Canada’s International Trade Strategy

Machine Operated Script:

Will Pellerin 

This is a place that the media dynamic has perhaps missed the mark a little bit, right, where people talk about, well, we have trade agreements with Japan through the cptpp, or with South Korea we or with the EU. I mean, that’s all fine and dandy from a legal perspective, to have the legal framework there, but it doesn’t mean that that you can replace 20 years of relationships that you’ve developed with your US customers or your US suppliers overnight 

Annik  

before we get started with the show. Here’s a quick word from our sponsor, global Training Center. As trade compliance professionals, you want to make sure that your procedures and documentation are completed as correctly as possible to avoid any delays and possible finds. We provide a range of trade compliance courses that will fit your needs, from in person or web training to recorded on demand courses. We can train one or even 1000s on your team through your learning platform or on our portal. We can even customize a private session for your team. Go to globaltrainingcenter.com to find out more.

Warrington Ellacott  

Hey, welcome everybody. It’s the Canadian aid simply trade podcast, but brought to you by the guys at the global trading center. I’m Warrington Ellicott from the Canadian Association of importers and exporters, and I’d like to welcome you to today’s pod. I’ve got two great guests with me, two great friends of the pod. Our returning champion, will perilorin for his second visit to the pod fry and Will’s a partner at McMillan. First time caller, long time listener, Taylor Farrell also at McMillan, both on the trade front and both here to give us a great conversation about what’s going on with with trade, right? Nothing going on with trade, as I like to say, boring times. Just so we time stamp this. We are recording this about noon on Monday, May the fifth. And there’s a lot of stuff going on. And first of all, our election update, as you well know, we now have a new prime minister, while re elected Prime Minister Mark Carney, the liberals were successful in being elected into a minority position, as it would appear to be today. And lots of exciting things come with that. The House of Commons is going to return on May 26 and King Charles the third is also coming to Canada, as we understand, to read the throne speech. And then the next matter will be, obviously, I think we’re going to see a cabinet here very shortly. And then they have to draft a budget, and then legislation starts. So let’s kick it off. I guess will. We’ll start with you. You know, if we think about the previous Liberal government, and what we think we’re going to see in the new Liberal government, what do you think is going to be any differences, improvements, changes in the trade file for this government?

Will Pellerin 

So I think the government will be far more fiscally conservative. First of all, I think there’s going to be an impetus to balance the budget. I think there’s going to be a lot more targeted focus, but trade is front and center of the whole portfolio, no question about it. I think the number one priority is solving this dispute with with the United States, as you know, and as we’ll be discussing. The Prime Minister is heading to Washington this afternoon to meet with President Trump. Tomorrow. A lot of things will flow from that, but high level priorities, I think the general gist of it is to try to find a way to balance, to make friends with the United States, probably try to make friends with China to the extent possible, and appoint some competent people to to lead that charge across the board.

Tayler Ferrell 

I mean, I think that’s I think that’s exactly right. I think it’ll be interesting to see how there’ll be a tension between making friends with the United States and making friends with China. There’s an interesting tension there, and making new friends, or deeper friendships, with a trade diversification,

Warrington Ellacott  

yeah. And in that regard, I see a real education for traders on expanding their export expertise, right? Because, I mean, with everything, everything in this world, there’s there’s also an opportunity, and I think this is great opportunity for traders, not only in Canada but elsewhere, to expand their export expertise. Would you agree?

Tayler Ferrell 

Absolutely. I think that’s a question that we’re experiencing a lot from clients right now, is these issues that have always been around but have not been front and center of mind, things like classification, tariff, classification and value for duty, they are front of center, front and center now, and it’s going to continue to be that way for companies that look to export to new markets.

Warrington Ellacott  

Yeah, no will, I guess you know when, when someone thinks about export? What do you think is the first couple of things they should be thinking about?

