The Trump administration brings back a 1974 law to tax Brazil and threatens Canada

A 1974 law came out of the closet. In the span of a few days, the Trump administration reopened two separate trade fronts. The first, against Brazil, results in customs duties of 25% which came into force on July 22, 2026. The second, against Canada, remains a threat for the moment, linked to the smoke from forest fires which invades American cities. Two files, two very different pretexts. A single common thread: a White House that does not shy away from any reason to bring out the tariff weapon.

Brazil, victim of formal judicial circumvention

In February 2026, the Supreme Court invalidated most of the tariffs imposed by Trump in the name of the national emergency, ruling that he had exceeded his powers. The administration could then have to repay up to $175 billion, an estimate from the Penn Wharton Budget Model relayed at the time by the Journal du Coin. Trump immediately made it known that he did not intend to reimburse anyone immediately, promising a case that could drag on in court for up to five years.

The administration has not given up, it has changed its weapon. It is Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 which now serves as the legal basis for taxing Brazil at 25%, a text which makes it possible to sanction a trade partner deemed disloyal without going through the declaration of national emergency rejected by the judges. A pure and simple circumvention, almost before the eyes of the Supreme Court itself.

Certain products escape the tax: beef, orange juice, planes and aeronautical parts, energy products. Brazilian President Lula (Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva) rejected the decision and promised countermeasures, intending to take the matter to the WTO. The fact remains that Brazil's room for maneuver in the face of the world's largest economy is, let's put it bluntly, limited.

Canada, taxed for… the smoke from its forests

Just a few days later, change of continent, change of motive. Donald Trump has accused Canada of "willful negligence" in the face of forest fires affecting the country, and is now threatening to add the cost of pollution generated by smoke to the customs tariffs already applied to Ottawa.

Forest fires, particularly active in northwestern Ontario, have caused air quality to plummet even in several large American cities in recent days. According to CNBC and The Hill, Trump claims that these costs "must necessarily be added to the customs tariffs that Canada already pays", and announced that he wanted to call Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney "to find out what they plan to do about it". A threatening tone, where simple bilateral cooperation on forest management could have sufficed.

Carney, for his part, acknowledged, in a message published on X, that the fires had “worsened considerably” in recent weeks, forcing the evacuation of thousands of people in northwestern Ontario.

A common thread: any pattern will do

What is striking, when putting the two files side by side, is not so much the rate applied as the method. For Brazil, a sophisticated legal circumvention, different text of law but identical effect to what the Supreme Court had just banned. For Canada, an unprecedented cause and effect link between a natural disaster and trade policy.

In either case, pricing is no longer a tool reserved for real commercial disputes. It becomes a reflex, applied to almost any pretext available at the moment. Other partners deemed “disloyal”, for reasons sometimes just as far removed from trade strictly speaking, could be next on the list.

How far will the escalation go?