Trump ends all U.S. trade talks with Canada over digital services tax

[blackbird]

32 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

That doesn’t matter. Its not a selective tax that puts them at a competitive disadvantage, that’s all that matters.
 

If an American company buys Tim Hortons Trump doesn’t get to demand we cancel taxes on donuts because its us owned. 
 

All cars sold in Canada are owned by American companies so we have to stop taxing those also?

You so business in Canada, you pay taxes in Canada, period. It doesn’t matter what country your company is headquartered in. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Just more Socialism and government tax grabs is why the cost of everything is going out of sight for millions of Canadians and many have to go to food banks.  What's so hard to understand about that.  Too much government and too much taxation is bad for Canadians.  

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Barquentine said:

So make up your mind. Does Google operate in Canada or not?

Not the portion that they're taxing. The part that does operating Canada is already taxed and so are their employees. This tax doesn't apply to that. So no, the portion that this tax applies to does not represent doing business in Canada.

It's really not that complicated. If necessary I can get a whiteboard out for you

[CdnFox]

50 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

That doesn’t matter. Its not a selective tax that puts them at a competitive disadvantage, that’s all that matters.
 

If an American company buys Tim Hortons Trump doesn’t get to demand we cancel taxes on donuts because its us owned. 

If a Canadian goes south of the border and buys a Krispy Kreme, is it okay to demand that Krispy Kreme pay Canada sales tax as well as the American Tax?

That's the issue here. If a Canadian company goes to an American company and does business in America then the American company pays its taxes in America. Canada is not demand that they pay a tax in Canada as well

It's not evenly applied. It only applies to very large companies so that makes it look like even less of a tax and more of a cash grab.

Right now if I want an American accounting company to audit my books and I send them down to America and the Americans do all the work and send it back they don't pay tax in Canada. So explain how digital media would be different

[User]

14 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Yes, democrats shill for corporations and big tech too. Everyone knows American politicians on both sides of the aisle are cash-and-carry, especially these days. So if you would like me to retract MAGA I will agree 

You push this false talking point once, then you balk at my calling you out for it as being irrelevant, and now you so "graciously" concede that if I would like you to retract this point, you will. 

Just say you were wrong. It is not that hard. 

14 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

What Im telling you is that a domestic sales tax that applies to all businesses universally is a purely domestic matter if USA or Madagascar or the mayor of Timbuktu think it’s ok. As a sovereign country if we want to put a sales tax on toothpicks we don’t have to look up which country’s businesses make the most toothpicks and then seek for their permission to regulate transactions that occur within our own borders  

Except that the concept of a digital services tax is novel and also questionable as to how it applies at this point in the value chain and no, it is not purely a domestic matter when it clearly impacts the big US tech firms wildly disproportionately as compared to any business in Candada. 

Sure, you can do as you want in Canada, just as America can choose how to respond to your actions and how they impact US business like this. 

15 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Its not absurd...

Yes, it is absurd. You are free to argue against the actions, which you did, but you don't just get to dismiss them as not being "valid"

15 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

And again $2 billion shared across a number of the world’s wealthiest companies is nothing.

And again... Canada not collecting that is nothing as compared to their overall budget each year... 

You just repeated yourself over again in this whole response. 

15 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

It’s not ignorant to state the cost relative to their gross instead of their net.  At any rate it is still a drop in the bucket for these companies. 

Yes, it is. Because what they make in total each year has little to do with their ability to afford the cost. Let me show you why it is ignorant in simple terms:

Company A makes 20 Trillion in revenue each year, but they profit only 5 billion... 

Company B makes 100 Billion a year in revenue, but they profit 80 Billion...

Now you come along and say that Company A can easily afford 2 billion because look they made 20 Trillion in revenue!

Your using that number is ignorant because it doesn't take into account margins, risk, actual net profit... 

15 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

BOTTOM LINE:  These companies don’t have a god-given right to conduct business in our country tax-free. The entire premise of the Trump tariffs is that everyone must pay for the privilege of accessing the US market so isn’t it ironic that you think these companies should not only have tariff-free but also tax-free access to the Canadian market?

BOTTOM LINE:

The DST is controversial and has been controversial long before Trump or MAGA came along and your country doesn't have a god-given right to do whatever it wants free from the consequences for how other countries feel or will react to that. 

 

[ExFlyer]

"WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. President Donald Trump has publicly announced that he will cease all discussions with Canada over any new trade agreements, before immediately following that up stating that discussions have resumed despite never having stopped. Moments later, Trump took to social media specifically to denounce and formally end the discussions while pondering which European country is Canada."

