Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How many trade deals has mark Carney finalized for Canada this year?
Executive summary
Official sources show Prime Minister Mark Carney has announced at least three new, formal trade-related agreements this year: a Canada–Indonesia CEPA announced in September [1], a Canada–UAE Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) signed in Abu Dhabi in November [2], and public statements about a new ASEAN engagement including planned negotiations with the Philippines and broader ASEAN ties [3]. Available sources do not provide a single, definitive tally labeled “trade deals finalized this year,” and reporting mixes announced agreements, partnerships, and negotiations at various stages [3] [1] [2].
1. What counts as a “trade deal”? — Definitions matter
Different outlets and government statements use terms like “trade agreement,” “FIPA,” “CEPA,” “market partnership,” and “letters of intent.” The Prime Minister’s office distinguishes concluded agreements (for example, the Canada‑Indonesia CEPA) from negotiations still expected to conclude in 2026 (ASEAN/Philippines negotiations) [1] [3]. Reuters and broadcast outlets cover negotiations and tactical tariff moves but do not present a single list of finalized deals [4] [5]. Therefore any count depends on whether you include investment protection treaties, business‑council pacts and financing partnerships, or only fully signed and operational free‑trade agreements [2] [1].
2. Confirmed, announced agreements this year in the reporting
The federal press releases and reporting supplied identify at least these concrete items this year: the Canada‑Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), announced and celebrated in Ottawa [1]; the Canada‑UAE FIPA signed during Carney’s Abu Dhabi visit [2]; and a range of ASEAN‑focused initiatives, including a Letter of Intent with Malaysia and intentions to launch Canada‑Philippines FTA talks (though those are slated to conclude in 2026, not finalized this year) [3]. These items are presented as distinct outcomes in official communications [1] [2] [3].
3. Items reported but not clearly “finalized”
Several high‑profile trade discussions — notably with the United States and China — are characterized as active negotiations, suspensions, or tactical tariff changes rather than finalized deals. Reuters and BBC pieces describe ongoing U.S. talks, suspended negotiations, and tariff adjustments rather than signed agreements [4] [6]. Reporting also notes trade tensions with China and reciprocal duties; those are part of negotiation dynamics, not new finalized pacts in the sources provided [5] [7].
4. Government framing and political context
The Prime Minister’s office frames these outcomes as part of a strategy to diversify away from U.S. dependence and to “double non‑U.S. exports” over the coming decade; press releases highlight potential future trade expansion from the new agreements [2] [3]. Journalistic outlets emphasize domestic politics and tactical moves — for example, lifting some retaliatory tariffs and the political fallout from an anti‑tariff ad that affected U.S. talks — showing how negotiations and public messaging influence whether deals are reached [8] [9] [10].
5. Competing perspectives in the coverage
Official press releases present these announcements as wins that will open markets and attract investment [1] [2]. Independent reporting frames the picture more ambivalently: Reuters and other outlets point to stalled or sensitive talks with the U.S., a trade war context, and that some agreements remain in negotiation or are promises for 2026 [4] [5] [3]. Analysts in The Conversation and Fortune stress tactical tariff lifts and questions about whether moves are strategically wise or politically driven, signaling disagreement about the net effect of recent actions [9] [8].
6. Bottom line and how to interpret a precise count
If you count formally announced, government‑level agreements in the provided reporting, you can point to at least two clear finalized items this year: the Canada‑Indonesia CEPA [1] and the Canada‑UAE FIPA [2]. Broader ASEAN engagement and letters of intent or announced launches of negotiations (e.g., with the Philippines) are important but not “finalized” in the available sources [3]. Other high‑profile efforts (U.S. talks, China tensions) remain negotiations, disputes, or tactical measures in the cited reports [4] [5] [7].
If you want a definitive numeric answer suitable for citation (e.g., “X trade deals finalized”), tell me whether to include investment protection agreements and business‑investment pacts or to restrict the count to full free‑trade agreements; I will produce a precise tally and excerpts from the relevant texts [1] [2] [3].