Fact Check: US-Canada trade relationship valued over $400 billion last year.

Fact Check: US-Canada trade relationship valued over $400 billion last year.

Published June 28, 2025
i
VERDICT
Needs Research

# Fact Check: "US-Canada trade relationship valued over $400 billion last year." ## What We Know The claim states that the US-Canada trade relationsh...

Fact Check: "US-Canada trade relationship valued over $400 billion last year."

What We Know

The claim states that the US-Canada trade relationship was valued at over $400 billion in the previous year. To evaluate this, we can refer to various trade statistics. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. trade in goods with Canada has consistently been significant, with figures reported in millions of U.S. dollars. In 2022, the total value of U.S. exports to Canada was approximately $349.4 billion, while imports from Canada were also substantial, contributing to a total trade figure that could indeed exceed $400 billion when considering both exports and imports.

In 2024, the U.S. total goods trade with Canada was estimated at around $762.1 billion, indicating a robust trading relationship that has been increasing over the years (U.S. Trade Representative). Additionally, the International Trade Administration highlighted that Canada accounted for a significant portion of U.S. goods exports, further supporting the notion of a strong economic partnership.

Analysis

The claim appears to be credible based on the available data. The figures from the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Trade Representative indicate that the total trade value between the U.S. and Canada is indeed substantial. However, the specific figure of "over $400 billion" needs clarification regarding the year it references. The trade data for 2022 shows that the combined exports and imports could likely meet or exceed this figure, but the exact total would depend on the precise calculations of trade balances.

Moreover, the source reliability varies. The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Trade Representative are authoritative sources for trade data, providing reliable and regularly updated statistics. In contrast, some sources may present data that is outdated or not as rigorously verified, which could lead to discrepancies in reported figures.

The Congressional Research Service and other government-related reports also provide insights into the trade dynamics, but they may not always reflect the most current data available. Therefore, while the claim is plausible, it requires specific data from the correct year to confirm its accuracy fully.

Conclusion

Needs Research: The claim that the US-Canada trade relationship was valued at over $400 billion last year is plausible based on available data. However, without specific figures for the year in question and a detailed breakdown of exports and imports, it cannot be definitively confirmed. Further research into the most recent and comprehensive trade statistics is necessary to validate this claim accurately.

Sources

  1. Trade in Goods with Canada Available years: 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 ...
  2. Canada - Bureau of Industry and Security
  3. Canada | United States Trade Representative
  4. Canada - Market Overview - International Trade Administration
  5. U.S.-Canada Trade Relations

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: China's government spent 42 billion this year on a consumer trade-in program.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: China's government spent 42 billion this year on a consumer trade-in program.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: China's government spent 42 billion this year on a consumer trade-in program.

Jul 14, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Negotiations for a US-Canada trade deal set to conclude by July 21, 2025.
Needs Research
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Negotiations for a US-Canada trade deal set to conclude by July 21, 2025.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Negotiations for a US-Canada trade deal set to conclude by July 21, 2025.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: US-Canada trade talks stalled until Canada dropped digital services tax
Needs Research
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: US-Canada trade talks stalled until Canada dropped digital services tax

Detailed fact-check analysis of: US-Canada trade talks stalled until Canada dropped digital services tax

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Trump imposed 30% Tariffs on Mexico and The European Union today. Marking another unnecessary trade negotiation that is going to hurt the American people and strain our relationship with close allies. They will come into effect in around 20 days..
True

Fact Check: Trump imposed 30% Tariffs on Mexico and The European Union today. Marking another unnecessary trade negotiation that is going to hurt the American people and strain our relationship with close allies. They will come into effect in around 20 days..

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump imposed 30% Tariffs on Mexico and The European Union today. Marking another unnecessary trade negotiation that is going to hurt the American people and strain our relationship with close allies. They will come into effect in around 20 days..

Jul 21, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Negotiations for a US-Canada trade deal are set to conclude by July 21, 2025.
True

Fact Check: Negotiations for a US-Canada trade deal are set to conclude by July 21, 2025.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Negotiations for a US-Canada trade deal are set to conclude by July 21, 2025.

Jun 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: US-Canada trade relationship valued over $400 billion last year. | TruthOrFake Blog