to make a big stink about this issue," Pellerin, who works for McMillan LLP, told CBC News Network on Friday.
"If the U.S. was going to take a run at this and really has had a beef with Canada on this issue for a really long time, they really had no choice but to escalate that issue at the last minute now."
Here's what you need to know about the tax, which has been a thorn in the side of the Canada-U.S. relationship for years.
Canada's digital services tax (DST) affects mega companies that offer digital services — like online advertising or shopping — and earn more than $20 million in revenue from Canadian sources. Giant companies like Amazon, Apple, Airbnb, Google, Meta and Uber will be taxed three per cent on the money they make from Canadian users and customers.
The levy has been in place since last year, but the first payments are due starting Monday. It's retroactive to 2022, so companies will end up with a $2-billion US bill due by the end of July.
Revenue is one big benefit. The Parliamentary Budget Office estimated last year that the tax would bring in more than $7 billion over five years.
The Liberals first promised the tax during the federal election in 2019 under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, but it was delayed for years because a number of other nations wanted to work together on one, overarching digital taxation plan that could be applied in multiple countries.
As the delays dragged on, Canada went ahead with its own tax plan.
Aside from revenue, Ottawa has pitched the DST as a way to bring the tax code up to date and capture revenues earned in Canada by firms located abroad.
The United States has been hostile to the tax from the beginning because it largely affects American tech giants. Officials have argued the tax discriminates against American companies and Congress, notoriously divided between Democrats and Republicans, found a moment of common ground in criticizing Canada's plan.
The Computer & Communications Industry Association has estimated U.S. companies could pay as much as $1 billion a year in tax if the measure remains on the books.
A number of industry experts — from lawyers to cross-border groups and commerce associations — have warned for years that the tax would strain the relationship between Canada and the U.S., with one going so far as to predict in 2023 that the tax alone would be to blame for a trade war.
WATCH | Trump says he's ending talks with Canada over DST:
Canadian and U.S. business groups, organizations representing U.S. tech giants and American lawmakers all signed letters in recent weeks calling for the tax to be eliminated or paused. But Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said the legislation was passed by Parliament, and Canada would be "going ahead" with the tax.
Pellerin, the international trade lawyer, said he suspects the federal government will avoid changing its plan because it's taken a strategy of avoiding knee-jerk reactions to Trump's negotiation tactics.
"The Trump administration is not known for negotiating quietly in the back rooms or in the hallways of power … so I don't think this is unexpected," he said.
Trump says he's pulling back from the bilateral trade discussions because Canada plans to move ahead with its DST on Monday, a move he described online as "a direct and blatant attack on our country." The move put the 30-day deadline to reach an agreement in the trade dispute into doubt.
The Biden administration also opposed the tax, but tried to resolve the issue differently: It asked Canada for dispute settlement consultations under the Canada-United States-Mexico-Agreement (CUSMA) last August.
That consultation period ended in November without the Biden administration taking the case to the next step, but there is no time limit on when the U.S. could pick that plan back up — so the CUSMA route is still available to the current administration if Trump wanted to move away from his current tactic.
Yes. France, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom all have tax regimes in place, to name a few.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
35 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Tariffs Threaten Fed With a Real Inflation Headache, BIS Says
Resurgent US inflation could unfold as the world economy reels from Donald Trump's disruptive trade policies, the Bank for International Settlements warned. That bleak scenario was described by General Manager Agustin Carstens, presenting an annual report that catalogued how existing global vulnerabilities have been further exposed by the American president's actions since taking office in January.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
t42 IoT Tracking Solutions Full Year 2024 Earnings: US$0.032 loss per share (vs US$0.008 loss in FY 2023)
Revenue: US$4.16m (up 3.8% from FY 2023). Net loss: US$1.75m (loss widened by 316% from FY 2023). US$0.032 loss per share (further deteriorated from US$0.008 loss in FY 2023). Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. All figures shown in the chart above are for the trailing 12 month (TTM) period t42 IoT Tracking Solutions shares are up 20% from a week ago. Don't forget that there may still be risks. For instance, we've identified 3 warning signs for t42 IoT Tracking Solutions (2 are concerning) you should be aware of. — Investing narratives with Fair Values A case for TSXV:USA to reach USD $5.00 - $9.00 (CAD $7.30–$12.29) by 2029. By Agricola – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: CA$12.29 · 0.9% Overvalued DLocal's Future Growth Fueled by 35% Revenue and Profit Margin Boosts By WynnLevi – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: $195.39 · 0.9% Overvalued Historically Cheap, but the Margin of Safety Is Still Thin By Mandelman – Community Contributor Fair Value Estimated: SEK232.58 · 0.1% Overvalued View more featured narratives — Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. 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
USA Today
35 minutes ago
- USA Today
I'm Oppenheimer's grandson. We can still go from crisis to conversation on Iran.
