{"id":428051,"date":"2026-03-06T06:25:11","date_gmt":"2026-03-05T23:25:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/market-news\/2026\/03\/scotiabanks-base-case-is-usmca-renewal-but-the-tail-risks-are-worth-pricing\/"},"modified":"2026-03-06T06:25:11","modified_gmt":"2026-03-05T23:25:11","slug":"scotiabanks-base-case-is-usmca-renewal-but-the-tail-risks-are-worth-pricing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/market-news\/scotiabanks-base-case-is-usmca-renewal-but-the-tail-risks-are-worth-pricing-428051\/","title":{"rendered":"Scotiabank’s base case is USMCA renewal \u2014 but the tail risks are worth pricing"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

The clock is ticking on the USMCA joint review and Scotiabank just released a comprehensive report that’s worth a read.<\/p>\n

“The future of [USMCA] is the single most consequential macro uncertainty facing the Canadian
\neconomy this year,” the report says.<\/p>\n

The good news first: Scotiabank’s baseline is that USMCA gets ratified or extended with limited adjustments that don’t materially change the macro trajectory. They’re explicit about this \u2014 the agreement is mutually beneficial and much of the recent US rhetoric looks like bargaining posture rather than a genuine signal to blow the deal up.<\/p>\n

But “low probability” isn’t “no probability,” and the report’s scenario analysis shows why even a small chance of a bad outcome demands attention. Their probability breakdown: a 10% chance of renewal by the July 1 review date, 42.5% chance of renewal before the US mid-terms, 37.5% chance the parties fall into annual reviews (prolonged uncertainty but the deal stays alive), and a 10% chance of outright withdrawal. The most likely outcome is a deal gets done \u2014 it’s just a question of when and how bumpy the road gets.<\/p>\n

The GDP hit<\/p>\n

So what happens if the base case doesn’t hold? Using their integrated US-Canada macro model, Scotiabank Economics stress-tested two post-USMCA failure scenarios. These aren’t forecasts \u2014 they’re “break glass in case of emergency” numbers \u2014 but they illustrate the asymmetry that makes this review so important.<\/p>\n

Scenario 1 is the “disruptive but contained” outcome \u2014 a 10% tariff slapped on currently exempt USMCA goods. Canadian GDP falls 0.6%, unemployment peaks at 6.5%. Painful but manageable. Growth slows without going negative.<\/p>\n

Scenario 2 is the one that matters. A 35% tariff on Canadian goods (energy and potash stay at 10%) sends the effective tariff rate on total Canadian exports to roughly 15%. GDP drops 1.9%. Canada goes into recession. Unemployment hits 7.1%. That’s the scenario where the Bank of Canada cuts 50 basis points and it still isn’t enough to fully offset the damage.<\/p>\n

For the US, even the severe scenario only clips GDP by 0.3% \u2014 but PCE inflation rises 0.3 percentage points, which would force the Fed to hike 25 basis points at exactly the wrong time. Nobody wins here, but Canada loses far more.<\/p>\n

Note that this isn’t what they think will happen, as they’re optimistic:<\/p>\n

Our baseline assumption
\naligns with a benign scenario whereby is ultimately ratified or extended with limited adjustments that do
\nnot materially shift the macroeconomic trajectory. This view reflects the fundamental reality: the agreement is
\nmutually beneficial, and much of the recent U.S. rhetoric appears aimed at strengthening its bargaining position
\nrather than signaling an intention to dismantle the deal.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Where the vulnerability is<\/p>\n

The most useful part of this report is the sectoral exposure analysis. Scotiabank mapped out which Canadian industries are most and least vulnerable by looking at two things: how much the US relies on Canadian imports in each sector, and how dependent Canadian exporters are on the US market.<\/p>\n

The “most vulnerable” corner is ugly. Electrical equipment, transportation, and manufacturing are all sectors where Canadian exports to the US dwarf the sector’s domestic GDP contribution while the US has plenty of alternative suppliers. Computers, chemicals, machinery, and plastics are all in that danger zone too.<\/p>\n

For TSX investors, Scotiabank’s GICS sector analysis shows Health Care, Information Technology, and Real Estate with the highest US revenue exposure (50-70%), while Communication Services and Consumer Discretionary are more domestically insulated. .<\/p>\n

The Canada-China wildcard<\/p>\n

The report’s timeline is a reminder of how much has happened in just over a year. Canada forging a strategic partnership with China on energy, agri-food, EVs, and trade prompted Trump to threaten 100% tariffs if a formal trade deal gets signed. Canada says it has no such intention, but the mere optics of it gave the US administration another lever to pull.<\/p>\n

The SCOTUS ruling against IEEPA tariffs adds another layer of legal complexity. The administration pivoted to Section 122 with 10% global tariffs \u2014 USMCA exempt \u2014 but that reprieve could evaporate if the review goes sideways. The thing is, by the time that might happen, the timeline on the 150 day US tariffs will have expired, leaving Trump with limited recourse to put tariffs on Canada.<\/p>\n

What to watch<\/p>\n

The path from here to resolution is going to be volatile. PM Carney’s Davos speech calling this a “rupture, not a transition” set the tone. Trump’s response \u2014 that Canada “lives because of the United States” \u2014 tells you about the negotiating dynamic.<\/p>\n

Key dates: the first joint review hits July 1. The Section 122 temporary global tariffs expire July 24. And the 2026 US mid-term primaries loom large \u2014 economic pain for American voters could be the thing that ultimately forces a deal.<\/p>\n

For CAD traders: the Scotiabank model shows the loonie depreciating about 1% in Scenario 1 and 1.5% in the severe case, with a caveat that disorderly markets could push it further. A sharper depreciation would actually cushion the blow to exporters, acting as an automatic shock absorber.<\/p>\n

For equity positioning: if you believe in an eventual renewal \u2014 and the probabilities suggest you should \u2014 the volatility ahead could create opportunities in beaten-down trade-exposed names.<\/p>\n

This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The clock is ticking on the USMCA joint review and Scotiabank just released a comprehensive report that’s worth a read. “The future of [USMCA] is the single most consequential macro uncertainty facing…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":216,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[86],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-428051","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-market-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/428051","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/216"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=428051"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/428051\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=428051"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=428051"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.swingfish.trade\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=428051"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}