Putting reciprocal tariffs on U.S. trucks would force Trump back to the bargaining table—but we have to announce them right now

Start by aiming your countermeasures specifically at pickup trucks, the last bastion of profitability for Trump’s beloved Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis-née-Chrysler. Exactly match the 50% duties he plans to impose. Likewise, set the start date for their implementation for New Year’s Day. Most importantly — and, according to Clausewitz, this would seem crucial to success — announce these new retaliatory tariffs this Friday.

Why Friday?

Well, that’s when Trump will be wrapping up his much-anticipated love-in with Xi Jinping. Said meetings will be sure to conclude with grandiose pronouncements of his unrivalled “Art of Negotiation.” One of those “wins” might even be an announcement he’s welcoming a Chinese auto production plant to the United States. The President seems more open to this eventuality than ever, telling FOX News last week that he would be “okay” if China wanted “to come in and open a plant to build their cars here.”

Certainly, Wang Chuanfu, founder of BYD, China’s largest automaker; and Robin Zeng, founder of CATL, the world’s biggest battery maker, think there’s a grand meeting of minds to be had, as they are reported to be accompanying Xi to Washington this week.

All this, of course, worries both automakers and legislators. American lawmakers fret about the security concerns that Chinese connected cars present (mainly, the modern automobiles’ ability to collect data on infrastructure) while U.S. automakers are scared to death of China’s ability to undercut domestic manufacturers’ pricing.

Where that worry would turn into catastrophe, however, is if the President turns out to be dumb enough — or scared enough; the Washington Post’s Max Boot recently noted that “like many bullies, he shies away from a fight if he fears getting hurt” — to allow BYD, Geely, or SAIC to build cars in the continental 49 without insisting on joint-venture agreements with existing America automakers. If he were to blunder into such a debacle — and, considering his track record lately, that’s certainly more than a possibility — the timing could be perfect for a per-emptive strike. Indeed, it might be just the thing to see the Americans come back to the bargaining table with a better attitude.

Experts far and wide are pretty much universally asserting that an unfettered Chinese manufacturing presence on American soil could be the end of the U.S. auto industry. Perhaps the best assessment of the damage this would wreak comes from legendary auto analyst Michael Dunne of Dunne Insights, who thinks that Chinese automakers would “quickly overwhelm America’s auto industry, just as it is now ravaging Europe.” Chinese cars “are pouring” into Germany, Italy, and Spain at unprecedented rates, Volkswagen is already on an existential precipice, and, Dunne says, “Europe is getting gutted.”

The same would likely be true of the Detroit Three were BYD, Geely, or SAIC to set up shop in Michigan or South Carolina. Pretty much everything General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis produce would be under existential threat thanks to China’s ability to marry high-tech to low price. Heck, BYD, Chery, and the like are even making some more-than-passable — one’s a diesel hybrid — mid-sized trucks. Oh, the Detroit Three would likely keep sovereignty over full-sized pickups; the Chinese have no expertise in this segment, and are unlikely to be interested in developing all-new engineering they can’t sell anywhere else.

The question, then, is: are full-sized pickups enough to keep Detroit alive?

Maybe. Maybe not. What is certain is that, if and when the Chinese are indeed allowed to build in cars in America, anything that threatens the D3’s full-sized pickup market would grow that much more dire.

Which is why, Mr. Carney, you should do it. Threaten away! Lost in all the hubbub about how Canada is but an economic David to America’s Goliath is the fact Canadians buy around 300,000 Detroit-Three-built full-sized pickups a year. That represents at least $3 billion worth of profit if, as in the current situation, there aren’t tariffs. If, on the other hand, we did hit them with reciprocal tariffs of 50%, they’d be on the hook for at least $6 billion in duties.

I suspect the prospect of so much lost revenue would probably so frighten Jim Farley (CEO of Ford), Mary Barra (CEO of General Motors), and Antonio Filosa (CEO of Stellantis) that they would plead with Trump to get back to the bargaining table immediately. Less likely — but equally palatable to Canadian auto workers — is that a concurrent return to an Auto-Pact-era build-one-here-sell-one-here tariff-remission program would likely force all three to continue to produce cars in Oshawa, Oakville, and Windsor, even if it pissed off the President.

Even a worst-case scenario offers Canadians a taste of poetic (if Pyrrhic) justice: GM, Ford, and Stellantis might well leave Canada high and dry, but between the loss of Canadian pickup sales and the havoc the Chinese will wreak in their home market, their continued prosperity would be very much in question. Whatever the case, the double-whammy of Canadian tariffs on pickups and a (possible) Chinese invasion could be a game-changer.

A few caveats are worth mentioning here. First of all, any such tariffs on trucks would have to be accompanied by a complete revamp of our tariff-remission program. In its current form, GM, Stellantis, and especially Ford have a sweetheart of a deal; a return to the Auto-Pact-era one-built-here-for-every-car-sold-here policy would be essential. Secondly, the 25% tariff on current American auto imports would also have to remain in place. These tariffs are already highly effective; the reason U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer’s shorts have been in such a knot recently is that American auto exports are down by a significant — and Trump-annoying — 22%.

Industry insiders will also note that heavy-duty Ram pickups are currently made in Mexico, and thus not tariff-able. That may be true, but Stellantis made headlines last month when it announced it was moving production of its heavy-duty trucks to the U.S. GM also makes some pickups in Mexico, but it would take some massive rejigging of production to get its Silao plant to supply all the different pickups Canadians buy.

Also, there will be those that say that the White House would never grant Chinese automakers unfettered production in U.S., the assertion always that there are smart people advising the president against such miscues. I’m not quite sure whether the ‘nutlicks’ surrounding Trump — Greer, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, et al — are stupid or whether they’re just acting so in subservience. But, whatever the current situation, I think the concept that smarter heads will always prevail went out the window 18 months ago.

In other words, Mr. Carney, if you really are trying to save auto manufacturing in Canada, the timing is right. America’s most vulnerable flank is pickups, and as Clausewitz said, “A defender must always seek to change over to the attack as soon as he has gained the benefit of the defence.”

Sign up for our newsletter Blind-Spot Monitor and follow our social channels on X, Tiktok and LinkedIn to stay up to date on the latest automotive news, reviews, car culture, and vehicle shopping advice.