"“Canada is a very SNEAKY, very weasel nation. I call them Weasel Canada. Everyone does. Not beaver, weasel. I’m ending trade discussions with them. We don’t need them. So-called experts say maybe we need Canada. Who are these experts? PERVERTS? CRIMINALS? We don’t know. So-called experts say we should trade with them. I don’t think so. European leaders have been covering for them for too long. These maps of Europe? NO CANADA. Where is it in Europe? No one knows. I don’t see it. Maybe Canada isn’t a real country? Ok."

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2025/06/trump-ends-trade-talks-with-canada-resumes-trade-talks-with-canada-ends-trade-talks-with-canada-demands-to-know-which-european-country-is-canada/

[herbie]

Any further proof needed that Carney's dealing with a complete 1diot?

The tax has been public knowledge for years, the EU even has the same policy, which Trump mentions, yet the whiney Donnie Depends uses any petty excuse whatsoever to f*ck over Canada. "We hold all the cards"

To a fat, demented, failed actor thinking he can play school bully that's to be expected.

Edited June 28, 2025 by herbie

[Legato]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The other thing I find interesting is that many in the “no subsidies for art” crowd are all for subsidies for sports teams which is far less important than arts. Everyone has heard of shakespeare and beethoven (both were effectively government subsidized artists), nobody knows or cares about whatever sports were around back then. 

Neither Shakespeare nor Beethoven received government subsidies. The both had some royal patronage and private sponsorship.

Both these people were true artists,

Would you subsidise this.......

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, Legato said:

Neither Shakespeare nor Beethoven received government subsidies. The both had some royal patronage and private sponsorship.

Both these people were true artists,

Would you subsidise this.......

The royal patronage is the equivalent of government subsidies today amd happens in every culture. 
 

The thing about supporting the arts is that government is not meant to pick and choose specific pieces or styles of art, they’re meant fund “the arts” broadly and generally with rhe goal of creating a vibrant arts scene, nothing more. Vibrant art scenes almost by definition are going to result in some controversial or unconventional art. 

[BeaverFever]

On 6/28/2025 at 2:34 PM, User said:

You push this false talking point once, then you balk at my calling you out for it as being irrelevant, and now you so "graciously" concede that if I would like you to retract this point, you will. 

Just say you were wrong. It is not that hard. 

Except that the concept of a digital services tax is novel and also questionable as to how it applies at this point in the value chain and no, it is not purely a domestic matter when it clearly impacts the big US tech firms wildly disproportionately as compared to any business in Candada. 

Sure, you can do as you want in Canada, just as America can choose how to respond to your actions and how they impact US business like this. 

Yes, it is absurd. You are free to argue against the actions, which you did, but you don't just get to dismiss them as not being "valid"

And again... Canada not collecting that is nothing as compared to their overall budget each year... 

You just repeated yourself over again in this whole response. 

Yes, it is. Because what they make in total each year has little to do with their ability to afford the cost. Let me show you why it is ignorant in simple terms:

Company A makes 20 Trillion in revenue each year, but they profit only 5 billion... 

Company B makes 100 Billion a year in revenue, but they profit 80 Billion...

Now you come along and say that Company A can easily afford 2 billion because look they made 20 Trillion in revenue!

Your using that number is ignorant because it doesn't take into account margins, risk, actual net profit... 

BOTTOM LINE:

The DST is controversial and has been controversial long before Trump or MAGA came along and your country doesn't have a god-given right to do whatever it wants free from the consequences for how other countries feel or will react to that. 

 

It’s not wrong, everything I said about MAGA is correct amd Im willing to acknowledge that it applies to many/most democrats as well.
 

As for everything else, the TL;DR is that

1) EU and UK already have a similar tax

2) it is a Canadian transaction conducted in Canadian dollars with Canadian consumers via Canadian bank accounts. The mere fact that Canada can tax these transactions is self-evident 

3) The fact that US firms currently make up the majority of this second is irrelevant, they are competing o tue same terms as Canadian businesses in this space

4) Canada doesn’t have to eat the cost of this tax which they clearly communicated years in advance, nor should it. The government of Canada makes Canadian laws, the government is sovereign and these companies are not equals with whom it has to compromise or offer concessions or obtain their consent.  The laws are fair and they received ample notice and accommodations. We have a court system they can avail themselves of if they feel otherwise and unlike the US we truly have a fair and impartial judiciary.
 

Why would Canada absorb costs that this industry could easily afford and were provided significant advance notice of?  At tax time do you demand the IRS eat the cost of your taxes simply because you don’t feel like paying although you could easily?  Do you do that with any of your other bills? 

