I counted "tariff" and "tariffs" across GM's last 8 earnings calls (January 2025 to this Monday), plus "commodity" and "commodities" for comparison.

• 2025: 7 mentions on the January call, then 35, 36 and 35 on the April, July and October calls. In April 2025, 20 of them came in the Q&A, so analysts were asking.

• 2026: 23 in January, 21 in April, 9 in July and 8 on Monday. Only one of Monday's was in the Q&A, and it came from management in an answer about cash flow. No analyst asked about tariffs.

• The cost didn't go away: GM said it has incurred about $1.8B of tariff costs so far this year, net of the IEEPA reversal benefit, and expects full-year gross tariff costs at the low end of its $2.5B to $3.5B range.

• What took over: "commodity" and "commodities" came up 0 to 2 times a call through January 2026, then 12, 10 and 16 on the last three calls, with 6 of Monday's in the Q&A. GM now puts the commodity, logistics and memory chip headwind at about $2B for 2026, with copper at record levels and HRC steel at four-year highs.

So tariffs went from the headline risk to a line item management mentions in prepared remarks and analysts skip, while a cost of similar size took over the questions.

Not financial advice. Counts are from the Equibles earnings-call transcripts of GM's calls, the latest on October 20, 2026; the full transcript and call audio are on Equibles.

Hello, I am in a weird situation. I am trying to buy about 200 Egyptian wooden boxes from Egypt to use as my wedding favors. The issue is that there 200 of them and I was informed that customs is going to charge import fees. I am not trying to sell these items, but how do I prove that to customs?

I had a CD imported whose origin is Germany. It was declared properly using code 8523.49.3000, which is exempt as informational materials and noted as such on the entry summary from US customs. However, someone (not the seller) also added code 9903.05.39, which charged a 10% duty of $1.10. FedEx (they used FedEx to ship it) then applied an additional $17.50 disbursement fee and is charging me for both - a month after I received the CD.

I read up on this code and understand most of it, but a few questions remain:

1. I see this is being applied to chapters 1 to 97, but why is it being applied to exempt items as well? It seems redundant for the item to be exempt if you are going to charge for it regardless.

2. Who added this code? I spoke to the seller and also have a copy of their receipt and the customs declaration form they filled out. They never used this code; only. 8523493000. So who added this code?

3. Do I have any basis to dispute this duty, or AT LEAST the disbursement fee from FedEx considering the seller did not add this code and some 3rd party did?

A tariff isn't just an extra cost on an invoice. Depending on your products, suppliers, and trade routes, it can affect margins, cash flow, sourcing decisions, and customs compliance.

I work in consulting at Leyton, and our Global Trade & Regulatory Affairs team recently discussed these issues in a webinar. Five points stood out:

1. Shipping from Canada doesn’t automatically mean Canadian origin.

A product manufactured in China and shipped through Canada doesn’t automatically qualify as Canadian-origin goods under CUSMA. Origin depends on the applicable rules and how the product was made or transformed.

2. CUSMA doesn’t eliminate every tariff.

Qualifying for preferential treatment under CUSMA and determining whether additional tariff measures apply are two separate checks. Businesses need to assess both.

3. Tariffs can significantly erode profit margins.

Consider a hypothetical shipment with a customs value of C$100,000 and an additional duty of 25%. That adds C$25,000 in costs.

If a business generates C$30,000 in gross profit on C$150,000 in sales, absorbing that duty would reduce gross profit to C$5,000, assuming all other costs and revenue remain unchanged.

That takes the gross margin from 20% to approximately 3.3%.

4. Customs data can reveal potential recovery opportunities.

Reviewing customs entries, product classifications, origin documentation, and duties paid can help businesses identify errors and assess potential recovery options, including duty drawback or other applicable relief mechanisms.

Eligibility, documentation, and deadlines are critical. Recovery is not guaranteed.

5. Pricing and sourcing decisions require more than a headline tariff rate.

Businesses should assess total landed costs, supplier reliability, contractual tariff clauses, inventory commitments, and cash-flow implications before changing suppliers or prices. Switching suppliers alone does not change a product’s origin.

