What a Potential Trump Return Means for the USMCA Trade Deal

The specter of a second Donald Trump presidency is casting a long shadow over North American trade. As the United States, Canada, and Mexico prepare for the first formal review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2026, officials and industry leaders are grappling with a pressing question: how would a Trump administration approach the landmark pact he once championed as a replacement for NAFTA?

Recent high-level hearings in Washington have laid bare the simmering tensions and potential flashpoints that could define the future of continental commerce. The outcome of the 2024 U.S. election is no longer a distant political event; it is a critical variable in a multi-billion-dollar economic equation.

The USMCA: A Deal Forged in Trump’s Image

To understand what might come next, it’s essential to recall the origins of the USMCA. The agreement was a cornerstone of Trump’s first-term “America First” agenda, negotiated aggressively to replace what he frequently derided as “the worst trade deal ever made,” the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The USMCA introduced several key changes:

While the deal provided stability, it was always viewed by the Trump team as a starting point, not a permanent fixture. The upcoming review period is not a simple check-up; it is a potential renegotiation trigger.

Flashpoints on the Horizon: Where Could Trump Push for Change?

Based on rhetoric from Trump, his advisors, and testimony from recent U.S. hearings, several areas are in the crosshairs.

1. The Auto Industry and National Security Tariffs

This remains the most volatile issue. Trump has floated the idea of imposing a universal 10% tariff on all imports, including those from Canada and Mexico. More specifically, he has discussed slapping tariffs on automobiles entering the U.S., potentially up to 25%. Such a move, even on non-USMCA countries, would disrupt deeply integrated supply chains, raising costs for manufacturers in all three nations and violating the spirit, if not the letter, of the trade deal.

2. The “America First” Energy Agenda

Energy is another critical sector. A Trump administration would likely prioritize U.S. fossil fuel dominance and could challenge policies seen as disadvantageous. This might include:

3. Agricultural Market Access and Dispute Settlement

While the USMCA preserved key agricultural access, trade irritants persist. The U.S. has ongoing disputes with Canada over dairy tariff-rate quotas and with Mexico over biotechnology (GMO) corn. A Trump administration would likely pursue these disputes with even more vigor. Furthermore, there is concern about the potential weakening of the dispute settlement mechanism (Chapter 31), a key element for Canada and Mexico to challenge U.S. trade actions, which some Trump allies view as an infringement on U.S. sovereignty.

4. The Digital Trade and Data Wildcard

The USMCA included modern digital trade chapters. However, the political landscape around big tech and data has shifted. A future administration could seek to revisit rules on data localization, digital services, or the liability protections for online platforms, creating new uncertainties for the tech sector across North America.

The Canadian and Mexican Calculus: Preparing for Uncertainty

For Canada and Mexico, the strategy is one of preparation and alliance. Officials are:

The goal is not to provoke but to be ready to defend the agreement’s integrity while identifying limited, pragmatic areas for modernization that could serve as a pressure release.

The 2026 Review: A Political Lightning Rod

The scheduled 2026 review now looms as a major geopolitical event. Under a second Trump term, this would not be a technical exercise. It would be a high-stakes political negotiation where the threat of withdrawal—a tactic used effectively in the first round—would be back on the table. The sunset clause, often overlooked, becomes a powerful tool to extract concessions.

Even if the agreement isn’t torn up, the constant threat of tariffs or aggressive dispute actions could create a chilling effect on investment and planning, undermining the certainty the USMCA was meant to provide.

Conclusion: Stability at a Premium

The USMCA brought a tense but necessary stability to North American trade after the turbulence of the NAFTA renegotiation. A potential Trump return threatens to reintroduce that turbulence as a permanent state of affairs. The deal itself contains the tools—the sunset clause, the dispute panels, the review process—that could be used to unravel it.

For businesses and policymakers across the continent, the message is clear: the assumption of stable trade rules is gone. Scenario planning for protectionist measures, supply chain re-evaluation, and diplomatic bridge-building are no longer theoretical exercises. The future of North American trade may well be decided not in 2026, but at the ballot box in November 2024. The continent is bracing for impact, knowing that the rules of the game could be rewritten once again.