Fact check: Can US companies relocating to Canada still access US markets and trade agreements?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, US companies relocating to Canada can generally still access US markets and trade agreements, though with some important considerations.

The evidence strongly supports continued market access through existing frameworks. Canadian software companies benefit from tariff-free digital economy access, export controls, investment review benefits, and intellectual property protection that facilitate integrated North American market operations ^[1]. This regulatory framework extends to US companies operating from Canada.

Recent developments have actually improved this access. Canada has dropped some retaliatory tariffs on US goods, particularly those compliant with the USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement) ^{[2] [3] [4]}. This tariff reduction specifically targets goods covered under existing trade agreements, making cross-border commerce more favorable.

Real-world examples demonstrate this viability. US corporations are already quietly relocating to Canada, driven by factors including tax policies, business incentives, and the Canada-US Trade Deal ^[5]. Companies like Launchpad Co-Pack have seen increased business from US companies moving production to Canada as part of long-term strategies to maintain market access while avoiding trade war impacts ^[6].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks several critical nuances that affect the complete picture:

Sector-specific limitations exist. While many goods benefit from improved access, Canada maintains levies on autos, steel, and aluminum ^[2], meaning companies in these industries face continued barriers despite general tariff reductions.

Economic dependency concerns are not addressed in the question. Canada's economy remains heavily reliant on the US market, and the country's trade diversification efforts will only "partially offset" any decline in US trade ^{[7] [8]}. This suggests that while access exists, it comes with inherent risks tied to bilateral relationship stability.

Strategic trade positioning benefits different stakeholders. Canadian government officials and trade organizations benefit from promoting Canada as an attractive relocation destination, while US companies benefit from accessing Canadian incentives while maintaining US market access. Trade agreement administrators and cross-border service providers also profit from increased bilateral business activity.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question, while straightforward, contains an implicit assumption that may be misleading:

The question assumes seamless equivalency between operating from the US versus Canada, when the reality involves complex regulatory frameworks and sector-specific restrictions. The analyses reveal that access exists but requires navigation of specific trade agreement provisions and ongoing tariff considerations ^{[2] [8]}.

The framing omits recent trade tensions that have created the very conditions driving US companies to consider Canadian relocation. The question doesn't acknowledge that this corporate movement is partly a response to trade war impacts rather than purely strategic business optimization ^[6].

No mention is made of the ongoing nature of trade negotiations and tariff adjustments, which could affect future access conditions. The analyses show that trade relationships remain dynamic, with Canada actively adjusting tariff policies in response to US actions ^{[2] [3] [4]}.