When new U.S. tariffs affecting a broad range of Canadian products came into effect over the weekend, manufacturers were immediately faced with difficult questions around tariff classifications, pricing, customs procedures and how to manage the impact on U.S. customers.
WMCO responded quickly.
Over the weekend, the Cluster organized an emergency Facilitated Networking Forum for Monday, August 24, bringing manufacturers and industry partners together to compare what they were seeing, share strategies and identify the questions that needed urgent clarification.
That first discussion showed just how complicated the situation had become.
Companies were receiving different information from brokers, working through different tariff codes, and making real-time decisions about pricing, freight, product classification and customer relationships.
Rather than waiting for the situation to become clearer, WMCO used the forum to bring those experiences together and build a common understanding of the issues affecting the sector.
A second emergency forum followed on Wednesday, August 26, this time joined by trade lawyer Heather Jacobson, who worked through the questions raised by members and helped clarify how the new tariffs apply across different wood product categories.
Monday: Manufacturers Compare What They Are Seeing
The first forum was intentionally structured as an open working discussion.
Members shared how their companies were handling the tariffs, what their brokers were telling them and where uncertainty remained.
Some of the practical issues raised included:
- Who actually pays the tariff: Participants discussed the role of the importer of record and how Canadian exporters acting as U.S. importers may be directly responsible for tariff payments.
- Different approaches to customer pricing: Some manufacturers reported passing the full tariff cost on to U.S. customers, while others were sharing the cost or applying separate tariff surcharges.
- Managing freight costs: Participants discussed separating freight from product value where appropriate, since properly documented freight may not form part of the tariffable value.
- Classification uncertainty: Members compared tariff codes being used for cabinetry, architectural millwork, closets, furniture and component parts, with several noting that different brokers were providing different interpretations.
- Border reassessment risk: Companies discussed cases where shipments could be stopped, reviewed or reclassified by customs, creating the possibility of additional duties, delays and unexpected costs.
- U.S. assembly strategies: Members explored whether shipping parts or unassembled products to the U.S. for final assembly could reduce tariff exposure in certain circumstances, while recognizing that the approach can create substantial operational cost and risk.
- Pricing and compliance: Participants also cautioned against artificially adjusting invoice values or moving costs between product categories simply to reduce duties, emphasizing the importance of maintaining defensible and compliant documentation.
The conversation quickly demonstrated that there was no single answer that applied to every manufacturer.
Product type, final use, classification, assembly method, entered value and importer structure could all affect how a shipment was treated.
WMCO therefore used the Monday session to consolidate member questions and identify the areas where specialist legal guidance was needed.
Wednesday: Turning Questions into Clarification
Two days later, WMCO reconvened the industry with trade lawyer Heather Jacobson.
Heather’s approach was practical and product-specific.
Rather than simply reviewing tariff policy at a high level, she worked through actual examples raised by manufacturers and explained how customs classifications can change depending on the nature and intended use of a product.
One of the clearest examples involved the distinction between cabinetry, furniture and architectural products.
Heather explained that permanently installed cabinetry and wall paneling can be treated differently from standalone furniture, but that the distinction is not always obvious. Some cupboards, bookcases and shelving designed to be attached to walls can still fall within furniture classifications.
The group also discussed wood wall and ceiling panels, which may fall under builder’s joinery classifications rather than furniture codes.
These distinctions matter because products that appear very similar commercially can receive very different customs treatment.
Specific Issues Members Worked Through
The Wednesday discussion addressed several concrete examples raised directly by participating manufacturers:
- Bathroom vanities: Members discussed how certain vanity classifications may now face substantially higher duties and the need for companies to review whether their existing classification remains appropriate.
- Cabinet parts and finished products: Participants examined whether parts and components can be treated differently from finished assemblies and how customs considers the final use of the product.
- Closets versus kitchen cabinetry: The forum explored how very similar products can fall under different classifications depending on their intended use.
- Wall and ceiling panels: Heather clarified that some products in this category may fall under builder’s joinery rather than furniture classifications.
- Freight and customs value: Participants discussed when properly documented freight costs may be excluded from the entered value used to calculate duties.
- Importer of record structures: The group looked at how Canadian companies acting as U.S. importers of record can affect tariff responsibility and pricing decisions.
- Classification opinions versus binding rulings: Heather clarified that advice from customs brokers and consultants can be extremely useful, but those opinions are not legally binding. Companies requiring greater certainty can seek a formal binding ruling from U.S. Customs.
Heather also discussed mitigation strategies that companies may want to explore with qualified trade and customs advisors, including classification reviews, tariff engineering, customs valuation strategies and changes to import structures.
The overall message was not that companies should simply search for a lower tariff code.
It was that manufacturers should make sure their classifications are accurate, defensible and supported by proper documentation.
Members Sharing Strategies with Members
One of the most valuable parts of both forums was the exchange between manufacturers themselves.
Companies openly compared how they were responding to the same challenges.
Some members reported U.S. customers accepting the full tariff cost. Others were negotiating shared-cost arrangements or applying separate tariff surcharges.
Participants also discussed the effect these decisions could have on margins and competitiveness, particularly where absorbing even part of a tariff could significantly reduce profitability.
Other companies shared experiences around architectural millwork classifications, knockdown products, assembly in the United States and customs broker interpretations.
This exchange allowed members to learn not only from specialists, but from companies currently shipping products across the border and dealing with the issue directly.
Government Support and Funding
The Wednesday forum also looked beyond customs compliance to government support.
Moses from Belmark Advisory provided an overview of the federal Regional Tariff Response Initiative, including planned changes intended to make support more accessible to companies facing tariff-related pressures.
The discussion included potential support for businesses experiencing significant cost increases, revenue losses or liquidity challenges. Members were encouraged to review their eligibility early and begin preparing potential projects, particularly as competition for available funding is expected to be significant.
To make that process easier, WMCO has partnered with Belmark Consulting to provide members with a simple funding intake form. Companies can use the form to outline their needs and determine whether there may be relevant tariff-response or other government funding opportunities worth pursuing.
[Complete the WMCO–Belmark Funding Form]
The forum also reinforced a broader concern raised by manufacturers: the wood manufacturing sector is substantial, but often receives less attention than sectors such as automotive, steel and aerospace when trade support programs are developed.
From Information Sharing to Collective Advocacy
The forums were never intended to end with information sharing alone.
The concerns and examples raised by members are also helping WMCO build a clearer picture of how the tariffs are affecting manufacturers across cabinetry, furniture, architectural millwork, lumber and other segments of the sector.
That information is now contributing to broader advocacy efforts, including a coalition letter to government highlighting the importance of Ontario’s wood and advanced manufacturing sector and the practical consequences these tariffs are creating.
The aim is to ensure policymakers understand what manufacturers are actually experiencing: increased landed costs, pressure on margins, uncertainty around product classifications, disruption to customer relationships and the risk of losing competitiveness in the U.S. market.
The Value of the Cluster Model
The events of the week also demonstrated one of the core strengths of an industry cluster.
When a significant change happened over the weekend, WMCO was able to bring manufacturers together by Monday.
When those manufacturers identified questions that required specialist expertise, the Cluster brought the industry together again on Wednesday with a trade lawyer who could work through those questions directly.
Members did not have to navigate the issue entirely on their own.
They were able to compare experiences, share strategies, identify common challenges and help one another make sense of a rapidly changing trade environment.
That is exactly what the cluster model is designed to do.
WMCO will continue to monitor developments, share relevant tariff and funding information, advocate on behalf of the sector and create opportunities for manufacturers to work through these challenges together.
Comments are closed.