News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.9K     0 

Canada Imports More Vehicles from Mexico Than U.S. for First Time in 30 Years​

From https://canadatoday.online/canada-imports-more-vehicles-from-mexico-than-u-s-for-first-time-in-30-years/

For the first time in three decades, Canada has imported more vehicles from Mexico than from the United States, marking a significant shift in North America’s auto trade dynamics. According to newly released trade data, Canadian imports of Mexican-made vehicles surged in the first half of 2025, surpassing imports from U.S. automakers that have traditionally dominated the Canadian market.


A Historic Shift in Auto Trade​

For more than 30 years, the United States has been Canada’s largest supplier of imported vehicles, supported by deeply integrated supply chains and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), now replaced by the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). However, the latest figures show Mexico exported more passenger vehicles and light trucks to Canada than the U.S., highlighting Mexico’s growing role as a powerhouse in North American auto manufacturing.


Why Mexico Is Gaining Ground​

Analysts point to several reasons for the shift:

  • Lower Production Costs – Mexico’s competitive labor market and investment-friendly policies have attracted global automakers, including GM, Ford, Stellantis, Volkswagen, and Toyota, to expand operations there.
  • Supply Chain Strategy – Automakers are diversifying their supply chains after years of pandemic-related disruptions. Direct shipments from Mexico to Canada are becoming more efficient.
  • U.S. Tariffs & Trade Tensions – Recent U.S. tariff hikes on certain auto components have made American-made vehicles more expensive to export, tilting Canadian buyers toward Mexican imports.
  • Consumer Demand – Canadians are increasingly purchasing smaller, fuel-efficient vehicles and SUVs, many of which are produced in Mexico.
Click to expand...

Implications for Canada​


While this milestone reflects the adaptability of North America’s auto industry, it also raises questions about the future of Canadian–U.S. trade relations. The Canadian government has emphasized that CUSMA ensures fair competition, but industry experts warn that U.S. automakers could face long-term challenges if Mexico continues to expand its share of the Canadian market.

Canadian dealers say the shift is not just about numbers but about product availability and price stability. With Canadian consumers seeking affordable options amid inflationary pressures, Mexico’s competitive exports are filling the gap. If the trend continues, Mexico may cement its role as Canada’s second-largest vehicle supplier ahead of the U.S. for years to come.
Click to expand...

I'm making a guess that Canada's aluminum and steel will be going to Mexico.
 
wopchop said:
Any of these GTA house could easily be retrofitted to suit modern times. They are small and simple houses. But in almost every case, these houses will be described as "tear downs", when in reality they can be easily renovated. A small crew can easily gut one in a day.

A big reason for this is because they are largely being bought by small to medium-sized developers, who want to build something that maximizes the allowable lot square footage, which maximizes the selling price.

Even if you are looking at renovations, a lot of contractors you speak to will try to steer you away from that path and down a path that leads to high square footage and high price (and revenue for them).

You also need to be a real builder to do a renovation for a client. Many of these builds are pushed by developers, not builders, and they do not have the skill set and trade background you need to do a renovation.
Click to expand...
It's generally going to be cheaper to tear down and start new. Besides, builders are going to respond to the market. The demand is for open concept, big kitchens, big bathrooms, 9' ceilings, etc. that are difficult to do within a traditional 50s or 60s frame. They will also try to maximize the percent lot coverage to what the municipality permits. 1950s and '60s houses had 2x4 walls. The amount of space for insulation is limited compared to newer 2x6 construction.
 
lenaitch said:
It's generally going to be cheaper to tear down and start new. Besides, builders are going to respond to the market. The demand is for open concept, big kitchens, big bathrooms, 9' ceilings, etc. that are difficult to do within a traditional 50s or 60s frame. They will also try to maximize the percent lot coverage to what the municipality permits. 1950s and '60s houses had 2x4 walls. The amount of space for insulation is limited compared to newer 2x6 construction.
Click to expand...
This is not that true. If you are building a new 3000 sq-ft+ house at $350psf+, it will certainly cost much, much more than renovating an existing 1000-1500 sq ft 1950s/60s house. The size difference between the average teardown house and new build is substantial. The extra cost to "renovate" will never overcome that.

If the house sizes were comparable, then it can become more questionable, but you are still adding huge costs (excavation, foundation/basement, full wood frame), and that is not generally what happens.

You are right that certain features are more difficult to fit into the smaller space, but saying it is cheaper is simply not true. It is just nonsense idea that the development industry has sold you.

(Also, if you gut a 2x4 house, you can furr out all the exterior walls to 2x6 in no time at all and fit more insulation)
 
Last edited:
zang said:
The problem isn't that we don't have money to fix housing. The problem is that developers have little incentive to do that. Why has the condo market cratered right now, oversaturated with stock, despite a massive need for housing?
Click to expand...
I am aware that developers are sitting on the sidelines that is why I used as an example how $22.5 billions could be better spent in Canada on building affordable homes rather than give it to Ukraine to fund a human meatgrinder that has claimed over a million Ukrainians so far. Governments have long subsidized affordable housing not only in Canada but other countries even the US (Section 8). Of course, the money could be used on many other things including paying down our debt. The point is it is unconscionable for our government to be giving this amount of "aid" to another country that is of no strategic value for Canada, and I don't understand why there is no debate in Canada over this. Canada is not a serious country.
 
