David Pollak

Dear @StephenMoore When President Trump was elected to a second term, roughly 99% of U.S. goods entered Canada tariff-free. Both countries, however, protect sensitive sectors, especially agriculture, where subsidies, supply management, market access and farm incomes have long been handled carefully by governments on both sides of the border. So, Let's talk cows as an example Canada’s dairy system is not simply a tariff wall designed to keep American milk out. It is a supply-management system designed to keep production roughly aligned with demand, stabilize farm income and preserve a viable network of family-owned farms. Imports are allowed in significant negotiated quantities at low or zero tariffs; the very high tariffs people hear about generally apply only after those agreed import quotas have been filled. The United States protects its farmers too, often much more extensively, but it uses different mechanisms. American taxpayers support agriculture through crop insurance subsidies, income and price-support programs, disaster payments, commodity programs and direct government payments. Dairy farmers have access to federally supported margin-protection and insurance programs. The U.S. also restricts imports in sensitive sectors. Sugar is an especially obvious example: the United States uses tariff-rate quotas that limit how much foreign sugar can enter at low tariffs, precisely to protect domestic producers and prices. USDA explicitly describes this system. So there is a real hypocrisy in attacking Canada as a protectionist outlier. Canada essentially says to its dairy farmers: we will control production and imports so you can earn a reasonably predictable income from the market. The United States more often says to its farmers: we will expose you more directly to the market, but protect your income through subsidies, federally supported insurance, price and commodity programs, and, where politically important, import restrictions. In 2026 alone, USDA forecasts federal Dairy Margin Coverage payments, while its broader farm programs continue to provide income, commodity and insurance support. Both countries protect agriculture. They just write the cheque differently. And that matters to the family farm. Canada’s system was designed in part to prevent the boom-and-bust cycle in which oversupply collapses milk prices, smaller farmers fail, and increasingly large operations buy them out. Supply management gives a farmer greater certainty that producing milk efficiently can provide a viable living without having to become an enormous industrial-scale operation merely to survive the next price collapse. That does not make Canada’s system perfect. Quota is expensive and can make it difficult for new farmers to enter. But portraying Canadian dairy protection as some extraordinary trade offence while the United States protects its own farmers with quotas, tariffs, subsidies, insurance and government support is fundamentally misleading. Canada protects a relatively small number of agricultural sectors openly through supply management. The United States protects agriculture through an enormous, less visible architecture of federal programs and selective trade barriers. Calling one “protectionism” while pretending the other is “free trade” is the hypocrisy. Hope next time you will fact check yourself. Sincerely Glen