Dialogue alone won't solve the problem. But it's where every solution begins. It also allows us to talk about the hopeful side of nuclear science. So I'm proposing something unconventional. The war in Iran has been terrifying. It pushed the threat of nuclear weapons back to the forefront of global consciousness. And yet – somehow – we've made it through this conflict in better shape than many feared, assuming the ceasefire holds. We now have an unexpected opportunity to turn this narrow escape into something bigger: a chance to expand global peace and security. Like many, I have serious criticisms of how we got here. A nation that has never signed the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty, Israel, used its undeclared nuclear status as leverage to launch a war against a country, Iran, that has no nuclear weapons and has submitted to international inspections. This directly sabotaged promising diplomatic efforts between Iran and America. When the United States entered the conflict with a military strike June 21, Americans braced for another endless war in the Middle East. And yet, remarkably, we've arrived at a ceasefire. That outcome wasn't inevitable. It required restraint from Tehran and surprising restraint from Washington. Credit must be given where it's due: President Donald Trump played a central role in stopping the escalation, using his signature unconventional diplomacy. That success offers a model ‒ if we're willing to learn from it. Lesson 1: Stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons fuel Since the first atomic breakthrough, one truth has remained: Safety in the nuclear age requires cooperation ‒ even with adversaries. Nuclear science is not a secret that can be kept, it's a fact of nature. From J. Robert Oppenheimer onward, scientists knew the only real safeguard was shared control of enriched uranium that can be used for bombs. We need more cooperation to prevent nuclear proliferation ‒ not just in Iran, but everywhere. Gen. Wesley Clark: This is the moment for American leadership in Middle East. We can't miss it. Lesson 2: Strengthen the institutions that have kept us alive The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is more than a piece of paper. It is the backbone of the global nuclear order. It has slowed the spread of weapons, legitimized peaceful nuclear energy and built mechanisms for trust. The International Atomic Energy Agency ‒ through science and diplomacy, not force ‒ upholds this system. We must double down on supporting countries that respect these rules and hold accountable those, like Israel and North Korea, that operate outside them. The real nuclear threat before us The dangerous gamble to start a war in order to stop a single weapon from being developed must not become the global standard. Because the far greater danger isn't Iran or any one rogue nation ‒ it's a nuclear exchange between superpowers. That remains the true and growing risk, and it could even happen by accident. A false alarm, a cyberattack or a miscommunication could trigger an unstoppable chain reaction. Once missiles fly among the United States, Russia and China, no leader or even unconventional diplomacy can stop it. There won't be time. Opinion: Our nuclear weapons are much more powerful than Oppenheimer's atomic bomb So what can we do? We build on what has worked. Trump's success in brokering a ceasefire should now be expanded ‒ first to end the Gaza conflict, and then to revive stalled denuclearization dialogue. Trump has previously called for nuclear talks among America, China and Russia. That is exactly the right idea ‒ and this could be the moment. Charles Oppenheimer: I support President Trump's pursuit of nuclear diplomacy Some will call that impossible. They'll point to rising tensions, trade wars, proxy conflicts. They'll say the moment isn't right. But history teaches the opposite: It is precisely in moments of danger that real diplomacy must begin. Waiting for peace before negotiating peace is a contradiction. This is a time for bold action – of the Nobel Peace Prize variety – if done right. We are still living under a nuclear arms strategy called mutual assured destruction. Even its acronym ‒ MAD ‒ tells us how unsustainable it is. The threat is too vast, too fast and too complex for any one nation or leader to control. Most of us, as individuals, feel powerless in the face of such a system. But we're not without agency. Some people do have real influence, and that includes the leaders of the United States, China and Russia. They cannot be expected to make unilateral concessions, but they can be expected to sit down and talk. I'm not president. But I'm doing what I can ‒ using the name and ideas of my grandfather J. Robert Oppenheimer to push for a safer future. So I'm proposing something unconventional: an 'Oppenheimer Dinner,' inviting representatives from Washington, Beijing and Moscow to a private, off-the-record dialogue about how to reduce the risk of real nuclear war ‒ and discuss the positive side of nuclear energy. Dialogue alone won't solve the problem. But it's where every solution begins. It also allows us to talk about the hopeful side of nuclear science. The same technology that could destroy civilization can also power it, giving us clean energy, medical breakthroughs and global prosperity. It's up to us to choose which future we want ‒ and there is no time like the present. 'We can have each other to dinner. We ourselves, and with each other by our converse, can create not an architecture of global scope, but an immense, intricate network of intimacy, illumination, and understanding.' — J. Robert Oppenheimer, 1958 Charles Oppenheimer is the founder and co-executive director of the Oppenheimer Project. He is the grandson of J. Robert Oppenheimer, the director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory during the Manhattan Project.
