Trump rules out leaving the USMCA and says a Canada deal could come fairly soon

President Donald Trump played down the possibility of withdrawing from the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and suggested a trade deal with Canada could come soon¹. Asked directly about withdrawing from the pact, he answered that things were going very well, and added that Washington would have a great relationship with Mexico². An aggregated summary dates the remarks to September 12 and reports that the president said Washington will not withdraw, which narrows but does not settle the pact’s scheduled joint review⁵.

The reversal is on the record. Trump has previously said he was considering withdrawing from the agreement, and denied plans to withdraw on Saturday; one account of the exchange notes he asked what a term in his own deal meant⁶. Coverage before the remarks had flagged fears that a withdrawal threat would rewrite the rules for North American trade as the relationship deteriorated⁴. On the Canada talks, United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told Fox News that Washington had offered Ottawa the best deal⁷. Reporting also stresses what has not changed: the headline framing is that the pact is kept while tariffs escalate².

Why it matters to investors

The agreement is the legal floor under North American supply chains, and withdrawal is not a fast process: member nations can leave provided they give six months of notice³. Removing the withdrawal threat therefore removes a tail risk rather than a current cost. The current cost is the tariff layer sitting on top of the pact, which this reporting says continues to escalate².

That distinction is the whole story for anyone with cross-border exposure. Rules of origin, dispute settlement and investment protections survive; the duties that determine landed cost do not depend on them^4,5. The joint review of the pact remains open, so the framework’s terms are still in play even if its existence is not⁵.

What to watch

The first item is whether a Canada agreement materialises on the timetable implied by fairly soon, and what it does to existing duties^1,7. Greer’s characterisation that Washington already offered its best deal suggests limited room on the American side⁷.

The second is the joint review, which the reporting describes as narrowed but unsettled⁵. The third is consistency: the president has moved from considering withdrawal to denying it within a short period, so the assurance is worth what the next statement says it is worth⁶. Mexico is the other party and is described in warmer terms than Canada, which leaves open whether a bilateral settlement arrives before a trilateral one².