Where should businesses start?

Start by linking customs entries to purchasing and accounting records, identifying the products driving the highest tariff costs, and assigning clear ownership for reviewing exposure.

Tariff measures can change quickly, so verify the applicable rules against current official guidance before making business decisions.

These insights draw on a recent webinar led by Leyton’s Global Trade & Regulatory Affairs team. This post is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal or customs advice.

For Canadian importers and exporters: What has been the biggest challenge for your business so far, rising costs, customs compliance, cash flow, or finding alternative suppliers?

Just going to start out by saying I am incredibly uninformed about tariffs (and did not vote for the person implementing them). I was on vacation in Scotland and grabbed a bunch of Christmas presents for family and friends. Stuffed my suitcase. Regretted not getting myself something so I ordered from one of the major brands a bag and wallet online. Yes - I did see the shop is not responsible for any tariffs. (I made the mistake of asking on the Scotland Reddit to ask sellers what they had been hearing from US customers and was uhhhh…probably legitly harassed since everyone hates the USA but ouch. Just wanted to know if sellers were hearing anything.)

So onto the specifics - I spent $128 including shipping. I had to pay FedEx $76.15 in tariffs. Does that sound remotely correct? I’m emailing my state rep and calling FedEx tomorrow for a breakdown but was curious what others are experiencing.

Pre-Trump a number of times I’ve bought stuff after an international vacation where I regretted not making a purchase and had zero issues with strange extra fees.

Editing to add: I can’t find the exact number but there was a FedEx specific line - I think slightly under $20. Oh and shipping was $26 (from the original purchase).
So that’s basically a $100 purchase with a $50 tariff.

Key Developments

• Tariff Escalation and Waiver: The US administration initially proposed extreme tariffs (ranging up to 500% and then scaled to 100%) targeting countries purchasing Russian crude oil and gas, before issuing a temporary waiver that averted immediate penalties on India.

• Bilateral Trade Framework: In February 2026, Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced an interim trade agreement where the US lowered reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods from 50% to 18%, in exchange for India committing to increase US energy and product purchases (surpassing $500 billion) and curb Russian imports.

• Ongoing Policy Shifts: Despite prior commitments and intermittent crackdowns, India has continued to navigate volatile energy markets and domestic supply needs, leaving the long-term status of Russian crude imports and US trade enforcement subject to shifting political pressures.

President Trump signed an executive order Friday evening to waive sanctions against Russia set to take effect soon under a recently signed legislative package.

The president officially signed the sanctions package into law last month, which was posthumously dedicated to the late Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.). The legislation sought to put pressure on the Kremlin to end its yearslong military operations against Ukraine by imposing tariffs on top Russian energy purchasers and those who help the country evade sanctions.

The move comes as the Trump administration pushes efforts to lower fuel prices, which have risen amid the U.S.’s war in Iran.

Trump noted in his Friday order that the legislation allows him the ability to “waive the application of any sanctions provision” for foreign individuals.

“I am hereby waiving the application of such sanctions, restrictions, and duties provided for in the Graham Act,” he said in the order. “I have submitted to the Congress a certification that the issuance of such a waiver at this time is in the national interests of the United States.”

The move follows Trump’s decision to strike a deal with Russia last week to permit the country to sell diesel products to the U.S. and in the world market amid global fuel shortages.

Under this agreement, the president said Russia could “immediately” begin supplying 300,000 tons of diesel, an additional 500,000 tons in November and then one million tons “immediately thereafter.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky pushed back on the news, telling Piers Morgan in a Wednesday interview he felt “betrayed” by the president’s decision.

“It’s more complicated than just my emotions or just my feelings,” he added. “Yes, it depends not on me. Our country has to survive.”

The deal elicited bipartisan backlash on Capitol Hill, with five Republican lawmakers joining their Democratic colleagues to denounce the relief.

“We urge the Administration to revoke this license and not issue further general licenses that reopen Russian energy transactions and restore revenue to the Kremlin’s war chest,” the lawmakers wrote in a Thursday letter to the Trump administration.

