US and Canadian trade negotiators are expected to meet again ahead of the midnight tariff deadline, reports CBC News

• Canadian and American negotiators are expected to meet again on Tuesday to try and hammer out a deal to avoid new U.S. tariffs on some USD 30 billion in Canadian goods due to take effect just after midnight.
• Sources speaking to Radio-Canada said Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc could meet with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and then Prime Minister Mark Carney may speak to U.S. President Donald Trump.
• One of those sources said, as of noon ET, a time has not yet been set for either discussion, and things could still fall apart.

Deadline-eve negotiating sessions of this kind have a familiar shape: the pattern through recent trade disputes has been last-hour extensions, partial suspensions, or framework announcements that push the effective date rather than resolve the underlying disagreement, with full implementation less common than either side's rhetoric implies. The escalation ladder described here, officials first and principals only if staff-level talks produce something to ratify, is the standard sequencing, and a leader-level call is typically the tell that a deal is close rather than the start of one. The distinction that matters for the tape is between a deferral, which unwinds the risk premium built into the currency and the exposed equity names, and an actual imposition, which shifts attention to retaliation lists, exemption carve-outs, and the durability of the measures, since tariffs announced under deadline pressure have historically been narrowed, delayed, or suspended at meaningful rates. Cross-border integrated sectors, autos and energy above all, are where the pass-through is fastest and where even temporary tariffs have previously forced rapid supply-chain workarounds. Worth noting is the sourcing: unnamed officials signalling that nothing is scheduled and things could fall apart is itself a negotiating posture, a pattern seen repeatedly in the run-up to prior deadlines. The follow-ons are whether the principals' call materialises, any published list of covered goods versus threatened goods, and Ottawa's response language, which in past episodes has telegraphed whether retaliation is proportional or escalatory.