this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
27 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

12169 readers
329 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


🌐 Other Relevant Communities


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Contrary to what Carney claimed, interest and debt repayment are not considered in net profit.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

People want clarity on how things will play out 15 years into a deal made with Trump? He can't be counted on for a deal to last 15 days.

[–] ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

This bridge is a nightmare.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Even with the horrendous revenue split, it will still be a benefit to Canada.

[–] ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

I am under a NDA, all I will say is that the amount of wasted money is absurd.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Without violating the NDA, are you able to gesture in the direction of where someone might go looking to find that info for themselves?

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Silly people. Amortization is part of 'operating expenses'. That pretty much means that the depreciation on the bridge all comes off before Canada calculates what it pays to the States. It pretty much covers the interest on the debt, and a good chunk of the debt itself. So the debt payments are disguised as 'amortization'. Usually, depreciation is added back through an entry in cash flow. which goes to the Canadian government.

Whoever says that 'bridge debt' is not included in the side agreement just does not understand accounting. Of course, Trump does not understand it, either.

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago

However, the text of the agreement in principle states that Canada will make payments to the U.S. totalling 50 per cent of “net bridge and crossing related revenues” for 15 years, and doesn’t clearly define what counts as operating costs or make mention of Canada’s debt.

https://globalnews.ca/news/11978035/carney-premiers-us-tariff-threat/

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

That's all very textbook, but in this case you are wrong. Canada will pay the interest and debt repayment with their part of net profit. Read the terms.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Not how this reads in section 1 https://gordiehoweinternationalbridge.com/proposed-agreement-in-principle/

  1. Economic Participation: Canada will provide annual economic participation payments, outside the 2012 Canada–Michigan Crossing Agreement equal to fifty percent (50%) of net bridge and crossing related revenues for the first fifteen (15) fiscal years of bridge operations.

Net bridge and crossing related revenues is all revenues collected with respect to the bridge, less all incurred operating costs of the bridge.

Such payments shall be made to a United States-Canada Economic Development Fund, established and solely controlled by the Government of the United States.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

That was the original (fair) deal that Trump killed.

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Again, such silliness. Carney is a banker. He knows how to word contracts. All revenue collected comes to Canada, then Canada sends a check. Canada sets the terms of the 'refund' check.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

So naive. Get informed. Carney folded.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Canada and the United States have reached agreement in principle on the following:

  1. Economic Participation: Canada will provide annual economic participation payments, outside the 2012 Canada–Michigan Crossing Agreement equal to fifty percent (50 per cent) of net bridge and crossing related revenues for the first fifteen (15) fiscal years of bridge operations. Net bridge and crossing related revenues is all revenues collected with respect to the bridge, less all incurred operating costs of the bridge. Such payments shall be made to a United Sates-Canada Economic Development Fund, established and solely controlled by the Government of the United States.

  2. Eligible Fund Commitments: Canada and the United States will reasonably agree on the objects of the United States-Canada Economic Development Fund, which will be for the benefit of the United States and trade between Canada and the United States.

  3. Toll Governance: Canada will direct the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (WDBA) to inform the Government of the United States regarding proposed toll-rate adjustments during the first fifteen (15) fiscal years of bridge operations and to seek the United States’ consent where:

a. a proposed toll-rate increase (i) exceeds ten percent (10 per cent) within any fiscal year and (ii) would result in toll rates that are above the average of comparable regional crossings; or

b. a proposed toll-rate reduction would result in toll rates falling below the average of comparable regional crossings.

The Government of the United States must provide its consent or notice of withholding of such consent within thirty (30) days of notification from WDBA, failing which consent shall be deemed to have been provided.

  1. Crossing Agreement: Nothing in this Agreement in Principle shall be interpreted as amending, modifying or superseding the 2012 Canada–Michigan Crossing Agreement or the ownership, governance and financial framework established thereunder.

  2. Implementation: Officials will develop and finalize the legal, financial and administrative arrangements necessary to implement this Agreement in Principle as expeditiously as possible.

  3. Bridge Opening: Upon confirmation of this Agreement in Principle, the Parties will direct their respective officials, agencies and authorities to undertake all actions necessary to open the Gordie Howe International Bridge to commercial and passenger traffic on or before 27 July 2026. The Parties, along with the State of Michigan, shall also work together to hold a ceremonial opening event no later than 3 August 2026.

  • Canada nixes cross-border celebrations for Gordie Howe Bridge opening after new tariffs
  • Lutnick boasts U.S. will get 50% of net revenue on Gordie Howe Bridge, calls it ‘Art of the Deal’
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I wonder if "net revenue" is gross less Canada's debt payments at a fixed amount?

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago

Depreciation is a standard deduction in calculating operating expenses. It usually amounts to a dollar figure that could exceed interest, depending on the amortization period.

However, the text of the agreement in principle states that Canada will make payments to the U.S. totalling 50 per cent of “net bridge and crossing related revenues” for 15 years, and doesn’t clearly define what counts as operating costs or make mention of Canada’s debt. https://globalnews.ca/news/11978035/carney-premiers-us-tariff-threat/

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Interest and debt repayment are not included in the net profit calculation.

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

But depreciation is an operating expense.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 18 hours ago

But it's not part of this negotiated definition of net profit.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Good grief, it's not a "deal" at all - "proposed agreement in principle" indeed. With no definition of "operating costs," it's pretty much a worthless piece of paper.

There's also some confirmation that the US would have a say in toll reductions, not just increases as was reported last week.

As an exercise in kicking the can down the road, it's...fine. As an ironclad agreement, it sucks.

[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Even if it was a "deal" its still no deal. The US are bad faith actors without functional courts or congress. There can be no deal, or agreement at all, that won't be just as casually broken as every other deal.

This doesn't go away after Trump. He is just the face of a movement that has serious backing across the US. They can't be trusted or relied on.

There are no concessions to make. No deals to negotiate. The US will act as they will, we will respond. That's it.

Our job is to decouple as quickly as possible. Government agencies and Canadian corporations need to get off American tech like Amazon and Microsoft. No more Office, Teams. We need domestic or european partnerships with payment providers to replace Visa and Mastercard.

We need an increased port and shipping industry to remain a trading nation, and better rail to get to and from ports. Building this can easily absorb losses from US dependant markets, and put Canadians to work using our steel and aluminium.

Private investment is welcome, but its long past time to revive the crown corporation to build what we must. We have all the talent and resources right here.

Manufacturing isn't about labour anymore. Its about engineering and automation. We have deep greenhouse and agricultural expertise. We have world leading institutions.

What is needed, is the willingness to go boldly back to a proven methodology of a mixed market ecoonomy. Its what we did right before neoliberal ideology led us to this dumpsterfire. Crown corporations can bridge any gap.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Oh thank goodness I'm not the only one that sees it. I know everyone employed in US exports is terrified of not having that market, and they should be it's going to cost us a lot of jobs, jobs that will only be partially replaced by domestic production and diversification, but we really, REALLY have no choice, and the upside is it'll mean a lot of new jobs in other fields if we do it right. We need to leverage the crown corps to get the ball rolling, same as we've always done. It's not an if, it's a how and a when, and the sooner we reach that conclusion the better.