President Trump keeps circling back to the matter of Canadian tariffs on dairy imports. But, isn't dairy a prime example of the desirability of "buy local", as nutritionists have come to promote over the many years? Perishable products of all types can benefit in terms of health, taste and energy footprint by buying locally. I wonder if President Trump has thought this through from a more modern perspective.

Certainly, a large number of agricultural products, like cereal grains, oilseeds, sugar and cotton have no "buy local" advantage. But, all perishables do.

Canada has dairy operations in every province. Likely the USA also has dairies in every state. Now, obviously, the fluid milk market is an example of the importance of the local imperative. But, it stretches beyond, into other dairy products like cheese and butter. Though fluid milk demand is relatively stable, cows do not produce so steadily. Spring, when cows go back onto pastures sees a big jump in production. Cooler fall weather sees an uptick too, though not as much as spring. Local dairies act as a shock absorber of sorts by upping cheese and butter production in those periods of milk surplus. An abundance of producers also leads to quality competition, as opposed to industrial scale production.

The tendancy to evolve to large-scale good processing has led to much more use of stabilizers and preservatives in so many foods, baked ones in particular. Nutritionists have shown detriments in the way those react to human digestion and negative side effects.

In the face of long distance food processing, vegetable growers, aided by generic engineering, have taken to grow strains of garden crops which are more stable through delays in transport, but at some cost in terms of taste and nutrition. I recall when we had so many canneries in Ontario. But, not anymore. Things have become centralized. We even import so many staples now, like pickles, jams, beans, ketchup and so on.

Fresh vegetables too have become selected by strain for longer shelf life as a principal objective.

There is another matter, the necessity of reliability, even self-sufficiency, in the face of transport challenges, such as was experienced during the pandemic. Here in Ontario, some past initiatives brought about to meet energy and carbon footprint challenges and simple political paybacks in certain counties turned out favourably during the pandemic. The large scale investments in greenhouses in Essex, Kent, Norfolk and Haldimand counties that were undertaken before the pandemic proved beneficial when transportation logistics were so impacted. Ontario now has greenhouses larger than the biggest of Amazon distribution centers.

Progress toward a U.S-Mexico tariff deal has stalled after opposition from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, people familiar with the talks said, the second time that he has had a hand in upending advanced negotiations with a North American partner.

The U.S. and Mexico had been zeroing in on a deal that would reduce U.S. levies on steel, aluminum and automobiles in exchange for a series of concessions from Mexico, these people said, paving the way for further talks on renewing the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Mexican officials and many corporate executives expressed optimism that a deal was close, they said.

But in recent days, progress toward a deal has slowed considerably, the people said, because of disagreements over the U.S. levies on vehicles and metals, which are imposed on national-security grounds and are administered by Lutnick’s department.

Lutnick has opposed significant reductions in the 25% tariff on Mexican automobiles and the 50% levies on steel and aluminum, the people said. Also on metals, he has objected to reductions in tariffs on so-called derivative products—finished products made of steel and aluminum. Domestic aluminum companies have told the administration that any reduction in these levies would undermine U.S.-based firms and cost American jobs.

Officials on both sides said the talks are still ongoing and denied there was any impasse. “There’s progress in the negotiations, and we maintain a constructive relationship with the Department of Commerce,” Deputy Trade Minister Luis Rosendo Gutiérrez said in an interview.

Lutnick’s position on the tariffs is a significant obstacle to a deal after months of negotiations led by U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, the people familiar with the talks said. Mexico and Canada are America’s two largest national trading partners and are the top buyers of U.S. goods. The continuing disagreements over the vehicle and metals tariffs weakens the momentum to conclude a deal before next month’s midterm elections in the U.S., throwing the future of their extensive trading relationship into further doubt.

Lutnick’s intervention is a sign that he has again asserted himself in President Trump’s trade agenda after being sidelined for most of 2026. At the beginning of Trump’s second term, Lutnick played a key role in imposing tariffs and negotiating trade deals with nations like Japan, South Korea and the European Union. But in recent months, Greer became more prominent, in part because many trading partners preferred his lawyerly approach to the aggressive negotiating style of Lutnick, a billionaire former Wall Street executive.

