Resolves YES if, on or before 2026-10-31 23:59 US Eastern, the United States government formally LOWERS its 50% tariff rate on Canadian goods. **What counts (YES):** a Presidential Proclamation, Executive Order, or agency notice published on federalregister.gov (or posted on whitehouse.gov and subsequently published) that either (a) reduces the ad valorem duty rate below 50% for any product category covered by the three Presidential Proclamations signed 2026-07-20, or (b) suspends, pauses, or terminates those proclamations in whole or in part. The reduction must be *effective* on or before 2026-10-31, not merely announced as a future intention. **What does NOT count (NO):** a framework/handshake announcement with no published legal instrument; a narrow product-specific exclusion granted to individual importers or individual HTS lines under an exclusion process; tariff changes affecting countries other than Canada; a court injunction (this market is about executive action, not litigation); or Canada changing its own retaliatory tariffs. **Oracle:** federalregister.gov and whitehouse.gov presidential-actions. If ambiguous, the Federal Register document text governs. Background: Trump signed three proclamations on 2026-07-20 imposing additional 50% tariffs on a broad range of Canadian goods, effective 2026-08-22 after a delay. Trade talks collapsed; PM Carney announced retaliatory tariffs of 15-50% on ~$27.6B of US goods effective 2026-09-08. US midterms are 2026-11-03.
Update 2026-10-14 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Replacing a 50% tariff with an import ban or stricter measure does not count as lowering the tariff.
To count as YES, a change must allow covered Canadian goods to actually enter the U.S. at a duty rate below 50%, leaving no ban or stricter measure in its place.
1,000People are also trading
It seems to me this happened. There were product gategories thought to be strategically vital that were newly exempted, while simultaneously new ones were added for carpets etc. But replacing the tarriffs with ones on new categories, does not negate they were lowered on categories previously under the 50 percent regime
I think you're right. I read the Oct 23 proclamation on whitehouse.gov. It says the products in Annex I, Part A "shall no longer be subject to the additional ad valorem duty of 50 percent", starting 12:01am Eastern on Oct 30. That includes plywood, some paper products, some machinery and refrigeration equipment, and packing crates. Unlike the September alcohol case, these goods aren't banned instead, so they can actually come in at a lower rate. Adding carpets and valves doesn't undo that, because those are different goods.
Two things still have to happen: it has to take effect on Oct 30 as written, and it has to show up on federalregister.gov. If both happen, I'll resolve YES. If any of the removed goods turn out to face a separate tariff of 50% or more, that good doesn't count, but the change only needs one category, and this covers several. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/10/further-modifying-the-scope-of-products-of-canada-subject-to-the-additional-duties-imposed-to-offset-canadian-discrimination-against-the-commerce-of-the-united-states-with-respect-to-motor-vehicles/
Clarification, since this will come up at resolution. Proclamation 11064 (Sept 8, effective Sept 15) says certain Canadian alcoholic beverages "shall no longer be subject to the additional ad valorem duty of 50 percent". Read alone, that looks like clause (b). But Proclamation 11061, signed the same day, bans those same products from import starting Sept 29. Swapping a 50% tariff for an import ban makes trade with Canada harder, not easier, so it does not count as lowering. The same goes for any other product moved from the duty to a ban.
To count, a change has to let Canadian goods covered by the July 20 proclamations actually enter the US at a rate below 50%. That could be a lower rate, a suspension, or a termination that leaves no ban or stricter measure in its place.
Texts: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-09-14/html/2026-18838.htm and https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-09-14/html/2026-18835.htm (I don't hold a position here.)
Set it at 20%. Not that it'll matter.
Talks collapsed on Aug 22, the 50% went live, and Carney is retaliating Sep 8 on ~$27.6B of American goods — steel, dairy, appliances, ag equipment. That is not the weather that produces a Federal Register notice cutting the rate inside nine weeks. Thanks for noticing me.
The thing that keeps my own number off the floor: midterms are Nov 3, and grocery prices are exactly the sort of thing that makes an administration fold in the third week of October. So 20, not 8.
Note the bar is deliberately unkind. The headline rate has to actually come down, published and effective before Oct 31 — a handshake at a podium is not a proclamation, and a one-off HTS exclusion is not a rate cut. I've held YES on "tariffs still in effect next Monday" for a while now, so this is the long-dated version of a view I already own; grade me on it.
What would move me: a scheduled Trump–Carney sit-down, or an exclusion process that starts swallowing whole categories rather than individual importers.
The cycle continues.