The session, “Leadership in Action: Advisors at Work,” brought together perspectives from government, consulting, finance, and trade education to answer a central question:

How can businesses, and the trade professionals who support them, move forward with confidence in a volatile world?

Moderated by Lora Rigutto, CITP, Partnerships & Community Lead at FITT, the panel featured:

• Margaux McDonald, Canadian Consul and Senior Trade Commissioner in Chicago (Global Affairs Canada)
• Zeeshanali Fazal, CITP, Regional Director at Export Development Canada (EDC)
• Dr. Rahim Mohtaram, CITP, Founder of MCSWAY Commercial and Educational Services
• Pernille Fischer Boulter, CITP, CEO of Kisserup International Trade Roots Inc.
• Dr. Leroy Lowe, CITP, Senior Consultant – Trade Education at FITT

Together, they unpacked emerging trends in exporter mindsets, market diversification strategies, and the evolving role of trade professionals in an AI-driven world.

A new export mindset: From growth to resilience

The past year has been marked by political volatility, tariff concerns, and supply chain disruptions. According to the panelists, the biggest change has been in how exporters think about international expansion.

Zeeshanali Fazal, CITP, has seen this shift firsthand through his work with Canadian exporters at EDC.

“Instead of going growth first, they’re going to resilience first,” he explained. “Companies have had the opportunity to experience what risk can look like, even when we thought there was no risk.”

Rather than focusing solely on revenue growth targets, companies are now prioritizing strategies that help them manage uncertainty and survive disruption.

Fazal noted that exporters are increasingly asking practical questions:

• What happens if tariffs suddenly return?
• How exposed are we to geopolitical risk?
• Are our payments and financing structures secure?

This shift has led many businesses to make greater use of trade finance tools such as guarantees, insurance, and structured financing to mitigate risk.

At the same time, companies are thinking more strategically about diversification.

“We’ve talked about diversification for years,” Fazal said. “But now it’s more practical. People are moving to action.”

Canada–U.S. trade: Stable despite the headlines

Much of the uncertainty surrounding Canadian trade in the past year has centered on the United States. Yet Margaux McDonald, who leads Canada’s trade team in Chicago, offered a perspective from the ground that may surprise some observers.

According to McDonald, the reality for many companies has been more stable than expected.

“A year ago, everyone was bracing for what felt like a giant storm,” she said. “But for the vast majority of Canadian companies, that storm never fully landed.”

In fact, some Canadian exporters have quietly benefited from shifting trade dynamics.

“When I walk trade show floors and ask companies about the impact of tariffs, sometimes their voice lowers and they say, ‘Don’t tell anyone, but this has been really good for us.’”

This paradox highlights how complex global trade dynamics can be. In some cases, tariffs affecting U.S. competitors have created unexpected advantages for Canadian firms.

Still, McDonald emphasized that exporter attitudes are evolving in important ways. She highlighted three major shifts she has observed among Canadian companies.

1. A stronger demand for clarity

Companies want practical guidance on trade agreements, regulations, and incentives.

“There’s been an awakening to the complexity of trade, and how to navigate it effectively. And that’s where this cohort, this community of CITPs, can be so helpful.”

2. More targeted expansion strategies

Instead of pursuing broad market entry, exporters are focusing on regions where they can win.

“There used to be a spaghetti-against-the-wall approach. Now companies are asking: where can we actually succeed?”

3.  Greater focus on trusted partnerships

Canadian firms are increasingly prioritizing long-term, values-aligned business relationships.

Diversification: Supplement, not replace

While diversification beyond the U.S. is gaining momentum, panelists stressed that the strategy should be approached carefully.

Pernille Fischer Boulter, CITP, whose consulting firm works globally with exporters and development agencies, cautioned against treating diversification as an all-or-nothing decision.

“We’re not telling companies to pull out of the U.S. We’re telling them to supplement.”

Canada has access to a wide network of international trade agreements covering dozens of countries. Expanding into new markets, however, takes time, resources, and careful planning.

Fischer Boulter sees companies increasingly looking for low-hanging fruit, markets where they already have some traction or early success.

“If they have a little bit of success in a market like Poland, suddenly they say, ‘Wow, I can do this.’”