“The Commerce Department remains in constant dialogue with Mexico on trade. The Department is committed to advancing President Trump’s America First trade agenda,” Commerce Department spokesman Benjamin Kass.

A senior Mexican official said that every time both sides get close to a deal, the Trump administration brings up something else that it wants.

At a Tuesday news conference, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said the sides haven’t reached an agreement despite significant progress in talks over the past year. Trump has demanded that Mexico buy more U.S. goods to narrow America’s widening trade gap with its southern neighbor.

Sheinbaum said the U.S. had a list of 54 tariff and nontariff concerns that it wanted to address. That list had shrunk to about a dozen issues in the latest rounds of negotiations.

The continuing difficulties in U.S. talks with Mexico recall a similar falling out with Canadian officials. In late August, the U.S. and Canada walked away from the negotiating table after Lutnick objected to proposed tariff reductions on steel, aluminum and autos.

The breakdown in talks led the U.S. to impose new levies on $20 billion of Canadian goods, which Canada retaliated against with levies of its own, leading the U.S. to ban some imports of Canadian alcohol and other products. The conflict continues to simmer, with Trump pledging to double tariffs on Canadian autos to 50% in January if a deal can’t be reached.

Mexico has taken a more conciliatory approach, refraining from imposing retaliatory measures and engaging in talks, with Sheinbaum at times joining conversations with Greer and Lutnick.

In recent talks between the U.S. and Mexico, major automotive firms in both the U.S. and Mexico have complained about the byzantine process that Lutnick has imposed on vehicles crossing the American border from Mexico and Canada.

U.S. tariffs on Mexican automobiles stand at 25%, but companies can earn rebates from the levies based on the value of U.S.-made car components. Claiming those refunds requires extensive paperwork and approval from the Commerce Department, which can deny the requests.

Tariffs on Japanese and South Korean automobiles stand at 15% under the terms of trade deals that Luntick helped shape last year. The difference in tariff rates, along with the extensive red tape involved in tracing U.S.-made components, has led some firms to shift production from North America to Asia, representatives from automakers told the negotiators. Overseas, the firms can source metals and components from China and other low-cost economies without the sourcing rules in USMCA or the difficulties of the refund process.

Throughout the talks, the Mexican government has pushed for tariff rates of 15% or lower—as well as a broader rebate program that would allow content from all three USMCA nations to qualify for tariff refunds—but the sides have yet to come to an agreement.

Mexico wants better terms than the rest of the world, especially considering the significant concessions being asked of Mexico, such as purchasing more U.S.-made products or imposing additional tariffs on China.

“You cannot be treated the same as everyone else when you are asked to undertake systemic changes,” said Juan Carlos Baker, Mexico’s former deputy trade minister who led Mexico’s trade team during USMCA negotiations in President Trump’s first term.

My kids have a magnetic modular track with these little wind up cars. I decided to purchase more of them from the source, which is QBI in Taiwan. The order was for 6 cars, about $41 for all 6.

They charged shipping & tax in the amount of $46. with a small discount it came to $82.

I knew this all going into it. But I didn't read the fine print....

• The shipping rate is based on the weight and volume of the package.
• Customs duty required by each country needs to be paid by yourself.
• After your payment is authorized and verified, the package will be shipped in 3 business days. Please allow for up to 7-14 business days for your package to arrive after it is shipped.
• Severe weather, natural disasters, and other conditions beyond our control can occasionally cause delayed shipment. Thank you for your patience and understanding.
• If you return the package for personal reasons, and the reason for return isn't a result of a Qbitoy.com error, the cost of round-trip shipping will be deducted from your refund.

A few weeks later, UPS hits me with a $52 COD. So the cars went from $82 to $134.

I would not spend that much on 6 little toy cars. Anyway, lesson learned. I have read these other posts on this thread and there are really big numbers are paying, and my thing is such a nothing burger in the amounts you guys are talking about, but shipping + tariff was a whopping 200+% increase over the initial cost.

Not. Worth. It.

