Trade tensions between Canada and the United States are increasingly becoming a political liability for American lawmakers, particularly in states whose economies depend on cross-border commerce. Following the surprising defeat of longtime Maine Senator Susan Collins, a prominent New England business leader is pointing to President Donald Trump’s tariffs as a significant factor in the election.
John Gulliver, president of the New England-Canada Business Council, argues that the economic consequences of the trade war are reaching far beyond corporate boardrooms. With businesses facing higher costs and uncertainty, he is urging both governments to use established dispute resolution mechanisms under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). His warning highlights growing frustration with trade policies that have disrupted longstanding economic relationships and complicated efforts to restore stability.
Maine’s Senate Upset Sends a Warning About Trump’s Trade Policies
Democrat Troy Jackson defeated five-term Republican Senator Susan Collins in Maine’s November 3, 2026, election, ending her nearly three decades in Washington. Jackson, a former Maine Senate president and fifth-generation logger, won approximately 53% of the vote. His victory was particularly significant because Collins had previously survived difficult elections in a state that regularly supported Democratic presidential candidates. Her defeat contributed to the Democrats’ successful effort to reclaim control of the U.S. Senate.
For John Gulliver, the result demonstrates how opposition to Trump’s trade policies has become politically consequential. Speaking with iPolitics on November 11, he argued that tariffs played a major role in the midterm elections, particularly across northern states with extensive Canadian connections. However, the outcome cannot be attributed exclusively to trade. Affordability concerns, dissatisfaction with Trump’s administration, and disagreements over other national policies also shaped the campaign. The result nevertheless reinforced a growing warning that economic disruption can carry electoral consequences.
Business Council President Calls for an End to the Trade War
John Gulliver leads the New England-Canada Business Council, an organization dedicated to strengthening commercial relationships between Canada and the northeastern United States. His November 11 comments reflected concerns the council had already expressed publicly. In August 2026, the organization warned that unpredictable tariffs and retaliatory measures were damaging businesses, workers, and communities on both sides of the border, while making investment and employment decisions increasingly difficult.
Gulliver’s proposed solution emphasizes established trade rules rather than escalating political confrontation. He believes longstanding disagreements involving Canadian dairy policies, softwood lumber, and market access should be addressed through expert-led dispute resolution procedures. His argument recognizes that disagreements are inevitable in a relationship involving enormous volumes of trade. The challenge is preventing individual disputes from becoming prolonged economic conflicts. For companies managing cross-border production, reliable regulations can determine whether they expand operations, hire additional workers, or postpone major investments.
Road Salt Becomes a Defining Issue in the Senate Campaign
Trade policy was not an abstract issue during the Senate campaign. At an October debate, Collins highlighted her efforts to secure exemptions for road salt, cement, and other imports from Canada. The exemptions mattered to local budgets: Collins said the small border town of Frenchville faced an additional $10,000 in road-salt costs before relief was announced. Municipalities rely on salt to maintain safe roads through harsh Maine winters, making even relatively modest added expenses significant.
Jackson acknowledged that tariff relief helped but argued it did little to address the wider affordability crisis. His response, “We can’t eat road salt,” became shorthand for that disagreement. Collins presented herself as an experienced negotiator capable of obtaining practical concessions; Jackson questioned why so many other tariffs remained. Their exchange illustrates Gulliver’s broader concern: isolated exemptions may help individual businesses, but they cannot replace predictable trade rules for an entire regional economy.
Maine’s Economic Dependence on Canada Raises the Stakes
Maine’s trade relationship with Canada extends well beyond occasional imports. According to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Canada purchased approximately US$1.3 billion in Maine goods in 2025, accounting for 41% of the state’s merchandise exports. Those shipments supported businesses in manufacturing, seafood, paper, and other industries. Separately, Collins estimated that Maine imports about US$2 billion in non-petroleum products from Canada annually, demonstrating how deeply Canadian supplies are woven into everyday commerce across the region.
The Maine International Trade Center describes Canada as the state’s largest trade and investment partner. It also notes that cross-border economic activity includes services, tourism, and investment that merchandise figures alone do not capture. For a company moving raw materials across the border before selling finished products, a new duty can affect more than a single invoice. It can disrupt purchasing decisions, production schedules, and customer relationships that took years to establish.
Forestry Industry Faces Serious Consequences From Tariff Uncertainty
Forestry provides a particularly clear example of the stakes. A state-supported economic study estimated that Maine’s forest products industry contributed US$8.3 billion in total economic output and supported more than 29,000 jobs in 2024. Its activities stretch from logging and sawmills to pulp production and paper manufacturing, with major economic effects in rural communities in the state where alternative employers may be limited.
