Carney’s China Gamble: Ottawa Waits on Beijing’s Tariff Verdict as APEC Deadline Looms

Liam MacKenzie, Senior Political Correspondent (Ottawa)
8 Min Read
⏱️ 5 min read

The clock is ticking on Parliament Hill, and for once, the countdown isn’t driven by a confidence vote or a supply bill. It is dictated by a deadline in Beijing. Canadian producers — from Prince Edward Island lobster boats to Saskatchewan pulse farms — are staring down a December 31 cliff edge. Unless the Trudeau government’s successor, Prime Minister Mark Carney, secures an extension on a suite of suspended Chinese tariffs at next month’s APEC summit, duties snap back into place on New Year’s Day. The stakes? North of $2 billion in annual trade and a diplomatic reset that has, so far, been long on symbolism and short on paper.

The mechanism for relief is opaque, the politics are tangled, and the leverage is slipping. With the U.S. demanding alignment on China policy and Beijing playing a waiting game, Ottawa’s negotiators are running out of runway.

The January Deal: A Trade Truce Built on Steel

The current détente was born in January, when Carney sat across from President Xi Jinping and engineered a swap that broke ranks with Washington. Ottawa agreed to waive a punitive 100-per-cent tariff on nearly 50,000 Chinese-made electric vehicles. In return, Beijing scaled back duties on Canadian canola seed — a permanent concession — and suspended 100-per-cent tariffs on peas and canola meal, plus 25-per-cent levies on lobster and crab.

The suspension came with an expiry date: December 31, 2025.

It was a classic Ottawa compromise: a temporary reprieve bought with a permanent concession. The EV waiver was a strategic signal to Beijing that Canada could act independently of the White House. But the quid pro quo for the seafood and pulse sectors was always provisional. Now, with the APEC leaders’ meeting in Shenzhen on November 18 and 19, the invoice is due.

The Steel Linkage Nobody Talks About

Here is the paragraph the press releases omit: the agricultural suspensions are tethered to steel.

The Steel Linkage Nobody Talks About

Back in 2024, Ottawa slapped a 25-per-cent tariff on Chinese steel and aluminum, citing global overcapacity. Last year, the government began offering remission — effectively refunds — on those duties for specific steel products Canada doesn’t produce domestically. Carney extended that remission program until year-end during his January summit. Beijing’s agricultural suspensions mirror that timeline exactly.

“Steel is the anchor,” says Jeff Mahon, a former deputy director of the China division at Global Affairs Canada. “Beijing’s relief on lobster, crab, peas, and canola meal is calibrated to Ottawa’s relief on Chinese steel. They expire together. They get renewed together. Or they don’t.”

This creates a bind. The United States, currently in suspended trade talks with Canada, has been pressing Ottawa to harmonize its China tariffs with Washington’s steep levies. Granting Beijing further steel access — the price for extending the agricultural pause — risks inflaming the U.S. relationship. “Steel is not going to be something Canada is going to be able to deal with until it settles the American question,” Mahon puts it, with the dry understatement of a man who has sat in the room.

Producers on the Precipice

Out in the sectors, the anxiety is palpable and the logistics are brutal.

Greg Cherewyk, president of Pulse Canada, notes that China has historically been the top market for Canadian peas. Exports totalled $3.7 billion between 2019 and 2024 — the year duties hit. Right now, shippers are refusing to load vessels scheduled to arrive after January 1. “Without a posted bulletin from a Chinese ministry confirming the extension,” Cherewyk says, “the risk of a 100-per-cent duty at the port of discharge makes the trade uninsurable.”

The lobster file is equally stark. Geoff Irvine of the Lobster Council of Canada watched live exports to China — worth $570 million in 2024 — plummet by half in 2025. The March suspension stemmed the bleeding, but only marginally. Vietnam and Australia have seized shelf space in Chinese wet markets. “Add this to 50 other challenges,” Irvine says, “and the entire sector is not very happy.”

Canola tells a similar story. The Canola Council of Canada’s Chris Davison is pushing for permanence on the meal suspension. “We want a more permanent solution to provide businesses on both sides with needed predictability and stability,” he says. Canola seed — the $4-billion engine of the $5-billion China relationship — is safe for now. But meal and oil remain hostage to the political calendar.

The JETC Pre-Game

Before Carney and Xi shake hands in Shenzhen, the technical heavy lifting falls to the Joint Economic and Trade Commission (JETC). A high-level session is expected in China before the end of October. International Trade Minister Maninder Sidhu will chair the Canadian side.

The JETC Pre-Game

Sidhu’s office frames it as an opportunity to “advance Canadian interests and resolve outstanding matters.” His press secretary, Mujtaba Hussain, insists: “Canada will always stand up for our farmers, fish harvesters and agri-food workers.” Sidhu follows the JETC with a stop at the China International Import Expo in Shanghai in early November — a trade fair dedicated, pointedly, to imports.

Insiders view the JETC as the signal. If Beijing comes to the table with a draft extension text, the APEC meeting becomes a signing ceremony. If they don’t, Carney arrives in Shenzhen empty-handed.

Why it Matters

This is not merely a sectoral dispute; it is a stress test for Canada’s claim to an independent foreign economic policy. Carney bet political capital on the January reset — breaking with the U.S. on EVs, offering steel remission — to buy breathing room for producers. If Beijing lets the suspensions lapse, the EV concession looks like a giveaway with no return, the steel remission looks like a strategic blunder, and the “strategic partnership” rhetoric collapses into farce. For a government already navigating a volatile U.S. relationship, losing the Chinese market on the eve of a potential trade war with Washington would be a catastrophic failure of statecraft. The next six weeks will reveal whether Ottawa’s diplomatic architecture bears weight — or whether it was merely scaffolding.

Share This Article
Covering federal politics and national policy from the heart of Ottawa.
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2026 The Update Desk. All rights reserved.
Terms of Service Privacy Policy