Will Pellerin 

Yeah, I mean, absolutely. The question is market access and customers. I mean, there’s the business angle, and there’s the leak lay answer, right? And sometimes those things go well hand in hand, but the primary one is, who’s going to buy this product, and can you find alternative buyers, and what’s it going to cost to actually ship, right? If you’re a furniture manufacturer in in Manitoba, and you’ve always been shipping south to Chicago, that made a lot of sense. Can you now ship and turn that and sell to the Italians or the French or the Brits from, you know, Winnipeg in a commercially reasonable manner? Maybe not. So it all depends on the industry, and all depends on the sectors and making sure that you find buyers for those products where you can be economic in shipping that product. Then there’s the legal question, right? Do you have what it takes to meet the regulatory regimes of the EU or Asia, or wherever else you might be shipping with Japan or South Korea or something the sort that has, you know, a strong consumer base. And what do you have by way of frameworks and relationships? And you have, are your brokers equipped to assist you with that? Are your legal counsel equipped to assist you with those issues and the like? And do you have preferential market access in those in those regimes? Right? So you we, we know of the CETA, we know of our trade agreement with South Korea. We know the cptpp, and that opens a lot of doors to for Canadian businesses. But is it enough? And what do those agreements provide?

Warrington Ellacott  

And I think there’s also a business relationship question, right? Like the agreements between partners also would be much different from, say, an agreement in North America with an agreement with a European partner or an Asian partner, right?

Will Pellerin 

I think that’s exactly right. I think that the this is a place that the media dynamic has perhaps missed the mark a little bit, right, where people talk about, well, we have trade agreements with Japan through the cptpp or with South Korea. We are with the EU I mean, that’s all fine and dandy from a legal perspective, to have the legal framework there, but it doesn’t mean that that you can replace 20 years of relationships that you’ve developed with your US customers or your US suppliers overnight, right? You don’t necessarily have the depth of business relationships there, and that takes a really long time. So that’s not something that can be replaced right away. And the same is true frankly, across Canada, right? We talked about the Agreement on Internal Trade, or the Canada Free Trade Agreement, right? And whether or not you can replace relationships with the US counterpart by shipping from coast to coast here in Canada, maybe, but not always, certainly. And maybe you’ve not heard about those relationships. You know, a Vancouver company with companies in New Brunswick or Quebec or something of this

Warrington Ellacott  

sort. Yeah. So last time we spoke, we had Sean Stevenson, our good friend from Dentons on, and we were talking once again about origin. Origin was becoming ever more prominent, but, and we last spoke at April 3, so it’s just we’ll get started into sort of what’s transpired since April 3. And we’ve seen a number of activities from the US administration on a number of fronts. We’ve seen activity on seafood and fishing, copper, timber, and number, I know will you’re deep in that one, pharmaceutical, semiconductors, semiconductors and manufacturing and critical minerals, and now we have foreign films. But I guess the My question is, that’s a lot of stuff. And I guess the question is, I guess Taylor, I’ll start with you as we start thinking about trading moving forward, it appears that not all commodities, but the overwhelming majority of commodities that people trade, are now being captured by one or more tariffs. And what do you see is that complicating the business dynamic moving forward?

Tayler Ferrell 

Well, I think I’ll also flag another product that is of major interest to Canada that wasn’t mentioned earlier, is autos. That’s been a massive development since, since the last podcast, and from a Canadian perspective, that’s been a front of mine, absolutely. But when it comes to all these new products being captured by tariffs, it’s a new cost that companies haven’t had to account for before, haven’t had to consider before, and need to consider how they want to deal with it going forward. And can they lobby with the government to get exceptions? Can they absorb the cost, or are they going to pass it down? That’s, that’s the ultimate consideration. I

Warrington Ellacott  

mean, there’s a lot to debate whether on the policy side, but I guess I’d even want to go to the practical side. I guess it will, because the rules for each of these commodities is different, right? So. So if you’re, let’s say you’re a multi trader, and you’re captured by multiple dynamics here, the complications on one’s business and the complications on its legal construct is also quite increasing in complication, right? Yeah,