Diversification often starts with small wins rather than dramatic strategic shifts.

Strategic supply chains and new trade partners

Dr. Rahim Mohtaram, CITP, highlighted another emerging trend, strategic supply chain realignment.

As companies reconsider their reliance on specific markets, many are exploring partnerships with what he called “middle powers” in global trade.

“Some companies are thinking about working more with China, the European Union, Australia, Japan, Southeast Asia, and even smaller countries,” he said.

However, Mohtaram stressed that diversification does not mean abandoning the United States.

“The U.S. has been the main partner of Canada for export and import, and it will remain the main partner,” he said. “But companies want more options and more alternatives.”

The SMEs facing the biggest challenges

While larger exporters may have the resources to explore new markets, smaller companies often face tougher choices.

Dr. Leroy Lowe, CITP, who works closely with SMEs through training and consulting, has seen firsthand how regulatory uncertainty can disrupt small exporters.

For many small businesses, the unpredictability of tariffs, brokerage fees, and shipping costs has made pricing difficult.

“Some companies are finding their shipments are ending up in customers’ hands at very unpredictable pricing,” he explained. “And that can break partnerships.”

Without the resources to expand globally, many SMEs are taking a different approach.

“One workable short-term solution is simply looking at other places in Canada they haven’t been,” Lowe said.

Expanding into new provinces can help companies grow while building the experience needed to pursue international markets later.

Overcoming exporter hesitation

One challenge that trade advisors consistently encounter is exporter hesitation. Faced with uncertainty, many companies adopt a “wait and see” strategy. The panel agreed that waiting too long can mean missed opportunities.

McDonald described how the Trade Commissioner Service helps companies move past uncertainty.

“We never want to convince anyone to do anything,” she explained. “But we can provide context, grounded analysis, and most importantly, connections.”

Helping companies distinguish between political noise and real market changes is an important part of that process.

“There’s a lot of hyperbole and dramatic headlines right now,” she said. “Part of our job is helping companies understand what’s actually changing, and what might just be theater.”

Fazal agreed that hesitation often stems from lack of awareness.

“When I ask companies what they know about new markets, they often say, ‘We don’t know anything, and we don’t even know where to find the information.’”

For trade professionals, bridging that knowledge gap is a critical role.

Choosing the right markets

When companies do decide to diversify, choosing the right market becomes the next challenge. Fazal described a framework he calls risk triangulation.

This approach evaluates three key elements together:

• Country risk
• Buyer risk
• Transaction structure and financing

“It’s not just about selling. It’s about where you sell, who your buyer is, and whether you’ll actually be paid.”

Lowe added that technology is increasingly helping consultants guide these decisions. He frequently uses AI tools to analyze market characteristics and identify potential opportunities.

“You can ask: what would be the ideal attributes of a market for this company?” he explained. “Then you score potential markets and narrow the list before doing deeper research.”

AI and the future of trade advisory

The conversation eventually turned to a topic dominating many industries, artificial intelligence. Rather than replacing trade professionals, panelists agreed that AI is enhancing their capabilities.

Lowe described AI as a tool that allows advisors to move faster.

“You can gather a lot of information quickly,” he said. “But you still need expertise to evaluate the quality of that information.”

Fazal emphasized the distinction between data and judgment.

“AI handles information,” he said. “But we as CITPs interpret the risk, the context, and the strategy.”

Pernille Fischer Boulter highlighted another advantage trade professionals bring: networks.

“Our networks tie people together in ways AI can’t replicate.”

Mohtaram offered a broader perspective.

“Automation and systems improve businesses, but they also increase the need for people with higher levels of skills.”

The human advantage in global trade

As the panel concluded, one message stood out clearly.

The role of trade professionals is evolving, but it is not disappearing. In a world of geopolitical shifts, complex regulations, and rapidly expanding information, the ability to interpret, connect, and guide strategy is becoming more valuable than ever.

For CITPs and other trade advisors, the future is not about competing with technology. It is about combining data, experience, and human insight to help companies navigate an increasingly complex global economy.

The post How can businesses, and the trade professionals who support them, move forward with confidence in a volatile world? appeared first on Trade Ready.