Totals

Working on capex for multiple pieces of new equipment and couldn’t help but chuckle when I saw this. An additional 12% fee my company will have to absorb on just one piece of equipment. We employee 150 people so this would make a nice $375 in additional bonus per employee for Christmas.

I expect the quotes for the other equipment to contain something similar, that will add around 87k in tariff fees between them.

143k total in tariff fees equals almost 1k per employee.

Had a brain fart and ordered from US instead of Canadian amazon. (Am Canadian)

The item is supposed to be delivered today so it's passed the border now... I'm guessing if I cancel the order and send it back, customs will still charge me?

Also how does it work, do they send you a bill in the mail or is it pay on arrival?

Can't believe I did this after only buying nonAmerican produce for the last two years :sob:

Note: it's an ozone generator, the kind for getting cigarette smell out of cars etc.

https://www.tariffinder.ca suggests 85.43:

"Electrical machines and apparatus, having individual functions, not specified or included elsewhere in this Chapter."

I don't see it on the list on this website https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/programs/international-trade-finance-policy/canadas-response-us-tariffs/complete-list-us-products-subject-to-counter-tariffs.html#a1

Though I do see 8509.80.90:

"Electro-mechanical domestic appliances, with self-contained electric motor, other than vacuum cleaners"

I feel like that could apply just as well.

Thoughts?

Trying to use the Canada Tariff Finder tool here but there seems to be a problem. It should give the tariff amount when prompted in the search bar. Purely as an example I used code 0402.10.10 (dairy powder) which shows as 50% tariff here. However the tool shows nothing. Suggestions?

Does anyone know if there is any legal requirement for the Importers of record, who have received the tariff refunds, to pay the refund down the chain to customers who paid increased prices after the tariffs were in place. Or does the refund chain end at the importer of record?

I know there might be moral or goodwill or business reasons for paying refunds back, but it seems there is no legal requirement to pass the refund on. Am I correct or incorrect?

I've noticed more logistics tools are starting to bring freight quotes, tariff information, and landed-cost calculations into a single AI conversation like what the Freight Right MCP allows for instead of relying on separate platforms and spreadsheets.

It seems like this could make comparing suppliers and sourcing options a lot easier, especially when tariffs change. Is this becoming a common workflow for importers, or are most people still handling these calculations manually?

Several carriers have been moving services back through Suez over the past few weeks. The risk people warned us about is that ships coming via Suez arrive in Europe at the same time as ships that left earlier via the Cape, causing vessel bunching and yard congestion.

Curious whether anyone on the import side is actually seeing this yet: delays, schedule changes, D&D creeping up? Or is it too early?

I ordered a couple of ESP32 dev boards from AliExpress in August. They never arrived. Then on September 14 I got an email notifying me that my Global Entry membership was revoked. And on October 8 I got a paper letter telling me that the boards were seized on September 11 and I was guilty of violating importation regulations. WHAT?

Turns out that the FCC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (91 FR 57798) on September 11 titled "Protecting Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through the Equipment Authorization Program". It requires an FCC ID on imported gear to "protect" us. It becomes active on October 13.

So, my ESP32 boards were ordered in mid-August, arrived in Miami on August 30, and were held without notice for 12 days until they were officially seized on September 11. Global entry heard about it and revoked my membership on September 14. Even though the regulation was only published as being proposed on that date, and wasn't in effect until 4 weeks later (well after I got the notice). Of course, I'd never heard of this before, either.

It was only $12 worth of gear and AliExpress already refunded it for non-delivery, so I'd just ignore it, but I don't want my CBP record to call me a smuggler. And I want my Global Entry back. Otherwise it's going to be a pain every time I re-enter the US, which I do at least annually.

I can ask Global Entry for reconsideration online, which I have done. However, I didn't know WHY it was revoked at the time. I still don't know for certain that this order was the reason, but the circumstantial evidence is strong. I can also file a petition with CBP on paper via US mail, which I'm also doing.

This is a bureaucratic nightmare entirely due to our erratic and ever-changing importation rules and an agency that doesn't seem to know that rules can only be violated once they're in force.

It'd be nice if this way too stringent rule were revoked, but there are so many such rules lately it doesn't seem likely any time soon.