Canada’s confrontation with the United States has moved well beyond diplomatic talking points and into corporate budgets, investment plans and pricing decisions. New business-leader data show that Ottawa is receiving a decidedly mixed assessment: 53% rate the federal government positively for its handling of U.S. trade negotiations, while confidence in the eventual outcome is considerably weaker. The divide is especially striking because tariffs are no longer a hypothetical concern for many firms. Companies report financial pressure, closely follow every turn in the negotiations and are reconsidering where they sell, source and invest. At the same time, Canada’s economy has shown pockets of resilience and businesses have not uniformly rejected Ottawa’s broader strategy. The result is a complicated picture in which approval of the government’s negotiating performance coexists with deep uncertainty about where the trade fight ultimately leads.
The Headline Number Is 53%, but the Rest of the Results Matter
Modus Research’s latest Business Monitor found that 53% of Canadian managers and executives gave the federal government a positive rating for its performance in negotiations with the United States. That is enough to constitute a narrow majority, but it falls well short of a broad business consensus. Another 35% placed Ottawa in the negative range, 9% selected the neutral midpoint and 3% were unsure. In other words, the finding is better understood as a divided assessment than an overwhelming endorsement of the government’s approach to Washington.
The methodology gives the number useful context. Modus collected responses from 520 Canadian managers and executives between August 12 and August 26, 2026. Respondents came from a probability-based business panel initially recruited through random-digit-dial telephone sampling, and the results were weighted by region and enterprise size. Modus reports a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. That matters when interpreting a result sitting only a few points above the halfway mark. The data indicate that favourable assessments outnumber unfavourable ones nationally, but they do not indicate anything close to unanimity in corporate Canada.
Regional Divisions Are Much Larger Than the National Average Suggests
The national figure becomes more complicated once the results are separated by region. Quebec business leaders recorded the highest positive rating at 62%, with the Maritimes close behind at 61%. Ontario came in at 58%, British Columbia at 54%, Alberta at 34% and the Prairies at just 32%. The difference between Quebec and the Prairie region is therefore 30 percentage points, showing that a single Canada-wide number conceals sharply different assessments of the federal government’s negotiating performance.
Those regional differences are particularly important in a trade dispute whose economic effects are unevenly distributed across industries and provinces. Ontario has a large manufacturing and automotive base, Western Canada has major energy and agricultural interests, and Quebec has significant aluminum, aerospace and manufacturing exposure. Still, the Modus results do not establish that industrial composition caused the regional differences, so the numbers should not be used to assign motives to respondents. What they do demonstrate is that Ottawa’s performance is being judged differently across the country. A federal strategy viewed favourably by a majority of executives in Quebec, the Maritimes and Ontario received positive ratings from only about one-third of respondents in Alberta and the Prairies.
Leaders Rate Ottawa Better Than They Rate Canada’s Chances of Winning
Perhaps the most revealing finding is the gap between what executives think of Ottawa’s performance and what they expect from the negotiations themselves. While 53% rated the federal government positively, only 10% placed themselves in the top two categories when asked how likely Canada was to emerge with a net positive outcome. Another 48% considered a positive result somewhat likely, while 41% said it was unlikely. The distinction suggests that many executives separate the quality of Ottawa’s negotiating effort from the structural difficulty of obtaining a favourable settlement.
Regional pessimism was again uneven. In the Prairies, 65% said a net positive outcome was unlikely, compared with 48% in Alberta, 46% in the Maritimes, 41% in Quebec, 40% in British Columbia and 35% in Ontario. Those figures help explain why a positive performance rating should not automatically be interpreted as confidence in the strategy’s eventual success. An executive can believe federal negotiators are handling a difficult situation reasonably well while simultaneously believing that the United States’ negotiating position, tariffs and demands leave Canada with limited room for an advantageous outcome.
The Trade Fight Has Become Required Boardroom Reading
Few business issues appear to be attracting more attention. The Modus findings show that 65% of respondents were following Canada-U.S. trade negotiations “very closely,” while another 33% were following them moderately closely. Only 2% fell into the “not closely” category. For companies making decisions about contracts, capital spending, hiring or cross-border shipments, a tariff announcement can change assumptions that had been built into a budget only weeks earlier.
Attention was even higher among executives whose companies reported the strongest financial effects from tariffs. Modus found that 78% of those most strongly affected were watching the negotiations very closely, compared with 58% among respondents whose companies were not affected. That connection is intuitive without making the situation any less consequential. A manufacturer quoting a U.S. customer or an importer deciding whether to reorder American equipment needs to know whether current costs may change again. Trade negotiations that once might have been handled primarily by government-relations or customs specialists are increasingly relevant to chief financial officers, operations teams and senior managers responsible for investment and procurement.
Two-Thirds Say Tariffs Are Already Affecting Financial Health
The debate is not occurring solely around possible future damage. In the Modus poll, 19% of respondents said U.S. tariffs were having a strong negative impact on the financial health of their companies, while another 47% reported a moderate impact. Combined, 66% reported at least a moderate effect. Thirty per cent described the impact as relatively small and 4% were unsure. Modus also reported that financial services showed the lowest tariff impact among the industries it examined, reinforcing the reality that trade pressures do not fall evenly across the economy.