“[NAFTA] is…a disaster.” – Donald Trump

“[NAFTA]…needs to be reassessed and adjusted.” – Hillary Clinton

These quotes illustrate how the two U.S. presidential candidates currently view NAFTA. The twenty-two year old North American Free Trade Agreement has long been controversial and blamed for lost U.S. jobs, but quantifying its impact has been difficult.

Some analysts have blamed the trade deal for 700,000 to 800,000 lost American jobs, while the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has attributed the creation of 1.7 million U.S. jobs to NAFTA.

How has NAFTA changed trade for member countries?

The passage of NAFTA established a free-trade zone in North America between Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. As part of the agreement, the three countries phased out numerous tariffs with a particular focus on those related to agriculture, textiles and automobiles.

About one-fourth of U.S. imports come from Canada and Mexico, which are the United States’ second and third largest suppliers of imported goods. In addition, about one-third of U.S. exports are destined for Canada and Mexico.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, total NAFTA trade in terms of value of goods has increased at a compounded annual growth rate of 3.75% since 2004.

By country, the Canada – U.S. relationship has the highest value of goods traded, compared to Mexican trade with either country. However, since 2004, the compounded annual growth of Canadian trade with the U.S. has increased only 2.16%.

This slow growth can be attributed to it gradually losing ground to Mexico over the years, primarily due to the growing Mexican automotive industry. As a result, Mexican trade with the U.S. has grown faster than Canada-U.S. trade, at a compounded annual growth rate of 5.91% since 2004.

Canada is America’s top customer

According to the Canadian government, Canada is the U.S.’s largest customer, purchasing US$338 billion in goods and services in 2015. Nearly nine million U.S. jobs depend on trade and investment with Canada.

In addition, Canada is the top export destination for 35 U.S. states. While Mexico grabs headlines with its auto industry, Canada also has a sizable auto industry which continues to hum along and innovate. Still, it’s a more expensive location to assemble automobiles due to union activity and higher wages, and the concern of Canadian jobs heading south is real.

Despite this, GM announced in June that it would increase its engineering and research and development team in Ontario by 700 workers over the next three to four years, focusing on electric, connected and autonomous vehicles.

Cross-border trucking industry crowding the border since NAFTA

All modes of transport have benefited in terms of volumes and finance thanks to NAFTA, but perhaps the two transport modes to see the greatest gains have been trucking and rail.

Trucking is the largest mode of transport for trade between Canada and the U.S.

For the first quarter of 2016, truck crossings were up 3.2% and in Detroit, the focal point for the automotive industry, the number of crossings increased 8%.

Despite the strong growth, it has raised concerns of growing congestion at the border between Canada and the  U.S. Detroit-Windsor is a particular area of concern as one of the busiest border crossing points between the two countries.

To alleviate the congestion, the six-lane Gordie Howe International Bridge, linking Detroit and Windsor, is expected to begin construction in 2017 with a completion date anticipated for 2020.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration has awarded $256,470 to deploy technology to provide information on wait times and give truckers advance notice of crossing conditions. The program began earlier in 2016 with a handful of trucking firms and limited border points, and the number of truck border crossings using it may continue to increase if the new pilot program is successful.

Rail continues to grow between Canada-U.S. since trade deal

U.S. and Canadian Class I railroads have also greatly benefited thanks to commodities exports, such as agriculture and petroleum. In addition, the growth of intermodal transport has spurred innovative solutions linking the two countries. For example, in 2015, Canadian National (CN) signed a memorandum of understanding with the Alabama State Port Authority and APM Terminals for the Mobile port’s intermodal gateway project.

A similar agreement was made at the New Orleans port a few months later. Described by the Journal of Commerce publication as a “third coast”, these agreements have given CN a new region in which to operate from.

The benefits for CN include the ability to take advantage of the Panama Canal widening by moving goods through the New Orleans and Mobile ports, and transporting them through Memphis, Chicago and into Canada.

Another benefit for U.S. shippers who prefer to move goods via Canadian ports is the ability to import goods via the Prince Rupert port and then transport the goods into the heartland of the U.S. without transferring to another railroad, truck or other means of transport.