5) what you don’t understand is that taxes are paid from gross revenue not net profits, meaning they can be offset with tax deductions, credits, write-offs, etc. It is not dishonest to discuss companies by gross earnings in fact EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization) is one of the most common ways to value a company. 
 

6) Yes any country can object to some domestic policy of another country and take some action in response. Canada could object to the way USA treats some endangered species on the Gulf of Mexico or the way we think USA treats gay or black people or whatever. And we could announce some punitive action as a result. That doesn’t mean it’s legitimate or appropriate for is to do so. 

Edited June 29, 2025 by BeaverFever

[User]

13 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

It’s not wrong, everything I said about MAGA is correct amd Im willing to acknowledge that it applies to many/most democrats as well.

No point in going any farther. This is already so incredibly dishonest. Let's review:

First, you make the ignorant/dishonest claim that this is a Trump/MAGA issue. 
Second, after I call you out on this and explain how it wasn't, you balk, trying to say my comment is irrelevant - a dishonest tactic, as it was clearly relevant. 
Third, after I call you out on your dishonest schtick above, you give a half-hearted concession, saying you will retract the MAGA comments if I want you to
NOW, after all that crap, you take back your concession and double-down say you were not wrong... 

 

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, Legato said:

Neither Shakespeare nor Beethoven received government subsidies. The both had some royal patronage and private sponsorship.

Both these people were true artists,

Would you subsidise this.......

I've thrown out better stuff while cleaning my garage...who knew you could paid by with calling it art...

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, herbie said:

Any further proof needed that Carney's dealing with a complete 1diot?

The tax has been public knowledge for years, the EU even has the same policy, which Trump mentions, yet the whiney Donnie Depends uses any petty excuse whatsoever to f*ck over Canada. "We hold all the cards"

To a fat, demented, failed actor thinking he can play school bully that's to be expected.

Biden was actually pretty pissed off about it too. And it's actually just coming into effect now, the taxes brand new so now is when they're dealing with it

Clear evidence that while carney may be dealing with an  1diot, trump is dealing with an even bigger one. 

And trump is going to win. We'll either have to give up massive amounts elsewhere or drop the tax. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

The problem is global and is eliciting a global response. Many countries have noticed that foreign high tech firms have used the internet to make huge profits from ads etc. while paying little to no tax locally because of tax residence jiggery-pokery, quite unlike the local media businesses they have wiped out. Digital services taxes are simply a rational way to make everyone pay their fair share. To say that the cost of the tax will be passed onto the consumer and should therefore be abandoned is weak beer indeed. That could be claimed of any corporate tax and is hardly a serious argument for giving up on taxing companies. The high tech billionaires have pressured Trump to pressure us to give up on this. They may succeed in Canada but not elsewhere over the longer term. Voters can see what is happening and they simply won’t put up with it no matter what the tax accountants say. 

Edited June 28, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

4 hours ago, User said:

BOTTOM LINE:

The DST is controversial and has been controversial long before Trump or MAGA came along and your country doesn't have a god-given right to do whatever it wants free from the consequences for how other countries feel or will react to that. 

I can assure you it’s not that controversial outside the US any more. Most people around the world would agree with the proposition that if you are making a huge income in a country you should be paying a fair level of tax on same in that country. 

Edited June 28, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[herbie]

To put it bluntly a fat, geezed out old fart deluded enough to think he's an actor is trying to play the school bully and picked Canada as his target. A petty minor issue he thinks he can score big on.

With the notion that US companies are allowed to suck money out of anywhere they wish with a firehose and those countries affected have no right to respond. 

Beaverfever, quit bothering the Magats with real facts and let them live in their dreamworld under a rotting log. Diaper Donnie says so,  so the other 7 billion in the world must all be wrong.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The problem is global and is eliciting a global response. Many countries have noticed that foreign high tech firms have used the internet to make huge profits from ads etc. while paying little to no tax locally because of tax residence jiggery-pokery, quite unlike the local media businesses they have wiped out. Digital services taxes are simply a rational way to make everyone pay their fair share. To say that the cost of the tax will be passed onto the consumer and should therefore be abandoned is weak beer indeed. That could be claimed of any corporate tax and is hardly a serious argument for giving up on taxing companies. The high tech billionaires have pressured Trump to pressure us to give up on this. They may succeed in Canada but not elsewhere over the longer term. Voters can see what is happening and they simply won’t put up with it no matter what the tax accountants say. 

The problem with this argument is that they are actually still taxed in their home jurisdiction. So what you talking about is a double tax.

And many of those countries have companies that provide services to Americans and are not taxed in America.

And if the argument is valid why isn't it valid for all internet service providers? This only applies to the big boys who are worth taxing so to speak.

