this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
35 points (92.7% liked)

Canada

10024 readers
1001 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
mp3@lemmy.ca
otter@piefed.ca
mp3@piefed.ca
35
Canada dropped the Digital Services Tax because of dairy supply management (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 16 hours ago by sbv@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Here's my theory: Carney dropped the DST because of supply management on dairy. My evidence is sparse, but:

Last month, the U.S. and Britain announced a trade deal related to a range of products. But Britain’s 2-per-cent DST was not affected.

(From the Globe)

That shows other countries have a DST but that hasn't been a sticking point in trade negotiations.

Meanwhile, Quebec really likes supply management:

83 per cent of Quebecers want governments to do everything in their power to protect the country’s supply management system.

During the next election, Carney will probably need Quebec's support to stay in power. By giving up the DST, Carney may be able to keep supply management for dairy, and avoid alienating Quebec voters.

I guess we'll see during the final negotiations. Do our dairy farmers get to keep their protections?

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 31 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I am very disappointed that we are retaliating slowly but conceding quickly. If no deal is reached by the deadline or we get a stupid letter dictating the universal tariff, put the DST back on.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 9 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

There was a lot of talk about elbows up, but I'm unclear what is being taxed and how. There's a list, but I don't know what that represents in terms of financial cost to Canadian buyers and US producers.

Like, is it a tiny bit of posturing for the home crowd, or is it something that will hurt US industries (and Canadian buyers)? I don't know.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Some of the existing countertariffs are targeted specifically at the southern states (thus oranges, sugar, tobacco, and such) who tend to be more likely to vote Republican. The idea was originally less "strike out against everyone in the US even if they didn't want this" and more "hurt the people who caused this mess". How well that's worked in practice is difficult to say.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago

That original strategy was a good one - I think it was used to strong effect during the first Trump presidency. I hope these tariffs are equally effective, but I haven't heard too much since they were implemented.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 27 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Perhaps the prime minister could take a moment out of his busy schedule to tell us what the fuck he was thinking if it's anything other than "we're absolutely desperate to make a deal and have no choice but to give them whatever they want."

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 8 points 16 hours ago

I suspect the PM doesn't want to alienate other voting blocks by saying it out loud. Just like he really didn't want to piss off older Canadians by saying his policies would lower house prices.

I agree with you, but he's smart enough to know that an embarrassing sound bite will play forever in CPC ads, along with a scary voice over like "he's willing to screw over Canadian businesses for dirty yucky Quebec, so why won't he bend over for Alberta's Big Beautiful fossil fuel producers?"

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 18 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Not happy with this at all

For all the US's rhetoric about trade deficits being bad, we need to say we don't want a trade deficit on digital services and we're using tariffs the same way they are.

We aren't unique in having a tax like this, and the US has no place saying it's unfair when it's not even only foreign companies paying. We're literally don't the opposite of a tarif today.

Plus the US government is subsidizing their tech companies especially in the AI space.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Fair enough. There's a push and pull in negotiations that we (generally) don't see. I'm trying to read the tea leaves to figure out why Carney would ditch the DST, and this is a possible reason. I can't know if it's the reason. But it's interesting to think about.

We aren’t unique in having a tax like this,

I think we're unique in that we made our tax retroactive.

and the US has no place saying it’s unfair when it’s not even only foreign companies paying.

Generally, I agree that the US has no place dictating our tax policy, but they are within their rights to control their trade with us. 90% of the companies paying are US tech companies (I think that's in the Globe explainer), so I can see why poking us to see what they can get. I don't like it, but that's (sadly) irrelevant.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah there's definitely a big picture

I just can't take anything the current US admin says as serious, so when they say they'll walk away I would want to call that bluff.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I think at this point we're just buying time to diversify trade. It's incredibly stupid to to think factories can be built in two weeks or even that businesses can source products from suppliers in other countries in that time frame. This is seemingly what Trump thinks, but yeah, it's stupid.

So I'm hoping they're doing everything needed to end dependence on the US in the background while mitigating the impact of Trump's nonsense in the short term. But as @sbv@sh.itjust.works says, we can't really know we're just reading tea leaves.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago

You're right. There's no "done" here. There's a tonne of work to be done to diversify our economy and trading partners - it'll be an ongoing burden because we don't have any other adjacent markets.

Anyhow. My perspective isn't as gloomy as other commenters. There were international rules around digital services taxes being negotiated before Trump came along. AFAIU they stalled, but this crap seems like a good reason to get them started again.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 hours ago

Evidence really is sparse. Nonexistent, even

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 hours ago

A problem I see with this is that it is going to become unsafe to consume food stuffs coming from the US very soon. RFK would rather watch people die then put in the proper health requirements, if there is no requirements than capitalism will do what capitalism does and cut costs.

[–] puppinstuff@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

But it’s not going to work. The argument assumes standard negotiation rules are in play. This is a bully who’s willing to blow up the trade deal because he thinks even a loss will be an annexation win.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

I guess we'll find out in a few weeks.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Same thing happened with NAFTA. We sold so many industries down the river for French cows.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago

I'm not too familiar with the NAFTA negotiations, but it seems on-brand.

[–] teppa@piefed.ca 5 points 15 hours ago

I love spending 30$ on a tiny brick of cheese instead of having to pirate all my US media.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 5 points 14 hours ago

DST was going to bring in $1.5B/year in revenue. Dairy farmers would be happy to move to price subsidy model that the US has. Canada produces 9.5B litres of milk, and together with about $1B in programs for dairy farmers, 25c/liter paid to farmers would reduce retail milk prices by $1/liter.

[–] Slayan@lemmy.ca 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Hello could you point to me where the leger firm statement about supply management is? I'm trying to find it and i can't. The only thing i found about it is citynew aka rogers saying they translated a story from lapresse but i can't even find this.

It's also stated that the poll were made in two days and pulled/asked 1001 person, so i doesn't really represent the quebec population. Also when i try to find anything related to supply management, everything is 1-2 yeara old

Tl dr: this seems like a shit report, and i'm unable to find any source. Do you have any?

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 3 points 14 hours ago

Nothing beyond the link in the post. It's consistent with what I've heard in other media, the Bloc's supply management trade bill, and Maxime Bernier's recent political success (🤣).

I wouldn't be surprised if it's a push poll from the dairy industry, but it represents the goals of notable Quebec constituency.