The distinction between direct and indirect exposure is important. A Canadian company does not necessarily have to export finished products to the United States to encounter tariff-related costs. It may buy U.S. components, supply a Canadian manufacturer that exports south, compete with tariff-affected imports or depend on customers whose own margins have been squeezed. Ottawa’s countermeasure package illustrates the breadth of sectors caught in the dispute, identifying steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, electronics and other goods. For affected managers, the trade fight can ultimately surface as a supplier quote, delayed order, narrower margin or postponed investment rather than as an abstract tariff percentage.
The United States Still Accounts for an Enormous Share of Canadian Trade
Canada has made measurable progress in shifting some merchandise trade toward markets outside the United States, but the scale of the bilateral relationship explains why negotiations remain so consequential. Statistics Canada reported that the U.S. share of Canadian merchandise exports fell from 75.9% in 2024 to 71.7% in 2025. During the same year, exports to the United States declined 5.8%, while exports to countries other than the U.S. increased 17.2%. Canada nevertheless recorded an $81.6-billion merchandise trade surplus with its southern neighbour in 2025.
More recent monthly figures continue to show the United States dominating Canadian exports even as other markets expand. In July 2026, Canada exported approximately $50.5 billion in merchandise to the United States out of roughly $76.1 billion in total exports. U.S.-bound exports fell 6.6% from June, while shipments to several other major partners remained meaningful. That is the economic problem facing companies trying to diversify: new markets can reduce concentration risk, but replacing the scale, proximity and deeply integrated supply chains of the U.S. market is a much larger undertaking than simply finding another customer overseas.
Ottawa Has Shifted From Negotiating to Countermeasures and Business Support
The Modus research was conducted during one of the most consequential stretches of the dispute. On August 21, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that Canada was suspending negotiations with the United States after saying last-minute changes to the proposed U.S. terms did not meet Canada’s objectives. The federal government said its goals included preserving broad tariff-free U.S. access, reducing tariffs on strategic industries, increasing stability and protecting smaller businesses. Ottawa’s explanation reflects the Canadian government’s position; Washington’s negotiating interests and characterization of the dispute have not always aligned with Ottawa’s.
The next phase quickly became more concrete. After the United States imposed a 50% tariff covering $27.6 billion of Canadian goods effective August 22, the federal government announced additional counter-tariffs of 15%, 25% and 50% on $27.6 billion of U.S. imports, effective September 8, with rates matched to corresponding American measures. Ottawa also announced $7.5 billion in new and expanded support, including regional business assistance, liquidity programs, a diversification fund and worker supports. The government said those measures build on nearly $25 billion in assistance provided earlier in the trade conflict. For businesses, Ottawa is therefore being judged not only on negotiations but also on the cost and effectiveness of its defensive economic measures.
Other Business Research Shows Support Mixed With Demands for Faster Action
The Modus findings are not the only recent indication that corporate attitudes toward Ottawa are more complicated than simple approval or disapproval. KPMG Canada surveyed 359 business owners and senior decision-makers between June 25 and July 13. It found that 51% expected federal economic measures to leave their businesses better off over the next three years, while 55% believed the government was making progress in strengthening support for Canadian businesses. The sample consisted of companies with at least $10 million in annual revenue, and 72% of respondents identified as exporters.
At the same time, the responses reflected substantial pressure and a desire for adaptation. KPMG found that 66% had already adjusted prices to account for some or all tariff costs. Sixty-nine per cent agreed Canada should negotiate firmly and use available leverage, while 65% favoured a more transactional approach to U.S. negotiations. One-third expected to expand into new markets within one to three years. Because KPMG and Modus used different samples and methodologies, their percentages should not be treated as directly comparable polling trends. Together, however, they show business leaders simultaneously seeking protection, diversification, stronger negotiating leverage and faster domestic economic reforms.
“Half Give Ottawa Good Marks” Is Best Read as a Snapshot, Not a Verdict
Timing is critical to interpreting the Modus result. Responses were gathered from August 12 through August 26, meaning the field period began while talks were active, crossed the August 21 suspension and continued for several days afterward. Modus tested responses collected before and after the breakdown and said it found no statistically significant differences in the findings it reported. That makes the overall number more useful, but it remains a measurement of business sentiment during a rapidly evolving trade conflict rather than a permanent assessment of the government.
There are other reasons to resist oversimplification. Modus separately reported in September that economic and business confidence had improved even amid tariffs. Statistics Canada, meanwhile, reported real GDP growth of 0.8% in the second quarter of 2026, with exports, household spending and business capital investment contributing to the increase. Yet the Bank of Canada continues to identify the evolution of the U.S. trade relationship as a major economic risk and expects tariff-related uncertainty to weigh on investment. Taken together, the evidence points to an unusual combination: Canadian businesses have shown resilience, just over half give Ottawa positive marks for negotiating performance, but confidence in a clearly positive resolution remains considerably weaker.