Will Pellerin 

I mean the scenario planning for a sophisticated company that operates across a large swath of different businesses is absolutely nuts, right? You’re trying to game. Play a role. Play the different section 232, national security tariffs that you’ve talked about, Warrington, that could come into force, whether it’s critical minerals or timber and lumber or any of these other products that are currently under investigation that could lead to future tariffs in a number of months from now, right? These these processes that are currently unfolding, we know what we have today by way of tariffs. Those could shift pretty quickly. We know what’s being investigated for future tariffs. We can kind of scenario plan around those to some degree. But in terms of mapping it all out, these products are going to be hit. These products might be hit. These products, we think we might be able to avail ourselves of certain exceptions. Then there’s a retaliatory tariff piece, and it goes on and on and trying to and we are doing that exercise with a number of companies where we’re actually mapping this and scenario planning for those tariffs, and then understanding, okay, we have exceptions for these tariff codes. We really need to rethink our tariff classification that we’ve never really paid attention to for these products. We’ve never really paid a lot of attention on origin for these products. We probably have to do more work there, and then actually getting to the bottom of that and beyond that. You know, is our valuation right, or can we actually reduce our value for duty to reduce the tariff impact if duties do have to be paid? So it all comes down, of course, to those big three pillars, right of origin, tariff classification and value for duty, but they play in different ways, and the scenarios and the the tariffs are changing regularly, and there’s going to be a new wave when these 232, tariffs hit at the in the fall, assuming that the US sticks their timeline. And

Warrington Ellacott  

it appears that the execution of these tends to be hard and upfront, and then they there’s a pullback. And I think we saw that again. Was it last week? I think I lose track of time. But the there was the executive order with respect to stacking of the tariffs, where the rule was now changed. And I know Taylor, we were talking about it. So that changes things once again, does it not

Tayler Ferrell 

absolutely? I mean, another example is the original 232, tariffs. When they were initially implemented Canada, many countries had negotiated carves at car votes, and then this time around, with President Trump, second administration, they got rid of all those car votes. There are no car votes. Now, whether or not there would be more added or reintroduced is, is anybody’s guess. Yeah.

Warrington Ellacott  

So I get, I don’t know, for small business owners and medium sized business owners, I know there’s been a lot of frustration on the China side. I know that a lot of them have had orders that were coming on the water that they’re just not able to accept from a cash flow perspective, and and even on the origin and classification front, was very challenging for these folks, and it doesn’t seem that that it is going to resolve itself anytime soon. We still have reciprocal tariffs that are being negotiated. That’s what it sounds like. So it it to describe it as a mess. I don’t think is unfair. I think that’s a fair assumption. But I guess, you know will because we have a mess. You know what? I guess what are the kind of key takeaways that listeners should be focused on during this period?

Will Pellerin 

Think there’s nothing more important than really understanding the commercial aspects and the legal aspects of what you’re dealing with right fundamentally, who’s your importer? That’s the person that has to pay at the border. What do your contracts say in terms of who actually has liability for duties? Can you pass that on? What is your strength in terms of a negotiating position? Can you force a renegotiation, even if the contract doesn’t call for it? And we’re seeing a lot of that. We’re writing plenty of letters on behalf of clients also, right? And it’s not triggering a force majeure, but simply saying we can’t continue under this present model. And if you want to continue doing business with us, then we’re going to have to renegotiate. Some of that stuff might lead down the road to lawsuits, but for the time being, everyone’s trying to make it work, and everyone kind of understands this new reality, and we need the products to continue, and in most cases, the products aren’t available in the same way in Canada to continue, right? So a lot of these tariffs. Are meant to protect domestic manufacturing and the like. But that’s not always, always the case. I mean, we’re seeing a lot of products, car seats for baby, you know, baby car seats, or off road tires, or all these types of things that aren’t made in the in Canada and and they’re simply being hit with tariffs for really no proper benefits and really not applying a heck of a lot of pressure on the US administration to change force.

