With another major U.S. tariff deadline approaching, Canadians appear deeply worried about the economic consequences—but remarkably reluctant to reward Washington’s pressure campaign with concessions. New Abacus Data polling finds only 18% favour giving the United States what it wants on issues such as American alcohol and dairy restrictions if doing so would remove the threatened tariffs.
That resistance comes despite widespread expectations of economic damage. Seven in ten expect the new tariffs to hurt their local economy, while nearly three-quarters say the broader Canada-U.S. trade dispute has already affected their household finances. The numbers leave Ottawa with a difficult mandate: Canadians want the damage contained, but there is little enthusiasm for a deal that looks like Canada simply backed down.
The 18% Number Shows How Little Room Ottawa Has to Concede
Abacus Data asked 1,499 Canadians how the country should respond if the United States proceeds with new 50% tariffs on roughly $20 billion worth of Canadian exports. Only 18% chose the option of offering concessions, including ending restrictions on American alcohol and easing dairy restrictions, if those moves persuaded Washington to remove the tariffs. Another 15% were unsure. That leaves a substantial majority preferring either retaliation or negotiations that do not involve new concessions.
The result is particularly notable because respondents were presented with a potential benefit from compromising: getting the tariffs removed. In other words, the 18% figure does not reflect opposition to concessions in the abstract. Canadians were explicitly asked to weigh concessions against possible tariff relief. Abacus conducted the polling from August 7 through August 12 and weighted the results to match Canadian census demographics. The margin of error for a comparable probability-based sample of the same size would be plus or minus 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Canadians Are Split Between Fighting Back and Continuing to Talk
Rejecting concessions does not mean Canadians have reached a consensus on retaliation. Thirty-six percent favour responding with new counter-tariffs on American products even if doing so increases prices and creates a risk of further escalation. Another 30% would rather Ottawa continue negotiating without introducing additional counter-tariffs, even if the American duties remain in place temporarily. The result is essentially a three-way debate in which concessions are clearly the least popular of the major choices.
Another recent national poll points in the same direction, although its questions were structured differently. Angus Reid Institute found in late July that 62% wanted some form of Canadian counter-tariff, including 34% who favoured matching the United States dollar for dollar. Nineteen percent preferred negotiations without counter-tariffs, while only 7% favoured concessions. Different wording, timing and response options make direct comparisons inappropriate, but both sets of findings show that simply giving Washington what it wants has limited appeal with the Canadian public.
Quebec Is Especially Resistant to Making Concessions
The national result masks significant regional differences. In Quebec, only 12% favour concessions, while the number falls to just 10% among francophone Quebecers. Saskatchewan and Manitoba are similarly resistant at 10%. British Columbia sits at 15%, Atlantic Canada at 17%, Ontario at 22% and Alberta at 23%. Even in Alberta—the region most receptive to compromising among those separately identified by Abacus—fewer than one-quarter select concessions as their preferred strategy.
Regional attitudes toward retaliation also differ. Forty-six percent in Saskatchewan and Manitoba favour new counter-tariffs, the highest result in the country, followed by Quebec at 39%. Ontario and British Columbia each stand at 36%, Alberta at 31% and Atlantic Canada at 30%. Those numbers matter politically because some of the issues being discussed with Washington fall partly or entirely within provincial jurisdiction. American alcohol, for example, was removed from government-controlled liquor systems in several provinces after the trade conflict escalated, making any federal promise to restore those products more complicated than a simple negotiating concession from Ottawa.
Even Conservative Voters Mostly Reject the Concession Option
Political affiliation produces one of the clearest differences in the numbers, but concessions remain a minority position across every major party group measured. Among people who reported voting Conservative in the 2025 federal election, 26% favour concessions—the highest level among the major parties. The figure falls to 16% among Liberal voters, 14% among NDP voters and only 6% among Bloc Québécois supporters.
The pattern reverses when Canadians are asked about counter-tariffs. Forty-eight percent of Bloc voters support retaliation, followed by 43% of NDP voters and 39% of Liberal voters. Conservative voters are less enthusiastic at 29%, with 30% instead preferring continued negotiations without additional tariffs. That distinction is important. Conservative supporters are comparatively more willing to compromise, but even among them roughly three-quarters do not choose concessions. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has meanwhile publicly urged the Carney government to make “no more concessions,” particularly while major Canadian exports such as softwood lumber continue to face steep U.S. duties.
Older Canadians Are More Willing to Risk a Tougher Response
Age creates another revealing divide. Canadians between 30 and 44 are the most open to concessions, with 24% choosing that approach. The number is 19% among people aged 18 to 29, 14% among those aged 45 to 59 and 16% among Canadians aged 60 and older. Support for counter-tariffs moves largely in the opposite direction, rising to 41% among Canadians 60 and older compared with just 29% among those aged 30 to 44.
