Wolfgang Alschner is associate professor at the common law section of the University of Ottawa. He holds the Hyman Soloway Chair in business and trade law.– an almost inevitable move after the United States and the European Union announced their own tariffs in recent weeks.
With time on its side, why would Canada choose Section 53 to impose its tariffs? The likely reason is that it would allow Canada to follow the United States, which is using its own version of a judge-jury-executioner trade law, the notorious Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, to raise tariffs on Chinese EVs to 100 per cent. However, it is far from clear that following in the United States’ footsteps is in Canada’s interest.
The federal government has several legal alternatives to raising tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles. To offset Chinese subsidies that, according to Ottawa, give an unfair disadvantage to Chinese EVs, Canada can impose so-called “countervailing duties” after an investigation. This is. Because anti-subsidy tariffs target subsidized producers rather than China per se, they are less confrontational.