Advertisement 1This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing held at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 20, 2026. Photo by Aaron Schwartz/Getty ImagesArticle contentWASHINGTON, D.C. — Mexican leaders are weighing a U.S. proposal to revise the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement’s (CUSMA) auto rules of origin — changes that could force a major restructuring of North America’s tightly integrated auto supply chains.Sign In or Create an Accountor View more offersArticle contentLast week, U.S.
Trade Representative Jamieson Greer’s team told their Mexican counterparts that U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration wants to raise the overall required North American parts threshold from 75 to 82 per cent and, more controversially, require that 50 per cent of all components originate specifically in the United States.Article contentWe apologize, but this video has failed to load.Try refreshing your browser, ortap here to see other videos from our team.We apologize, but this video has failed to load.Try refreshing your browser, ortap here to see other
videos from our team.Article contentArticle contentBilateral talks between the U.S. and Mexico have been progressing, but Canada has been sidelined from formal technical talks in recent months, despite ongoing backchannel conversations. Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc visited Washington on Tuesday to meet with his chief negotiator, Janice Charette, and Greer. He said afterward he remains hopeful for a positive outcome.Article contentExclusive NewsletterPolitical HackPolitical Hack gets at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill. Wednesdays and Fridays.Subscribe NowSee all of our newslettersArticle content“I
remain optimistic,” he told reporters at the Canadian embassy in Washington, “that there will be a conclusion by all three parties — that the economic interest of North America is served by committing to what Ambassador Greer has previously, publicly referred to as the load-bearing walls of their trade relationship with Canada and Mexico.”Article contentHe also downplayed concerns about the rules-of-origin proposal, adding that Canada is “very confident that we will have those conversations with the Americans and the Mexicans” on such important changes to
the trilateral agreement.Article contentStill, some trade watchers fear that if the American and Mexican trade teams reach a bilateral agreement, Canada may be pressured to accept that framework or risk exclusion — a similar approach was used the first time in 2018.Article contentArticle content“It is clear the Trump administration is trying to drive a wedge between Canada and Mexico,” said Andrew Hale, fellow at Advancing American Freedom in Washington. “The countries should be negotiating trilaterally given that this is a trilateral free trade agreement.”Article contentRead
More Trump renews ’51st state’ rhetoric as LeBlanc admits ‘turbulence’ on D.C. trip There are major implications for Canada in upcoming Michigan and Wisconsin primaries Advertisement 1Story continues belowThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.Article contentCarlo Dade, director of international policy at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, agreed but said the outcome is up to Canada.Article content“The Americans have forced their hand to make that choice. So the way this will logically read is that the Americans concluded
negotiations with the easier of the two partners, and it’s now turning to the third partner to sign on,” he said.Article content“That’s what the Americans tried to do (in 2018),” he said, referring to the original CUSMA negotiations, “and last time Mexico was able not to go for it.”Article contentMexico’s trade team will be in Washington for a continuation of the bilateral negotiations in mid-June.Article content“(The Mexican team) should reject this proposal,” said Hale. “Not only is it unfair, but it’s counterproductive to the long-term
integration of the North American supply chains.”Advertisement 1This advertisement has not loaded yet.Trending 12 million Canadians to receive one-time bonus payment from CRA this Friday Canada Fewer than half of Albertans say they would stay in a newly independent province: poll News Advertisement 2Story continues belowThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Northern lights expected to be visible across Canada Thursday. Here’s how to see them Canada Accused al-Qaeda sleeper agent Mohamed Harkat wins another chance at staying in Canada Canada
Chris Selley: The U.K.’s Henry Nowak outrage happens in Canadian courts every day NP Comment Advertisement 2AdvertisementThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article contentBut the Mexican side was probably not surprised, said Diego Marroquín Bitar, fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, referring to how former USTR Robert Lighthizer originally wanted it at 85 per cent.Article content“It makes sense for them to go back to their original position,” Marroquín said, though that doesn’t mean Mexico will accept
