Trump says US better off without USMCA before July review

Donald Trump said Wednesday that the US would be better off without the USMCA trade agreement, pushing a North American trade risk back onto corporate calendars less than two weeks before the pact’s July 1 review.

Companies had largely treated the review as procedural. His comments turned it into a policy question for manufacturers, food groups, energy traders and retailers that move goods across the US, Mexico and Canada every day. Reuters reported that Trump did not issue a formal withdrawal threat and said he may still sign the pact. Bloomberg reported a tougher version, saying he also raised the possibility of leaving it unsigned and allowing it to terminate. For companies with parts or inventory in transit, the distinction matters less than the revived uncertainty.

“I would rather not have the agreement, but I may sign it.”

Donald Trump, via Reuters

The market signal sits in that ambiguity. Bloomberg said Trump went further in separate remarks, saying he would rather leave the accord unsigned and would prefer it terminated. Reuters recorded the softer caveat. Either way, a trade framework behind autos, parts and other cross-border manufacturing is again being described by the White House as optional, not settled law.

The economic exposure is large and uneven. Reuters said the US goods trade deficit with Canada was $46 billion in 2025, while the deficit with Mexico reached $197 billion. Mexico’s exposure is sharper because about 80 per cent of its exports go to the United States. A threat does not have to become a withdrawal notice to matter: suppliers can delay orders, add inventory or slow capital plans while lawyers and customs teams wait for the next signal from Washington.

Canada gives Trump the smaller deficit number. Mexico carries the heavier pressure point.

The review mechanics now matter more than they did a week ago. Reuters said the United States, Mexico and Canada face a July 1 deadline to approve a renewal or signal an intent to leave the pact. If renewed, the agreement remains in rolling review for another 10 years. If not, the next phase is less about paperwork and more about how much risk companies should price into supply chains that were built around tariff-free treatment. That is a boardroom issue as much as a trade-law one.

Industries organized around North American production rules would feel the shift first. Matt Blunt, head of the American Automotive Policy Council, was among the industry figures Reuters identified in its account of the review, underscoring the auto sector’s sensitivity to the pact’s future. A vehicle assembled in one country can include parts that have crossed borders several times. For automakers and suppliers, a reopened USMCA debate can affect sourcing and plant planning even before any legal break starts.

Trump has not committed to ending the agreement, and neither Reuters nor Bloomberg reported a formal withdrawal notice on Wednesday. The language still puts trade friction back beside other second-half risks for investors and companies that had filed USMCA under stable policy. Next month’s review now resembles a test of North America’s trading framework, rather than routine housekeeping.