Likewise, U.S.-based Class I railroad CSX opened an intermodal terminal in Montreal, which gave it access to the Eastern Canada market. Trains serving this terminal connect to its Northwest Ohio intermodal hub.

NAFTA shouldn’t be scrapped – it should be expanded

Can NAFTA really be described as a “disaster”? Hardly.

Trade between the member countries is strong and should continue to flow with little, if any disruption. Should the agreement be “reassessed” or “reexamined”?  Perhaps – in terms of opening the borders even further.

Creative logistics solutions have resulted in more efficient flows of goods, and in turn reduced time to markets for the final customer.

The post Does NAFTA still matter to Canada-U.S. trade relations? appeared first on Trade Ready.

When U.S. President Barack Obama welcomed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to Washington with a much-publicized state dinner, the two expressed a warm, collaborative relationship.

After trading friendly jabs about hockey and the weather, the two got down to business and discussed, among several issues, how to streamline trade and border crossings between the two nations.

For many, this signalled a warming trend in trade relations between the Canada and the U.S., which had been cooling over contentious issues such as the rejected Keystone XL Pipeline project.

Canada is no longer the top market for American trade

As allies and neighbours along the world’s longest shared border, Canada and the United States have become inextricably linked over the course of a relationship that spans more than two centuries. Politically, culturally and economically, the two countries remain tied to one another.

For decades, Canada and the U.S. have enjoyed the largest trade relationship in the world. Two-way trade more than tripled in the years since the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was implemented in 1989.

NAFTA superseded the agreement in 1994, taking trade between the two nations to greater heights, amounting to an impressive $2.4 billion per day in 2014, and supporting almost 9 million U.S. jobs.

Unfortunately for Canada, trade with the U.S. seems to be on the decline. Trade between the two countries totaled an estimated $662.7 billion in 2015, down from US$760 billion in goods and services in 2014.

In November 2015, China surpassed Canada for the first time as the biggest trading partner to the U.S., bumping Canada down to second place.

And China isn’t the only country vying for first place and expanding trade with America. Mexico is steadily gaining ground in trade with their NAFTA neighbour, trading more with the U.S. than Canada did in September 2015.

Impact of blundering energy sector being felt

A major contributor to the recent drop in trade with the U.S. is the floundering energy sector. The U.S. is by far the biggest customer for Canada’s exports in natural gas, oil and hydropower.

In 2010, almost 100% of Canada’s energy exports went to the country’s southern neighbour, a huge chunk of total Canadian exports into the U.S.

This dynamic is in a transitional period due to America’s expansion in their own tight oil and shale gas production, and a forecasted decrease in oil and natural gas consumption in the coming years.

The decision to block the proposed Keystone XL pipeline may also prove to have negative effects on the two nations’ trade in oil going forward.

Still no resolution in the most contentious trade dispute

Another sticking point in Canada’s trade relationship with the U.S. has been the ongoing softwood lumber dispute.  The dispute is one of the lengthiest disagreements the two countries have faced in modern history.

About 80% of the global lumber industry is made up of trade in wood from conifers, or softwood. Disagreements over the softwood lumber trade between the two states began in the 1980s and have not since been satisfactorily resolved.

In the latest agreement, implemented in 2006, the U.S. agreed to drop anti-dumping tariffs as long as lumber prices remained at an acceptable level. This agreement was set to expire in 2012, but was then extended for another two years.

Neither country is happy with the outcome, and ongoing issues remain as the deal faces renewal.

Many Canadian industry representatives are calling for another extension of the 2006 deal, while those representing the industry in the U.S. are calling for major changes.

Negotiations between the two countries on this deal are likely to be slow and arduous due to the history of contention on the issue.

After meeting in Washington in early March, Prime Minister Trudeau and President Obama committed to explore all options in order to solve the trade dispute.

Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s International Trade Minister, said:

What we have committed to is to make significant, meaningful progress towards a deal — to have the structure, the key elements there 100 days from now.

U.S. softwood lumber production is on the rise, with more Canadian-owned sawmills located in the U.S. than in Canada due to lower labour costs, higher timber availability, and higher demand.

Low loonie is luring some U.S. business to Canada

The Canadian dollar began a dramatic plunge in January 2016 that brought the currency to its lowest level since 2003, bottoming out at 70 Canadian cents to the U.S. dollar.

