USMCA review nears July 1

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has set July 1, 2026, as the date for the first joint review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade pact that replaced NAFTA and entered into force on July 1, 2020. USTR opened the U.S. consultation process in September 2025 and said it would collect comments on the agreement’s operation, compliance and possible changes ahead of the review. Canada and Mexico have also begun preparations through their own channels, according to public statements and policy commentary. Article 34.7 of the agreement makes the 2026 meeting more than a routine check-in. The three governments must review the operation of the pact and decide whether to extend it for another 16-year term; if they do not all agree, the agreement does not end immediately, but instead moves into annual reviews and could expire in 2036. Brookings and other trade analysts have described that structure as a source of business uncertainty because the agreement governs one of the world’s largest regional trade blocs. (ustr.gov) ### Why are manufacturers focused on this review now? The National Association of Manufacturers said in May that the agreement is “the foundation of North America’s manufacturing strength” and called for preserving it while making targeted changes. NAM has argued that the review should emphasize continuity, simpler customs documentation, wider use of rules of origin and protections for cross-border investment. It has also framed the pact as central to U.S. factory output and North American supply-chain integration. (brookings.edu) NAM’s figures are part of that argument. The group said annual trade among the three countries reached $1.5 trillion in 2024, that Canada and Mexico purchase more than one-third of U.S.-manufactured goods exports, and that 72% of imports from Canada and 63% from Mexico are industrial inputs used in further U.S. manufacturing. Those are the kinds of statistics manufacturers and logistics users are likely to cite as they assess whether to keep production and inventory flows tightly linked across the region. (nam.org) ### What changes is NAM actually asking for? NAM’s published materials point to process changes rather than a full reopening of the pact. The group has said the parties should simplify and digitize customs paperwork, cut border red tape, seek manufacturers’ input when refining rules of origin and preserve operational continuity during the review. In its telling, the goal is to make the agreement easier to use for companies already manufacturing across the three countries. (nam.org) Charles Crain, NAM’s managing vice president of policy, said in December testimony summarized by the group that the United States should preserve and strengthen the agreement during the six-year review “while making fine-tuned improvements.” NAM has repeatedly described USMCA as “the most pro-U.S. manufacturing trade agreement in history,” a phrase it uses in comments to Congress and USTR. (nam.org) ### Who is warning that origin enforcement is too weak? Charles Benoit of the Coalition for a Prosperous America argued in a May 14 commentary that the review should focus on stricter origin enforcement and on what he described as overreliance on “paper origins.” Benoit wrote that if one country declines to recommit in 2026, the parties would move into annual reviews until consensus is restored or the agreement sunsets in 2036. He also said bilateral talks between the United States and Mexico were already underway. (nam.org) The Coalition for a Prosperous America has taken a more aggressive line than NAM. In November 2025, the group said it had submitted comments to USTR calling for replacing the trilateral framework with two bilateral agreements, arguing that the current structure is unenforceable. That stance underscores that business and policy groups are not aligned on whether the review should produce narrow technical fixes or broader changes. (prosperousamerica.org) ### What does the formal U.S. process look like before July 1? USTR said on September 16, 2025, that it was seeking public comments on “any aspect” of the agreement’s operation and implementation, any compliance issues, and recommendations for actions the United States should propose ahead of the joint review. The agency also said it would hold a public hearing on November 17 as part of the consultation process required by U.S. law. (prosperousamerica.org) Canada has continued to publish CUSMA committee and governance updates through Global Affairs Canada, while Mexican officials have publicly referred to 2026 as the first six-year review point. The Free Trade Commission established under the agreement is the body charged with considering implementation, proposed modifications and ways to improve trade and investment among the parties. (ustr.gov) ### What should companies watch next? July 1, 2026, is the date written into the agreement and the USTR process for the joint review. Between now and then, the most concrete public markers are the positions filed by industry groups, the record from USTR’s November 17 hearing, and any statements from the three governments on the scope of changes they want to discuss. (ustr.gov) (international.gc.ca)