In an August 2026 warning to federal officials, Collins estimated that roughly US$170 million in Maine goods would be exposed to proposed Canadian retaliatory tariffs, with about 62% linked to forest products. She also reported concerns from two paper mills about rising expenses and potential employment consequences. Those numbers described exposure to announced measures, not a verified total of realized losses. That distinction matters: tariff threats can influence business confidence even when exemptions, negotiations, or policy revisions prevent some of the projected costs from materializing.
Canadian Tourism Shows How Trade Tensions Reach Local Businesses
Commercial trade is only part of the relationship. Canadian families also support hotels, restaurants, campgrounds, and shops across Maine, in communities accustomed to visitors from Quebec and Atlantic Canada. U.S. border data showed a sharp decline in Canadian arrivals during 2025, while the Maine Office of Tourism reported a smaller Canadian share of the state’s visitor market. Those changes created anxiety for hospitality businesses that depend on repeat cross-border customers.
The 2026 picture is more complicated than a continuing collapse. In July, 306,000 travelers entered Maine from Canada, an 11% increase from July 2025 but still well below the nearly 383,000 recorded in July 2024. Tourism officials described the recovery as encouraging but uncertain. The figures do not prove tariffs alone drove travel decisions; exchange rates and political sentiment also matter. They do show why damaged relations can have consequences for small businesses far from customs offices.
How CUSMA’s Dispute Resolution System Could Reduce Trade Tensions
CUSMA, called USMCA in the United States, offers a structured alternative to escalating public threats. Under Chapter 31, one government can request formal consultations when it believes another has violated the agreement. If the disagreement remains unresolved after the prescribed period, generally 75 days, it can seek an independent panel. Panelists examine the evidence and decide whether the contested measures comply with the trade commitments the countries accepted.
The process also provides a route beyond a ruling. Once a panel issues an adverse final report, governments are expected to work toward a resolution, which may involve changing a measure or agreeing on compensation. If no agreement is reached within 45 days, the complaining country may suspend trade benefits of equivalent effect, subject to treaty rules. None of this guarantees an immediate breakthrough. But it replaces open-ended retaliation with procedures, evidence, and consequences that businesses can better understand and plan around.
Dairy and Softwood Lumber Disputes Demonstrate the System’s Value
Dairy demonstrates CUSMA’s dispute procedures in action. In a case decided in December 2021, a panel backed a U.S. challenge to Canada’s practice of reserving portions of dairy import quotas for domestic processors. Ottawa revised its allocation rules. A second challenge produced a contrary result in November 2023, when a panel upheld Canada’s revised approach against U.S. objections. The rulings show that either side can prevail depending on treaty rules and disputed measures.
Softwood lumber follows a related but distinct process. Chapter 10 provides binational review of antidumping and countervailing duty determinations. In October 2026, a panel reviewing a U.S. countervailing duty determination involving Canadian softwood lumber upheld parts of the decision and sent other issues back for reconsideration. These proceedings do not erase every tariff or eliminate political disagreements. They demonstrate how technical disputes can be tested through defined legal channels rather than settled solely through pressure.
CUSMA’s Uncertain Future Adds Pressure to the Trade Relationship
Gulliver’s appeal arrives during a delicate period for the North American trade agreement itself. At the mandatory July 1, 2026, joint review, the Trump administration declined to extend CUSMA in its existing form. That decision did not cancel the pact. The agreement remains in force under its original term, which runs to July 2036 unless the parties extend it or a country withdraws earlier under the agreement’s separate provisions. Eligible goods retain their existing preferential market access.
Instead, Canada, the United States, and Mexico must now conduct annual reviews until all three agree to extend the arrangement or the current term expires. The treaty also allows a government to withdraw with six months’ written notice. For firms considering a factory, mill upgrade, or long-term supply contract, the distinction is crucial. Existing CUSMA rules still operate, but uncertainty about their future can complicate investments whose payback periods stretch across many years.
Democratic Victories Increase Pressure but Offer No Immediate Tariff Relief
Maine’s election result changes the political atmosphere, but it does not automatically remove tariffs. Democrats’ victories have given them control of both chambers of Congress beginning in January 2027, creating opportunities for oversight hearings and legislation challenging Trump’s trade measures. Yet the president retains veto power, and overriding a veto requires two-thirds support in both the House and Senate. Trade experts therefore caution against expecting an immediate reversal.
Ottawa has expressed caution. Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc said after the election that Canada’s negotiating approach would not change, while Prime Minister Mark Carney has stressed that the Trump administration remains Canada’s central counterpart in trade talks. For Gulliver, the practical objective is a return to predictable rules and negotiated solutions. Whether Washington responds will depend on political choices that extend beyond one Senate race. The businesses caught between the two countries cannot simply vote their way out of uncertainty.