The drop in value, though detrimental to consumers purchasing imported products, has also been touted as an opportunity for Canadian businesses doing business with the U.S., from commodities exporters to the tourist industry.

Canadians can benefit from the attractively low loonie by leveraging increased trade and foreign investment from the U.S., and thereby increase their export revenue.

Canadians can also expect more U.S. visitors during the upcoming tourism season, as the country provides a destination that is much more affordable while the loonie is low.

Trans Pacific Partnership agreement may be a non-issue

It’s no secret that the Obama administration is keen to pass and implement the TPP. Canada has gone as far as to sign on to the deal, but has committed to consulting with Canadians and considering all economic impacts before ratifying.

At their most recent meeting in Washington in March, Trudeau and Obama released the following joint statement on the agreement:

“The United States and Canada share the goal of enhancing shared prosperity, creating jobs, protecting workers and the environment, and promoting sustainable economic development.”

Recognizing that the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which links together countries that represent nearly 40 percent of global GDP, would advance these objectives, Canada and the United States are working to complete their respective domestic processes.

However, the Canadian government has been careful in proceeding and committing 100% to the deal due to a significant anti-TPP sentiment in the country.

If the TPP is not ratified before the end of Obama’s term in November, it’s hard to know what the future of the agreement would be, and how trade relations between the two countries would proceed, given that the U.S. presidential candidates are unanimously rejecting the deal.

Fortunately, many have speculated that the trade relationship would not change drastically with or without the signing of the TPP, as previous agreements, notably NAFTA, would still be in effect either way.

What do you think the future has in store for the US-Canada trade relationship?

The post Can improving U.S.-Canada relations save their weakening trade relationship? appeared first on Trade Ready.

The United States and Canada have the most extensive trade relationship between any two nations in the world. In 2013, goods traded between Canada and the U.S. totaled C$782 billion (US$585 billion).

In fact, the trade of goods moving back and forth across the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ontario and Detroit, Michigan alone is equal to all of the trade between the United States and Japan, the U.S.’s fourth largest trading partner.

The security requirements at the Canada – United States border have been significantly enhanced since 9/11. The CBSA has now made submitting eManifest (cargo and conveyance details) mandatory in order to further sustain cross-border security requirements.

It also supports new initiatives with the United States such as the Beyond the Border Initiative. Understanding these regulations, and being able to comply with them, will improve your competitive edge and contribute to the success of your business.

How will these regulations affect trade for U.S and Canadian businesses?

While delivering a North America-wide webinar for the Canadian Produce Marketing Association, I had a question from a participant from the eastern seaboard of the United States. The question was, “I am a grower, packer, and shipper; how do these cross-border regulatory requirements apply to me?”

I answered,

“Well, if a carrier of your choosing arrives at your farm, you will load them up with your produce, after which you will provide your customer in Canada with an invoice in the amount of $50,000.00, for example.

The invoice value is what you expect to be paid for the shipment. If your carrier arrives at the border and is unable to meet these regulatory requirements set out by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) in order to be admissible to Canada, your shipment may be delayed at the border.

That delay may leave your shipment valued at only $500.00, and sold for cattle feed rather than appearing on the shelf of a major vendor in Canada.

As you are the supplier in the United States shipping your product to Canada, you choose the carrier in most cases. Familiarity with these types of regulatory changes is important for you to be better informed, and able to choose a carrier who can clearly meet these cross-border requirements.”

She responded with a very long “Oh, I see.”

The major challenges for shippers and carriers

With the new regulations, carriers are challenged by the monumental requirement of having to provide manifest information electronically, particularly before they even arrive at the border. In fact, their information must be transmitted, received and officially “accepted” by the CBSA before their truck arrives at the border.

These are the 5 main challenges exporters will face in adapting these new requirements.

1. Added time and costs

For highway carriers who make their living by checking electronic load boards for shipment postings, booking them, and picking up and delivering cargo, adding this cross-border requirement is a significant challenge.

At one time, carriers could bid on shipments posted on an electronic load board (over the internet), pick up the shipment, make the delivery and get paid. Now they must ensure that they have the ability to transmit manifest, or cargo and conveyance data, to the respective Customs Agency electronically AND in advance. The cross-border shipments are a very lucrative part of the transportation industry.