Warrington Ellacott  

And I think it’s fair to sort of highlight to the our US listeners that Canada has free trade agreements with all the other g7 partners, and it also has free trade agreements directly with Mexico through cptpp, as well as many Asian traders, and so the FTA environment in Canada as a much more fluid and free situation. I forgot CETA, you know, with the European Union. So there likely is going to be a change of assortments between, say, Canadian retail, maybe even Mexican retailer and US retail, you know, Taylor, do you see that happening at some point? I

Tayler Ferrell 

mean, absolutely. I think one point that, you know, the previous Canadian government was criticized for was was some of its immigration policies, but what immigrants offer to Canada is access the relationships to these markets, right? And that’s a way to develop a business. And we can start seeing expansion into, you know, undersea to the EU and and use the cptpp to expand into these, these markets. Absolutely. Yeah.

Warrington Ellacott  

And then so specifically, this week, was it this? I think it was. No. It was last week the Canadian government and finance Canada actually put out a remission order that was supposed to address the hundreds and hundreds of questions that had been coming into the department about what is a fair tariff and will you winch in car seats. For example, car seats were not being manufactured in Canada, but yet they were being tariffed. So I think will. I’ll start with you. Why don’t you just highlight for the listeners what what transpired and what questions are currently being answered of the department,

Will Pellerin 

right? So I think you’re absolutely right to focus on this remission order. This this exception that was released on April 16, Warrington, because it is a big deal, and we’ve spent spent much of the last week figuring it out and working through it. So high level, this provides a remission or an exception for all the tariffs that have been applied since March 4,

Warrington Ellacott  

Canadian retaliatory certificate. That’s all

Will Pellerin 

that’s being hit here is so it’s removing the tariff, or removing the application of the tariff. Rather, for Canadian businesses, when the imports relate to a number of different things, including health, national security, right, where the importer is a hospital or something of this sort. But very, very importantly, and perhaps most importantly in all of this, is this exception for that doesn’t basically takes the surtaxes away for goods that are used in manufacturing or processing of other goods here in Canada. So basically, and we’ve had conversations with the Department of Finance on this really for input goods, primarily right goods that Canadian manufacturers need for their own manufacturing operations that they couldn’t get from outside the United States, and it was really important to the government that those goods not be hit. Department of Finance told us they had about 600 remission applications in the queue. Most of those might not be fully formed or fleshed out, and probably would take a long time, but this probably takes care of hundreds of those requests and immediately gives relief to companies importing and actually applies retroactively back to the original tariff, whether it’s the March 4 or the march 13 date. So you just, you know, apply the order and council code into your customs paperwork. And Bob’s your uncle,

Warrington Ellacott  

yeah, Taylor, there was, there is a sort of level of due diligence that needs to be done here. You just can’t pick a pick an argument of remission out of thin air. You got to have some justification for that. And there was also an option for an advanced customs ruling. Is that correct?

Tayler Ferrell 

That’s That is correct. And we are experiencing, we’re getting a lot of questions from clients. First, on the there’s a confusion between just general remission applications. And then can we use this US remission order, and do we properly fall under these exceptions, and a lot of clients are hearing, you know, market intelligence competitor, you know, we’re receiving permission, and is it, is it through this application process? Probably not. Are they using the US permission order, and are they properly using it? That’s a big question. And then, yes, you can. Apply to the CBSA for an advanced ruling query, how fast they’d act like, how fast you can get that ruling in time for your import. And keeping in mind the US remission order is only available for goods that are imported before October 16, 2025, so six months. So where time is of the essence. Is the advanced ruling a great option?