it.Article content“There’s a reason why the Mexicans and the Canadians didn’t accept the original 85 per cent request … because the auto industry couldn’t take it,” he said.Article contentHe also pointed to how the sides negotiated a gradual approach last time, giving auto companies time to adapt to comply with the agreement.Article content“So anything that’s negotiated from now on will definitely have to include some gradual implementation,” he added.Article contentBut Marroquín is more concerned by the proposed 50 per cent U.S. content floor.Article content“The 50
per cent minimum US content floor would be devastating for the auto industry. It would cause major disruption,” Marroquín said, referring to the need for flexibility to make auto production efficient.Article contentBut that may not be the case for Canada.Article contentArticle contentAccording to Matthew Holmes of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, most Canadian vehicles already effectively meet the 50 per cent U.S. content threshold.Article content“It’s not as acute an issue for us,” he said.Article contentThe real disruptor for Canada, he said, are the Section 232
tariffs on autos, steel, and aluminum, which are driving layoffs in Canada and raising U.S. car prices — all while failing to boost U.S. production as intended.Article contentMarroquín also emphasized that layering stricter rules of origin atop the 232 tariffs would risk job losses in all three countries while reducing North America’s competitiveness against Asia and Europe.Article content“If you make the rules of origin more stringent and you still have tariffs on top of them, that can really destabilize the auto industry,” he said.Article contentWhile
the 50 per cent U.S.-specific requirement may be less vexing for Canada, Canada is more vulnerable than Mexico when it comes to boxing out China, which Washington is keen to do.Article contentDade urged Canada to recognize that Mexico faces a different set of strategic pressures – namely the need to retain jobs and avoid civil unrest — and has an easier path on the China question.Article contentArticle content“This time around, China is front and center,” Dade said, referring to how it’s been a key part
of the 19 trade agreements Washington has forged with other countries.Article contentCanada exports far more to China than Mexico, he said.Article content“We can’t afford to do what Mexico can do.”Article contentNegotiations over rules of origin changes are likely to continue in the weeks to come, running up to the July 1 review date. But LeBlanc has repeatedly said he is not concerned by having a resolution before then.Article content“We’ve got to be careful not to set up a cliff that doesn’t exist,” LeBlanc said Tuesday,
noting how CUSMA remains in place for 10 more years even if there is no consensus by the three parties to extend it for 16 years.Article contentBesides, biding their time might benefit Canadian negotiators, some trade watchers say, especially if control of Congress swings to the left in the November U.S. midterm elections.Article content“Wait it out,” said Hale. “A future Congress and president will likely come to their senses by then.”Article contentNational PostArticle contentOur website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops,
longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.Article content Latest from Shopping Essentials We tried on Reformation’s new linen line — here’s what’s actually worth it If you have a special occasion this summer, Reformation has you covered 14 hours ago Fashion McDonald’s just dropped FIFA World Cup 2026 meals and collectibles across Canada — here’s what to know Available from June 9 to July 6, 2026 15 hours ago Food & Drinks Fever Days 2026: Save 30% on
candlelight concerts and more in Canada Summer just got even more exciting 18 hours ago Entertainment Advertisement 3Story continues belowThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Every major concert coming to Ontario in 2026 — and where to get tickets Featuring ROSALÍA, Mt. Joy and Kehlani, plus more artists touring Ontario this year 1 day ago Music These are the 3 best hair products and tools we tried this week Beauty Buzz: The 3 best beauty products we tried this week
from T3, Shark and L’Oreal Paris. 1 day ago Fashion & Beauty Featured Local Savings
CUSMA, auto rules of origin, Canada US Mexico agreement, Jamieson Greer, Donald Trump, Dominic LeBlanc, Janice Charette, Section 232 tariffs, Michigan and Wisconsin primaries, July 1 review date
So Canada’s just gonna give in, right? Sounds like the US is bullying again.
I don’t even understand these auto rules of origin like at all. Isn’t 82% just gonna make prices go up? Also why does Mexico have to be involved in Canada stuff.
Replying to Marissa Gutierrez—Mexico’s probably just the middle man, like always. But doesn’t “50% in the United States” basically mean they’re trying to force plants to move? Idk, I heard something like this on TikTok so probably wrong.
Canada in a bind… maybe they should have negotiated better before. But raising parts from 75 to 82 and then making half US-made sounds like a setup to stop imports, which is kinda the point of tariffs without calling them tariffs. If this breaks the supply chain, my neighbor says their truck’s gonna cost like $10k more, so yeah not great.