Your argument just doesn't hold water the way it's presented. The new BC fairies are going to be built in china, are we charging income tax to the chinese? nope. If I call an American Travel Service and book a hotel room and a flight and pay them a fee for it I'm paying for their service but they're not paying any tax in Canada.

I suppose it would be fine if you wanted to say that if you wish to sell advertising in Canada then you have to have a Canadian presence which can be taxed because you're selling and doing business in Canada but this tax covers a hell of a lot more than that.

How do you circle that square? How do you address the fact that very frequently other countries by services from Canada and don't demand that we pay taxes for them?

[SpankyMcFarland]

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The problem with this argument is that they are actually still taxed in their home jurisdiction. So what you talking about is a double tax.

Have you seen the extraordinary lengths to which US tech companies abroad go to avoid paying tax? When it comes to multinationals, the international tax system has broken down. Where Facebook etc are actually paying tax at this stage has become a bewilderingly complex and opaque matter which is why so many countries have run out of patience and are speaking together on this: if you make money here, you pay tax here. It’s very simple, really. 

 

 

Edited June 29, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, blackbird said:

Just more Socialism and government tax grabs is why the cost of everything is going out of sight for millions of Canadians and many have to go to food banks.  What's so hard to understand about that.  Too much government and too much taxation is bad for Canadians.  

So is too much climate change - it's already one the biggest reasons food prices are rising faster than anything else.

It'll be the main reason soon enough.

The reason for that of course is abject indifference - the worst crisis we face.

[eyeball]

8 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Where Facebook etc are actually paying tax has become a deeply complex and opaque matter which is why so many countries are speaking together on this: if you make money here, you pay tax here. It’s very simple, really.

One of the biggest challenges we need to overcome as a species is resistance to a global minimum corporate tax rate.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_minimum_corporate_tax_rate

It's not looking good...

 

 

[CdnFox]

25 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Have you seen the extraordinary lengths to which US tech companies abroad go to avoid paying tax? When it comes to multinationals, the international tax system has broken down. Where Facebook etc are actually paying tax at this stage has become a bewilderingly complex and opaque matter which is why so many countries have run out of patience and are speaking together on this: if you make money here, you pay tax here. It’s very simple, really. 

 

 

Sure but you're conflating two issues. There's a big difference between tax avoidance in your own country and being taxed by a secondary Country for profits you earned within your own country.

Like I said, if you want to pass a law that says anybody who sells any goods or services in Canada must have an office in Canada and pay taxes on those goods and services specifically then there's some legitimacy to that.

Or perhaps even more appropriately charging a goods and services tax on goods and services regardless of where they're purchased from which again has some validity. Therefore the benefit of a person in this country and therefore the tax is applicable to that person rather than the business.

But the taxes envisioned doesn't make sense and it doesn't address the larger problem that describing either

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

o is too much climate change -

How delusional can a person be?  Climate has always changed.  Get used to it.  Man cannot control the climate.  It is absurd to think he can.  The best man can do is to adapt to the consequences of changing weather such as being prepared to deal with forest fires, floods, etc.   Any rational scientist will tell you the same thing. 

Don't waste any more money and resources on trying to stop climate change.  Don't harm the energy industry and stop the carbon tax on industry and caps on industry emission scams.  Stop wasting taxpayer money on rebates for EVs

Edited June 29, 2025 by blackbird

[Aristides]

On 6/27/2025 at 5:39 PM, Barquentine said:

Does Walmart pay taxes in Canada on their business operations here? Last time I checked they were American owned.

I would hope so. Why should Canadian retailers that do pay Canadian taxes have to compete with American companies that didn’t?

[Aristides]

The UK has a DST yet Trump signed a trade agreement with them.

[I am Groot]

21 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Most of the great works of art through history is subsidized at some point,

Not by the government.

21 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The “subsidized” art  is also often the cutting edge content that moves the culture and art scene forward

Uh huh. If you have to give a long winded explanation of what a painting or sculpture is then it's just junk because it fails to communicate anything. If your music won't be paid for or listened to then why sing it? If no one is interested in your book why should the public be required to subsidize it? If your dancing doesn't attract sufficient paying customers to make a living, then do something else. And then there's the CBC, which we are required to pay for even though almost nobody watches it. They produce TV shows no one watches but everyone has to pay for. Ridiculous.

 

[LinkSoul60]

3 hours ago, Aristides said:

The UK has a DST yet Trump signed a trade agreement with them.

DST is nothing more than a negotiation tool for Trump in the trade discussions.  Get this tax revenue from another bucket in the trade deal, and pause or concede the DST to give Trump the biggest win ever to stroke his ego so we can move on and get a new trade deal signed.