G7 Statement on Shared Concerns: Disconnect with the Economic Models of the United States and China. Possible Impacts on Industry and Biotechnology Security.

Finance ministers and central bank governors from the Group of Seven (“G7”) democracies prepared a summary document to paper over their respective differences while meeting in Banff, Alberta this past month in preparation for the formal G7 meeting to take place in Kananaskis in June. Officials called for a common understanding of how "non-market policies and practices" undermine international economic security. The statement did not mention President Trump nor the tariffs imposed internationally but clearly it will need to be front and centre at the meeting. Nor did the statement address China, the other world leader in economic terms, and the concerns of massive state subsidies and its export-driven economic model. The G7 statement called for an analysis of market concentration and international supply chain resilience. "We agree on the importance of a level playing field and taking a broadly coordinated approach to address the harm caused by those who do not abide by the same rules and lack transparency”. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/g7-draft-pledges-tackling-excessive-imbalances-global-economy-bloomberg-news-2025-05-22/ The G7 take a globalist perspective on economic analyses whereas the US and China appear to be less concerned.

As previously stated, there is no ambiguity that the US has significant concerns with respect China, including the flooding of Chinese-produced steel into the international market which has driven the prices down significantly. Notably, China's steel subsidisation rate, as a percentage of firm revenues, is ten times higher than that of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. This surge has disrupted steel markets in OECD economies, leading to a fivefold increase in anti-dumping measures since 2023 https://www.oecd.org/en/about/news/press-releases/2025/05/surging-excess-capacity-threatens-steel-market-stability-employment-and-decarbonisation-plans.html. 

Canada has imposed a 100% tariff on electric vehicles (“EVs”) from China in 2024, following the lead from the US. The move was to protect the North American market from yet more dumping. An EV from China is effectively on-third the price of the current lowest-priced EV in Canada. Tesla remains the top-selling EV, notwithstanding recent calls to boycott the vehicle based on political viewpoints of its founder, Elon Musk. China's Ministry of Commerce has said it will apply a 100 per cent tariff on Canadian rapeseed oil, oil cakes and pea imports, and a 25 per cent duty on Canadian aquatic products and pork. Even so, some Canadian economists have called to diminish or remove the tariffs on China https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-china-electric-vehicles-1.7486204. This would be an error. Canadians need employment from international automobile manufacturers as there are no Canadian based automobile companies. Chinese EVs would severely hamper the fledgling Canadian EV market which has seen heavy investment by government and industry players over the past few years https://www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/additional-analyses--analyses-complementaires/BLOG-2425-004--tallying-government-support-ev-investment-in-canada--bilan-aide-gouvernementale-investissement-dans-ve-canada. 

After the recent COVID pandemic, the scientific community was attempting to confirm the basis for the emergence of the coronavirus that initiated the pandemic in the first place. It appears that the available data points to a natural zoonotic emergence within, or closely linked to, the seafood market in Wuhan, China. There is no direct evidence linking the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 to laboratory work conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, although there remain controversial opinions. https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-virology-093022-013037. An incident in Canada at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Manitoba, which has top biosafety level facilities to handle the most dangerous viruses, resulted in the termination and removal of two Chinese nationals who were researchers at the laboratory in 2019, over security breaches, which government officials said included improperly sending Ebola genetic viral sequence samples to colleagues at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China and failing to disclose professional relationships with Chinese researchers and institutions. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service remained concerned of the security threat posed to Canadian research institutions, including government research facilities, by incentivizing economic espionage and theft of intellectual property, and one of the Chinese national’s close and clandestine relationships with a variety of entities within China, known to be a security threat to Canada https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/winnipeg-lab-firing-documents-released-china-1.7128865. It has been advocated that Canada should immediately end all government-funded research collaborations with China in a host of sensitive technology areas, as a parliamentary committee has recommended in a new report. The ban is needed to counter the Chinese government’s “increasingly assertive” efforts to build up its military and scientific might, sometimes through espionage https://www.science.org/content/article/house-panel-concludes-covid-19-pandemic-came-lab-leak. 

A memorandum to the US Under Secretary Bonnie Jenkins from the US Department of State. titled “Final Report of the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) on Biotechnology in the People’s Republic of China’s Military-Civil Fusion Strategy” cited, among other issues, concerns relating to biotechnological applications for military purposes by China https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/ISAB-Report-on-Biotechnology-in-the-PRC-MCF-Strategy_Final.pdf. 

Canadians need to remain vigilant and concerned, more so now with market uncertainty in world in which technologies of every scope are fundamental to growth, yet unobtainable by some, coupled by the possible requirement of new supply chains with evolving partners, and for some members of the G7, the need to ensure global balance in trade. The G7 document was devoid of their previous positions on fighting climate change, traditional defence of free trade, as well as the clear and stark language in reference to the Russia/Ukraine war. What are the roles of Canadian governments and businesses in the international market. Does the US really consider Canada as a mere vassal nation? Now, more than ever, is the time for Canadian governments to create the correct climate for investment and for Canadian businesses to grow along with its closest trading partners and allies. Time will tell and the clock is ticking ever so rapidly.

Nicholas J. Cartel

www.accendexe.com

The above-referenced opinion does not constitute legal advice or financial advice but are views of the author.