Warrington Ellacott  

And I think the practical recommendation for our listeners in you know, Mexico us, is they need to contact their business partners in Canada and have a discussion about whether there is a a chance that we can apply. And then, of course, the Canadian, their Canadian partner, would take the lead in initiating that remission order. But I think there’s some opportunity, at least, to explore the question and then execute a remission request, right? That’s very well,

Will Pellerin 

yeah, that’s right. I mean, the remission applies or it doesn’t, and in some cases, that might be a little bit marginal, right? If it’s for equipment used in a factory that’s that’s going to produce a good does that work or does that not work? It’s not an input good, but maybe there’s an argument to be made, and that’s where we’re having a lot of conversations with clients on some of this stuff. But Taylor’s absolutely right. There is so much misinformation that we’re hearing in the market right now. We’re hearing of companies saying, Oh, I have a remission application, I have a remission that I can use, or I’ve gotten a remission? Well, no one, and the Department of Finance has confirmed this. No one’s getting additional remissions other than this April 16 remission that actually applies other than autos, which is its own thing. So there’s a lot of people misunderstanding what actually exists out there. It’s the old telephone game where one person tells the other person that they have something that they can use. Maybe it’s an exception under Chapter 99 of the customs tariff or something the sort. But the messaging is getting jarbled along the way. Well,

Warrington Ellacott  

I can tell you, I said, the Canadian Association of importers and exporters are taking this up with finance Canada directly, and we’ve been taking some input from our members, and we have many questions that we’re asking of the department, so stay tuned on that.

Will Pellerin 

There’s a lot of questions to be asked, and frankly, the Department of Finance is very interested in hearing and has told us also that CBSA is the one administering and that we should also be reaching out to CBSA for their views and their interpretations. But

Warrington Ellacott  

that’s another sort of pro tip for you listeners. If you’re looking for a strong consensus voice, joining a trade association or a Chamber of Commerce is a great idea, so give us a call.

Will Pellerin 

We tell our clients all the time. All right,

Warrington Ellacott  

enough on remission and let’s I did want to get your thoughts about though, this this maritime dominance executive order. It’s quite broad, and it impacts both the the Chinese vessels of China origin and and then also then reflects on the owners that may be of Chinese origin, and then vessel operators in auto and so it it’s a complete tariff regime is sort of the wrong word. But anyway, there’s a there’s a financial bubble now, over the entire logistics and shipping container framework, I think one of the great carve outs was that shipping on the Great Lakes was not in scope. And I think that’s great news for domestic producers in both the United States and Canada who are moving bulk container products, whether that be grains or ores or minerals or salts or sugars. I think that was great. But will I was, I was interested in getting your thoughts on like, obviously this is going to have a massive hit on cost. And you know, where is that going to where is that going to lay in the supply chain and and maybe even the legal context moving forward,

Will Pellerin 

it’s a really good question. We’re struggling with it. I mean, first of all, it’s not really a question of Canadian law, so we don’t spend a lot of time advising in that space. But you’re absolutely right, like, from a commercial perspective, it’s just another bump in the road or actual roadblock in some cases, right? We’re having difficulty even understanding, and clients are having a difficulty understanding where the harm is even coming from. Most is the problem these potential shipping pieces is going to be the tariffs. These two things stacking with each other is just a recipe for ultimate disaster for many, many companies. So I think that’s the lay of land, something that we’re monitoring carefully. But on the Canadian side, we don’t yet have a heck of a lot of insight into how it’s all playing out, precisely because of the exception on the Great Lakes, amongst other things. I think I’m

Warrington Ellacott  

going to, I’m going to call up our friends at the Vancouver Port Authority and the Montreal Port Authority and have them on the pod. I mean, clearly I think this is another input cost that business did not think about, or couldn’t it. Couldn’t even imagine that this was going to be an issue, and unfortunately, small. Business owners are now going to have to pay particular attention to how their goods are being transported and and what the flag of the carrier is and the like that, to me, is a bit of a stretch. All right. Well, now it’s time to roll the dice and try to figure out, Taylor, we’ll go with you first. Like, where are we in Canada’s trade like, if I take a high level like, where are we? I