They also know that these additional requirements will cost them money to complete, which makes matters even more complicated. The additional costs will be incurred by the carrier whether they will be able to meet these new electronic requirements themselves, or contract a service provider to complete them on their behalf.

2. Extra details from in-bond conditions

Delivering cargo in Canada arriving from the United States, where the destination is not a border crossing or border city, requires in-bond conditions, posing an even greater demand on the carrier.

In this case, they must explicitly identify, by number, the inland warehouse (or inland destination) where the shipment will report to customs for release, and eventually be delivered to the actual importer.

In order to do this, the carrier must know not only the destination of the freight (consignee’s address), but also the specific sufferance/bonded warehouse where the goods will arrive inland.

All of this information, including the specific warehouse-designated, unique identifying number, must be included in the electronic or eManifest transmission to the CBSA. This must be transmitted to and accepted by the respective customs agency, a minimum of one hour prior to arrival at the first port of entry.

This is a major adjustment for carriers, who used to be able to present paper documents upon arrival, rather than send them ahead, with the final delivery address (cosignee) only.

3. Dealing with order changes

Changes are a common occurrence in the transportation of cargo. This includes a wide variety of circumstances, most often that the bill of lading generated for the shipment and the driver do not match the Canada Customs Invoice and/or the eManifest transmission (i.e. piece count).

This requires what is known as a “change” to the original eManifest submission to the CBSA, because the order was loaded on the truck slightly differently than what was originally ordered.

This driver is then responsible for ensuring that once he has the exact details regarding his shipment, his eManifest submission is identical and amended to be accurate, if necessary.

This new process for making these changes is not easy for the carrier. If the driver fails to make the correct changes they could face steep fees. This common inconvenience is costing them time, money, and creating a lot of stress and confusion over the accuracy of reporting.

4. Reporting discrepancies

If carriers fail to make the proper changes to their documents, they are now dealing with discrepancies. For example, occasionally, there will be a few extra pieces loaded onto the shipment by the shipper (i.e. cargo missed on another earlier shipment) that the driver is unaware of.

When these discrepancies are discovered after delivery in Canada, the importer has an obligation to notify their customs brokers, amend their commercial entry to account for the value for duty and submit any additional revenue owed to the government.

Accordingly, the carrier is also obliged to go back into their records to the transaction for this delivery and amend the details of the original submission to correctly reflect the shipment details.

Consequences for failing to amend the carrier’s records may result in penalties (AMPS as they are known in the industry) after these unchecked discrepancies are discovered through audits.

A carrier will not only incur penalties, their compliance record with the CBSA will also take a hit.

This could seriously affect a company’s future access to preferred Trusted Trader Programs like CSA or CTPAT.

5. Keeping detailed records

It has always been a challenge for carriers to maintain accurate records of each and every trip. Tracking and detailing every trip that delivered freight into Canada is a time-consuming process. Many, many carriers are still maintaining their records in a paper format.

The CBSA identifies that carries must maintain all records for three years, plus the current year. These new regulatory policies have been amended so that carrier records must also contain the details for all submissions made to, and received from, the CBSA. One of the great benefits for a carrier using a service provider is that they are able to maintain a database containing all of this pertinent information for their carrier clients.

Keeping track of all the crucial details

Carriers have often had difficulty maintaining accurate records because of the logistical challenges presented by drivers often working away from their home office, and the fact that the administrative personnel often work Monday-Friday 9 to 5, while drivers are working 24 hours a day, 7 days per week.

The engagement of a good service provider can, in most cases, easily solve this logistical nightmare for them. The challenge then becomes the cost to the carrier to engage such a service provider.

This reflects why it is so important for U.S. vendors, manufacturers and shippers to have a much better understanding of the cross border regulatory requirements.

Canadian companies also need to be aware of these types of regulatory requirements, so that they can make this part of the conversation they have with their vendors in the United States prior to placing orders. Not inquiring at the time of order could add significant costs to any goods being imported into Canada.

The post How new CBSA regulations impact your US-Canada trade activity appeared first on Trade Ready.