卡尼“退一步”取消DST不是低头，而是谋局保护加拿大主权（观点，中英对照）

加拿大总理马克·卡尼因撤回网络服务税（DST）的决定而遭到猛烈抨击，批评者指责他向特朗普低头，违背了竞选时“对美强硬”的承诺。但这些批评未免过于短视，可谓一叶障目不见泰山。卡尼的决定并非退让，而是在保护加拿大经济免受严重冲击的同时，为国家争取到推动更有利关税协议的宝贵机会。

Critics have accused Prime Minister Mark Carney of caving to Donald Trump by backing down on Canada’s proposed Digital Services Tax (DST). Some say he broke campaign promises and surrendered to U.S. pressure. But this critique misses the forest for the trees. Carney didn’t fold—he chose to protect Canada’s economy from real harm while preserving the possibility of a better deal for Canadians.

说实话，这笔向美国科技巨头征收的网络服务税（DST）表面上看似光鲜，但应用于实际却问题百出。它原本意向美国科技巨头征收高额税款，但这些公司完全可以将税负转嫁给那些在加拿大投放广告的本地企业，因而真正承担成本的将是加拿大企业和普通消费者，而非那些被征税的跨国巨头。而即便其预计税收可达50亿加元，其对加拿大经济的潜在冲击，远远超过了这点税收所带来的收益。

Let’s be honest: the DST, while popular in theory, was flawed in practice. It aimed to target U.S. tech giants, but these companies would have simply passed the tax on to Canadian advertisers. The result? The burden would have landed on Canadian businesses and consumers—not the multinational giants it was meant to target. And with estimated revenues reaching $5 billion, the cost to our economic stability was far greater than the potential tax benefit.

更关键的是，特朗普的威胁并非虚张声势。他明确表示，如果加拿大坚持实施网络服务税（DST），美加之间的贸易谈判将立刻终止，并会向加拿大加征更多关税。事实上，加拿大已经在承受美国重关税的巨大压力，钢铁关税高达50%，汽车关税为25%，而对许多不在《美加墨协定》（USMCA）涵盖范围内的商品也征收了25%的关税。最终承担这些代价的，将是加拿大的出口商、制造商，以及像你我这样的普通消费者。

More critically, Donald Trump’s threats weren’t idle. He made clear that if Canada implemented the DST, trade negotiations would cease and additional tariffs would be imposed. Canada is already reeling from heavy U.S. tariffs: 50 per cent on steel, 25 per cent on autos, and 25 per cent on many other goods not covered by the USMCA. Canadian exporters, manufacturers, and ordinary citizens like you and me would be the ones paying the price.

卡尼撤回网络服务税（DST）的决定，并非软弱的表现，而是为了避免让加国经济蒙受损失，其目的是为谈判争取空间，以取消那些已经令加拿大各行各业备受压力的惩罚性关税。正如《环球邮报》所报道的，加拿大驻美大使柯斯滕·希尔曼（Kirsten Hillman）确认，加拿大仍在竭力争取在7月21日最后期限前取消全部关税。她在国庆日接受采访中表示“这是我们的目标，也是我们正在为之奋斗的方向。”

Carney’s decision to rescind the DST wasn’t about weakness—it was about avoiding economic self-harm. It was about buying room to negotiate the lifting of punitive tariffs that have already strained Canadian industries. As The Globe and Mail reported, Ambassador Kirsten Hillman confirmed that Canada is still fighting to secure a deal that removes all tariffs by the July 21 deadline. “That’s our goal, that’s what we’re fighting for,” she said during a Canada Day interview.

此外，撤回数字服务税（DST）并不意味着加拿大放弃了让美国科技巨头为其在加国市场获利而承担税务。在不久将实施的经合组织（OECD）/二十国集团（G20）之规则中，将允许包括加拿大在内的国家依据用户所在地对网络跨国公司征税。这一全球性的征税方案为加拿大提供了一条让这些科技巨头因从加拿大用户数据中获取利润而缴纳合理税款的切实可行的途径。但在当前关键的贸易谈判阶段，如果为了推进这一目标而贸然采取单边行动，将会破坏整体谈判局势，无疑得不偿失。

Moreover, rescinding the DST doesn’t mean Canada is abandoning efforts to ensure U.S. tech giants pay their fair share. An OECD/G20 framework, which is expected to be implemented later, would allow countries like Canada to tax digital multinationals based on where users are located. This global solution will give Canada a meaningful pathway to ensure digital firms pay their fair share for profiting off Canadian consumers’ data. To back down from pursuing such a tax unilaterally—especially at the cost of undermining vital trade negotiations—is a no-brainer.

从这个角度来看，取消实施网络服务税（DST）的决定，与其说是退让，不如说是在一场高风险博弈中的深思熟虑之举。尽管特朗普方面可能会将此视为一场胜利，但加拿大有望因此而赢得更大的利益。通过暂时让步，卡尼为加拿大保住了关税谈判桌上的一席之地，这可是一场能为加国争取长期贸易利益、让加拿大避免因关税而导致的经济急剧下滑的关键谈判。

In that light, the decision to rescind the DST looks not like a retreat, but a calculated move in a high-stakes game. While Trump’s team may claim a victory, Canada’s potential win is even bigger.By temporarily backing down, Carney secured Canada’s place at the negotiating table on tariffs—a setting where the country can advocate for its long-term trade interests and steer the nation away from a worsening economic crisis driven by U.S. levies.

卡尼的决定远非是对加拿大主权的让步，恰恰相反，这是一个战略性选择——他将国家的经济生存置于象征性对抗之上。对于那些指责卡尼对美国“下跪”的人，他们完全看走了眼。事实上，这是一次主动出击、审慎果断的决策，充分体现了他对现实贸易外交复杂性的精准判断。在当前局势下，这无疑是维护加拿大主权的正确之举。

Far from surrendering Canada’s sovereignty, Carney made a strategic decision—one that puts the country’s economic survivability above symbolic standoffs. To those claiming Carney put his elbows down, they’ve got it backwards. This was an elbows-up move—assertive, strategic, and rooted in the real-world complexities of trade diplomacy. It was the right decision to protect Canada’s sovereignty under the circumstances.