Tayler Ferrell 

think where we are is it’s, it’s three pronged. I already indicated, trade diversification, exploring new partners, reducing interprovincial barriers, reducing regulatory burden, and right? And I mean, in Prime Minister current, in the platform and the liberal platform, there was, you know, mention of investing in infrastructure, rail, ships, and that will be a goal, hopefully, if, you know, if followed through with it’ll go a long way towards reducing these even if not legal barriers, like just geographical barriers, and then also, I think there needs to be an increase, or I expect to see an increase in defense spending. Defense spending will tick boxes of, you know, increasing our NATO obligations, promoting domestic production or domestic manufacturing. Excuse me, we have good capability in Canada, and it might go a long way to appeasing prem or President Trump, who has raised this issue in the past. So it’s a sort of low hanging fruit in a some that’s something that Canada can increase production of and trade in. So

Warrington Ellacott  

I’ll submit, though, that my expectation, though, is if there is infrastructure investment in Canada, there’s going to be a procurement policy also, which is going to reward Canadian producers in those contracts. Right?

Tayler Ferrell 

Absolutely. I often work in the in a public procurement space, or advising the public procurement space, and it’ll be interesting to see how that pans out, knowing Canada’s and the province’s obligations under Canada’s trade agreements that have public procurement chapters, so there are rules governing how far you can go with by Canada, or, you Know, policies that would hurt other bidders from other countries, so it’d be interesting to see what that looks like on paper.

Warrington Ellacott  

Now, we’re not telling the Prime Minister what to say when he goes to Washington on Tuesday, but I mean, Will? It’s very difficult for me to see whether we actually have a usmca agreement today, with all of the activity going on, it it seems very difficult to come to a table with all this activity. So I’m interested in your thoughts there.

Will Pellerin 

Yeah, and kind of to even answer your earlier question, give my sense of where we are on trade right, right now, to me, we’re very close to the bottom right. It’s things can things are looking up, and potentially there’s a further pit that we can fall down. But I think there is optimism here, optimism that the meeting tomorrow will start and lay the groundwork for ultimate renegotiation of the of the usmca. I think that will take time. It will take many months to relationship that needs to be developed, but I’m with you. Warrington, I completely agree, ultimately, this agreement is not being respected. I think that’s an understatement. But what’s helpful at least, is how the United States is using the usmca at least, to justify lower tariffs on Canada, for example, those national security tariffs where there’s that usmca exemption, some of the auto Tariffs applied by the United States are exempt for usmca origin, components and parts. And so there’s at least a realization by the US administration, that we do have this agreement, this agreement that Trump himself negotiated, but that can only take us so far. And I think we’re entering kind of a wholesale renegotiation of that agreement, whether we want to or not. I think at the end of the day, that’s what we’re looking for, but it’s going to be very difficult. And if I was in the Prime Minister’s shoes, I would certainly be extremely cautious about giving away anything at this stage in the game without a full guarantee that we’re done on tariffs. And you can’t just offer a little bit to remove the tariffs as they stand, knowing full well, as we know that these other tariffs, so these 232, tariffs are being threatened and could be imposed tomorrow morning, right? So if we’re going to actually renegotiate to remove the tariffs, it has to apply to these tariffs, but also to all these threatened tariffs that could take effect in the coming months, or we’re right back to square one, and we’ve done nothing for ourselves.

Warrington Ellacott  

Yeah. I mean, Secretary Besson has also made statements in the media about the expectation that the United States trading partners will come along with some China measures, and if that’s not the case, that there might be some punitive actions against those traders. So, you know, Taylor, my criticism many years has been that we, Canada really hasn’t had a China trade strategy, frankly, and I’m not sure we’re closer to that or further away from that. At the moment, it feels like we’re kind of still sitting in the locker room before the game starts,

Tayler Ferrell 

and I’m curious to see if we’ll stay in the locker room or what that might look like. I mean, President Trump, obviously he, you know, he removed the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days, except for on China, and he’s taking a firm stance on China and Canada has historically introduced trade measures. For example, our EVs policy to try and address the United States concern. So how will we toe that line between developing a China policy, China trade policy and and, you know, our with our US partners as well,