Monarch Butterfly said:

Canada Imports More Vehicles from Mexico Than U.S. for First Time in 30 Years​

From https://canadatoday.online/canada-imports-more-vehicles-from-mexico-than-u-s-for-first-time-in-30-years/




I'm making a guess that Canada's aluminum and steel will be going to Mexico.
Click to expand...
This points to the biggest flaw in the CUSMA trade agreement. Why did our negotiators agree to a free trade agreement with Mexico with no quotas on the number of cars that Mexico can export to Canada? I can't find breakout figures for cars and car parts but in 2024 Canada imported almost $35 billion in goods from Mexico whereas Mexico imported just over $6 billion in goods from Canada. A completely lopsided trading agreement. Mexico exports almost 5X what it imports from Canada? When was the last time you heard this discussed in the media as a problem for Canada?

There is no way that Canadian autoworkers can compete with the wages being paid in Mexico. Check out this article from May 2022 (post CUSMA) announcing a 25 cent an hour wage increases for workers at GM's Silao's plant that assembles the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra bringing hourly wages to $3.25/hour! https://www.jalopnik.com/gm-factory-workers-in-mexico-get-a-25-cent-raise-to-3-1848932879/ (yes you read that right - autoworkers in Mexico are making $3.25 / hour - that's not a typo).

"After much negotiation, General Motors has given workers at its largest factory in Mexico a raise that comes out to 25 cents an hour, on average. This bumps up the average factory worker's pay from $3 an hour to $3.25 for many at the GM Silao plant, where the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra are made.

Read More: https://www.jalopnik.com/gm-factory-workers-in-mexico-get-a-25-cent-raise-to-3-1848932879/"

By comparison workers at GM Oshawa where the same pickups are assembled make up to $50 an hour and of course GM Canada has other payroll burden costs that GM Mexico does not have.

Of course, US auto workers can't compete with Mexican wages either and have lost millions of jobs to Mexico but what has been the American response? Blame Canada! There is a reason why Trump boasts about poaching Canadian auto jobs. He knows he can't poach jobs from Mexico given the big wage disparity. He has probably also been told that the Detroit Big Three would not survive without cheap Mexican labor propping them up, so Canadian workers are taking the brunt of this terrible three-way trade deal.

It never made sense to me to make a three-way trilateral trade deal when the third country has wage structure that is a tiny fraction of the wages paid in Canada and the United States.

Like so many important subjects in this country there is no debate about this. Do we still want to have an auto industry? Is it important to have? Is so we have to protect our industry from cheap imports from Mexico. If it is not important than why not open up the market to China?

Finally, I would echo your last statement. I sure hope that Mexico is buying Canadian steel and aluminum to go into these Mexican assembled cars that they ship north to us. I hope there is some silver lining for Canada.
 
Last edited:
EBT said:
Of course, the money could be used on many other things including paying down our debt. The point is it is unconscionable for our government to be giving this amount of "aid" to another country that is of no strategic value for Canada, and I don't understand why there is no debate in Canada over this. Canada is not a serious country.
Click to expand...
I love your comments. They are so gloriously unhinged and uninformed.
 
Ikea (founded in Sweden in 1943, but now headquartered in Sweden & Netherlands) sources wood from over 50 countries, with major suppliers including Poland, Lithuania, and Sweden. Canada needs to negotiate a trade deal with Europe for Canadian wood to be used in their furniture.
 
Monarch Butterfly said:
Ikea (founded in Sweden in 1943, but now headquartered in Sweden & Netherlands) sources wood from over 50 countries, with major suppliers including Poland, Lithuania, and Sweden. Canada needs to negotiate a trade deal with Europe for Canadian wood to be used in their furniture.
Click to expand...
Ikea is a very green company. Unless they're planning on opening up manufacturing here in Canada as well, it's unlikely we'll see them want to deal with the carbon footprint and cost of shipping wood overseas only to ship final product back. Especially after they closed their only North American manufacturing plant (Danville, Virginia) in 2019.
 
zang said:
Ikea is a very green company. Unless they're planning on opening up manufacturing here in Canada as well, it's unlikely we'll see them want to deal with the carbon footprint and cost of shipping wood overseas only to ship final product back. Especially after they closed their only North American manufacturing plant (Danville, Virginia) in 2019.
Click to expand...
Canada could ship wood and metals on ships to Europe, and the finished products from Europe to Canada on the same ships.
 
Monarch Butterfly said:
Canada could ship wood and metals on ships to Europe, and the finished products from Europe to Canada on the same ships.
Click to expand...
Those ships are already likely currently carrying products elsewhere. For sheer profit and logistics reasons, it’s unlikely empty containers are heading back in that direction. Besides, Canada exports high quality solid wood, not exactly IKEA’s material of choice.
 
zang said:
Those ships are already likely currently carrying products elsewhere. For sheer profit and logistics reasons, it’s unlikely empty containers are heading back in that direction. Besides, Canada exports high quality solid wood, not exactly IKEA’s material of choice.
Click to expand...
Canada exports other wood products too - especially paper products. We are the largest producer of newsprint, and one of the largest for pulp.

I believe Ikea owns a lot, if not most, of their wood production supply chain (i.e. to make the particle board), which they have setup in various countries where harvesting is happening.
 
Last edited:
^...more like he's malignant tumor than a deficit. >.<
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
Prime Minister Mark Carney is considering naming two sitting MPs to diplomatic posts as rewards for their service as former cabinet ministers and as a means to recruit fresh talent, unencumbered by the Justin Trudeau years, two sources say.

Bill Blair, a former Toronto police chief who served in several high-profile cabinet roles including National Defence and Public Safety, is being considered as high commissioner to Great Britain, the sources said.

He would replace Ralph Goodale, who held senior cabinet posts in Mr. Trudeau and Jean Chrétien’s governments. Mr. Goodale, 75, has been high commissioner since 2021.

Former natural resources minister Jonathan Wilkinson is being considered for a European ambassadorship, likely Germany or Belgium, the sources said.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top