Older Canadians are also following the dispute more closely. Abacus found 97% of people aged 60 and over had heard at least something about the latest tariff threat, including 38% who had heard a lot. Awareness was 81% among respondents aged 18 to 29, with 17% saying they had heard a lot. That difference may help explain why attitudes toward the dispute vary by generation, although the polling does not establish causation. What is clear is that the Canadians most closely following the confrontation are also among those least inclined to choose concessions as Ottawa’s preferred response.
Canadians Expect Economic Pain but Still Do Not Want Ottawa to Fold
The resistance to concessions becomes more striking when placed beside expectations for the economy. Seventy percent of Canadians believe the planned tariffs would negatively affect the economy in their own area. Twenty-nine percent anticipate a “very negative” effect and another 41% expect a somewhat negative impact. Only 9% foresee a positive effect, while 10% expect no meaningful impact.
Concern rises sharply with age. Fifty-eight percent of Canadians between 18 and 29 expect a negative local impact, compared with 61% among those aged 30 to 44, 74% among those aged 45 to 59 and 79% among people 60 and older. Regionally, negative expectations reach 75% in Quebec and 74% in both British Columbia and Alberta. The combination creates an unusual negotiating challenge for Ottawa: voters clearly understand that refusing a deal could carry economic consequences, yet only 18% still choose concessions. Economic anxiety, at least in these results, does not automatically translate into public support for backing down.
For Many Households, the Trade War No Longer Feels Theoretical
Tariff fights can sound distant until they begin appearing in household budgets, workplaces and investment decisions. Abacus found 74% of Canadians believe the broader trade dispute with the United States over the previous year and a half has already affected their household finances. Thirty percent describe the effect as major and another 44% call it minor. Only 16% report no real financial impact.
Attention to the latest escalation is correspondingly high. Ninety-one percent have heard at least a little about the threatened tariffs, including 31% who have heard a lot and 42% who have heard some. Canadians remain uncertain, however, about whether Trump will actually follow through. Thirty-eight percent believe the tariffs are definitely or likely to take effect, while the largest group—40%—puts the chances at roughly 50-50. Just 10% consider them unlikely or certain not to happen. That uncertainty leaves businesses and families preparing for an economic shock that many Canadians still believe could be avoided through negotiations.
Alcohol and Dairy Have Become Symbols of a Much Bigger Fight
Two of Washington’s most visible complaints involve Canadian restrictions on American alcohol and the country’s dairy system. Several provinces removed U.S. alcohol products after the trade conflict intensified in 2025. Ontario’s LCBO, for example, stopped selling U.S. products online and in stores. A separate Abacus study conducted in British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Atlantic Canada in late July found 69% wanted those provincial restrictions maintained, compared with 19% who wanted American alcohol returned.
Dairy is even more politically sensitive. Canada manages imports of supply-managed products through tariff-rate quotas, allowing specified quantities to enter at lower tariff rates while applying higher rates beyond those quantities. Washington has repeatedly challenged Canada’s administration of dairy quotas under CUSMA. A second dispute-settlement panel, whose findings were released in 2023, ruled in Canada’s favour on all of the U.S. claims involved, leaving Canada without an obligation to change the challenged CUSMA allocation measures. Conceding on dairy therefore carries significance far beyond the price of milk or cheese: it touches a longstanding Canadian agricultural policy that governments have repeatedly pledged to defend.
The Bigger Warning May Be What Canadians Now Think About CUSMA
Perhaps the most consequential finding extends beyond the August 19 deadline. Fifty-five percent of Canadians told Abacus that Canada should prepare to move on from CUSMA and develop trade relationships with other countries instead. Only 34% want Ottawa to continue focusing on preserving and updating the North American agreement, while 11% remain unsure. British Columbia is the most willing to look elsewhere at 63%, while Alberta is the least at 49%.
That shift arrives at a pivotal moment. The United States declined to extend CUSMA for another 16 years during the agreement’s July 1 review, although CUSMA remains in force and the review process continues. Trump’s latest Section 338 tariffs are scheduled to impose 50% duties on nearly $20 billion of Canadian goods and, unlike many earlier measures, can apply even to covered goods that qualify for preferential treatment under CUSMA. With Canadian and American negotiators still working toward an agreement, Ottawa faces a narrow path: obtain meaningful tariff relief without producing a deal that most Canadians perceive as surrendering leverage simply to end the immediate threat.