Warrington Ellacott  

to our horn again. So in November, our annual trade summit this year, we’re going to focus on diversification. Actioning Canada’s trade diversification strategy. No more talk. It’s going to be action. So we’re going to be inviting all of our good friends from around the world to have a conversation about, how do we trade more with Canada? That’s going to be our mix. And of course, the Mexican is going to be well, everyone’s coming to this party, but will What do you think? What do you think is going to happen at the g7 and like is it’s going to be entertaining, for sure? I

Will Pellerin 

yeah, I think the the tone will have changed significantly. I think that obviously Prime Minister Trudeau and Prime Minister Carney are very different people. Trudeau had a you know, bent of being the progressive standard barrier bearer globally. That is not the case with with Prime Minister Carney. I think that we’re kind of in for a bit of a reset of the relationship and of Canada’s place and how we play globally, rather than being kind of the global voice for for progressive trade, or what, what it may be, I think, I think it might be a bit of a boring g7 actually, yeah. And I think, and I think that’s probably what Canada wants. Ultimately, at this point, I think the Prime Minister is getting his, you know, I don’t

Warrington Ellacott  

know. Is currently a golfer. Can he take the President out

Will Pellerin 

at the guy there plays hockey, but I don’t know if he’s ever I don’t know what. Can’t

Warrington Ellacott  

somewhere golf club. No, he doesn’t work. That’s no fun. Taylor, are you trying to jump in there? What do you think?

Tayler Ferrell 

Well, I’m interested to see Prime Minister Kearney has relationships with some of the folks that will be attending the g7 and President Trump has imposed measures that have not made himself friends with those of the g7 so that’s an that’s an interesting dynamic to start, to start with, to see how that plays out.

Warrington Ellacott  

You know the Sherpas are flying around and trying to get consensus as we speak. And I know Matt Holmes at the Canadian Chamber was doing some activities. So keep on it, Matt, keep going. Well, I’m gonna wrap it up here. But I just, I wanted to send some congratulations to the simply trade folks that this is they’ve had 300 episodes, and we’ve, we at IU Canada, been blessed to play a role in that. So congratulations and happy birthday and happy 300 This is a 302 so we’re happy to be 302 this is great. So once again, will paler in Taylor Ferrell from McMillan in Ottawa. If you you need some assistance. By all means. Give them a call, and great to see you guys. Likewise, fantastic. Thanks for having me. I’ll probably see you in

Will Pellerin 

Ottawa soon, anytime.

Warrington Ellacott  

All right, folks, you have yourselves a nice day.

Lalo  

Thank you very much for joining us. Simply trade is brought to you by the generous contributions of global Training Center. You can follow the show and GTC on LinkedIn or Twitter and other social networks. Make sure you check out the show notes in the description for a full rundown of today’s show with all the important links. Also make sure that you share this with a friend and subscribe on your favorite streaming platform. We really like hearing from you if you enjoyed the show, make sure to rate and review where we listen to this podcast. If you or someone you know would like to be a guest on the show or would like to sponsor simply trade or suggest any topic you would like for us to discuss, please contact us via email at simply trade@globaltrainingcenter.com or you can DM us on Twitter at simply trade pod. Thank you again for the privilege of your time. Happy trading. Simply trade is. Not a law firm or an advisor. The topics and discussions conducted by simply trade hosts and guests should not be considered and is not intended to substitute legal advice. You should seek appropriate counsel for your own situations. These conversations and information are directed towards listeners in the United States for informational, educational, entertainment purposes only, and should not be substituted for legal advice. No listener or viewer of this podcast should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this podcast without first seeking legal advice from counsel. Information on this podcast may not be up to date, depending on the time of publishing and the time of viewership. The content of this posting is provided as is, no representations are made that the content is error free. The views expressed in or through this podcast are those of the individual speakers, not those of their respective employers or global Training Center as a whole. All liability with respect to actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this podcast are hereby expressly disclaimed you.