The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA; known in Mexico as the Tratado entre México, Estados Unidos y Canadá, or T-MEC, and in Canada as the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement, or CUSMA) is a trilateral free trade agreement among the United States, Mexico, and Canada that entered into force on July 1, 2020, replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which had governed regional trade since January 1, 1994. The agreement comprises 34 chapters and 12 side letters governing goods trade, services, investment, intellectual property, labor, the environment, digital trade, government procurement, and dispute resolution. The USMCA zone represents approximately 500 million people and accounts for roughly 30 percent of global GDP.¹⁾ Total intra-regional goods and services trade reached an estimated $1.93 trillion in 2024, with Mexico ranking as the top U.S. trading partner in goods for the second consecutive year at approximately $930 billion, and Canada following at approximately $903 billion.²⁾

Negotiations to revise NAFTA began in 2017 under the first Trump administration. The USMCA was signed on November 30, 2018, and a revised protocol was signed on December 10, 2019, following congressional negotiations that strengthened labor and enforcement provisions. The U.S. implementing legislation, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, was signed into law on January 29, 2020.³⁾

Key structural changes from NAFTA include:

• Rules of origin for automotive goods: The regional value content (RVC) requirement for passenger vehicles increased from 62.5 percent under NAFTA to 75 percent, with additional requirements phased in through 2023. A new Labor Value Content (LVC) requirement mandates that 40–45 percent of auto content be produced by workers earning at least $16 per hour within the USMCA region.⁴⁾
• Labor and environment chapters: Unlike NAFTA, which addressed labor and environmental obligations through side agreements, USMCA incorporates them into the core text of the agreement and subjects them to the general state-to-state dispute settlement mechanism.⁵⁾
• Rapid Response Labor Mechanism (RRM): A facility-specific enforcement mechanism allowing expedited action against labor rights violations. Between May 2021 and June 2025, the United States triggered 37 known cases under the RRM, with a resolution rate of approximately 71 percent.⁶⁾
• Digital trade: A dedicated chapter establishing rules for cross-border data flows, prohibiting data localization requirements, and addressing e-commerce.
• Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS): USMCA substantially limits ISDS compared to NAFTA. Between the U.S. and Canada, ISDS was eliminated entirely; between the U.S. and Mexico, it was narrowed to specific sectors. Canada and Mexico retain access to ISDS under the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).⁷⁾
• Sunset clause: The agreement includes a built-in six-year joint review, with a 16-year term subject to renewal. If the parties fail to agree on extension, the agreement enters a ten-year annual-review period, with expiration possible on July 1, 2036.⁸⁾

For a detailed account of the negotiation, ratification, and implementation of the agreement, see USMCA – History.

The first mandatory six-year joint review is scheduled to begin July 1, 2026. The review process has been complicated by broader bilateral tensions. The second Trump administration imposed tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) beginning in early 2025; the U.S. Supreme Court struck down those tariffs on February 20, 2026, after which the administration imposed a 10 percent surcharge under Section 122 authority.⁹⁾ USMCA utilization among Mexican exporters rose from 44.8 percent in January 2025 to approximately 85 percent by January 2026 as qualification conferred tariff exemptions.¹⁰⁾

On March 18, 2026, the United States and Mexico launched bilateral preparatory discussions ahead of the July 1 joint review, with separate U.S.-Canada talks proceeding on a parallel track.¹¹⁾ The United States is expected to press for tighter automotive rules of origin, new provisions addressing electric vehicles and critical minerals, restrictions on Chinese-affiliated manufacturing in the region, and stronger labor enforcement. Mexico and Canada are expected to seek narrower adjustments while preserving the existing framework.¹²⁾

Whether the review produces a straightforward 16-year extension, a renegotiated agreement, or a protracted impasse is actively contested; see USMCA – Debate and Free Trade / Market Integration Viewpoint.

There is no single domain-wide consensus on the effects of the USMCA. Substantial agreement exists among trade economists on macroeconomic trade volume effects, but significant disagreement persists on distributional outcomes, labor enforcement effectiveness, and whether agreements of this type benefit working-class populations across all three countries. See USMCA – Economics Consensus.

Free Trade / Market Integration Viewpoint: Holds that the USMCA advances prosperity in all three countries by deepening North American supply chains, reducing barriers, and enabling comparative advantage. Proponents point to post-2020 trade volume growth and the displacement of China as the top U.S. goods trading partner.

Labor Protection Viewpoint: Holds that the agreement's labor provisions, including the RRM and high-wage LVC requirements, represent meaningful progress over NAFTA but remain inadequate to reverse wage suppression or prevent job offshoring. Labor and union advocates generally seek stronger enforcement and higher wage floors.

Economic Nationalism Viewpoint: Holds that regional trade agreements, including the USMCA, prioritize corporate interests and multinational supply chains over national manufacturing capacity and the interests of domestic workers. Proponents of this view tend to favor tariffs, domestic content requirements, and managed trade over rules-based free trade frameworks.

National Sovereignty Viewpoint: Holds that international trade agreements constrain the ability of elected governments to set independent economic, regulatory, and social policy. This concern is expressed across the political spectrum and applies to each of the three parties, though the specific objections vary by country and political tradition.

Supply Chain Security / China Decoupling Viewpoint: Holds that the USMCA review should be used primarily to restrict the use of Chinese-affiliated manufacturing in the region — addressing “backdoor” entry of Chinese-origin goods via Mexico and Canada — as a matter of both economic and national security policy.

Environmental Viewpoint: Holds that the USMCA's environmental chapter either does or does not adequately address ecological concerns related to North American trade and investment. Views range from supporting the agreement's enforceability improvements over NAFTA to arguing that trade liberalization is structurally incompatible with environmental protection.

• USMCA – History
• USMCA – Debate
• USMCA – Economics Consensus
• North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
• USMCA – Free Trade Viewpoint
• USMCA – Labor Protection Viewpoint
• USMCA – Economic Nationalism Viewpoint
• USMCA – National Sovereignty Viewpoint
• USMCA – Supply Chain Security / China Decoupling Viewpoint
• USMCA – Environmental Viewpoint
• Trade Agreements
• Free Trade

~~FOOTNOTES~~