Trump’s rewriting truck emissions playbook. Where does this leave Canada?

This was supposed to be a great year to be a manufacturer or purveyor of Class 8 trucks. There was a new round of EPA-driven emissions standards coming down the pike in 2027, which would add significant cost to the price of a new truck in the interest of further reducing NOx emissions.

As with past emissions regulations, it stood to reason buyers would be lining up for build slots to get ahead of the rule and its associated costs. This phenomenon is known as a pre-buy, and it has happened prior to previous rounds of emissions regulations, giving Class 8 orders a lift.

And if ever the market needed a lift, it’s this year. Weak freight fundamentals combined with economic uncertainty caused by tariffs have thus far seen fleet buyers sitting on their wallets, reticent to commit capital to new equipment.

But with the election of U.S. President Donald Trump last November and the overhaul of Washington that’s come since, future emissions regulations are now up in the air. In late July, the EPA proposed repealing the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the legal foundation on which the EPA27 emissions rule was built. The move is widely seen as paving the way to kill that very regulation, also known as GHG Phase 3.

Bye-bye, pre-buy.

Already, truck and engine makers are adjusting their timelines, even having spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing products that would comply with the EPA27 rules.

During an earnings call with analysts, Cummins CEO Jennifer Rumsey said Cummins is pushing back the launch of its EPA27-compliant engine platform from early 2026, to later in the year.

“We still believe today that we’ll have a ’27 NOx regulation,” Rumsey said. “And if we do, then that will likely drive demand back up. But it’s uncertain right now. We’re working closely with the EPA to try to push for clarity.”

She may be more optimistic than I am. Just days later, the EPA announced new guidance that will require engine makers to give drivers more flexibility when running out of NOx-controlling diesel exhaust fluid (DEF). Beginning with 2027 model year products, drivers operating without DEF will be able to continue doing so for up to 10,500 miles (16,898 km) – or roughly a month – before power is reduced. Today, engines running DEF experience a near-instant derating to 5 mph (8 km/h) when the DEF tank runs dry.

Does that sound like a move made by an administration with an appetite for more emissions regulations?

While many drivers and fleet managers will celebrate the relaxation of current and future emissions requirements, Canadians should hesitate to pop the champagne. Canada, traditionally, has been dragged by default into whatever emissions regulatory environment was created by our more influential peers to the south.

And for good reason. The U.S. rules were effective. It takes 60 Class 8 trucks today to generate the same emissions as one truck in 1988. We, in Canada, have ridden those coattails to a cleaner climate.

But, what now? Will Canadian policymakers continue to remain in virtual lockstep with the U.S. as it reverses course on emissions? Or will we attempt to go it alone?

The latter thought is a scary one, as it’s completely impractical.

The reality is, the Canadian market is too small for manufacturers to extract from the broader U.S. market. It cost them hundreds of millions – if not billions – of dollars to meet increasingly stringent emissions regulations and our market is just too small to support that kind of investment.

Do our well-intentioned policymakers understand that? I hope so. The Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) is doing its part to educate them.

CTA president Stephen Laskowski had this message for Ottawa: “If the Carney Government is true to their word about wanting to inject growth and productivity into the economy, the Government of Canada will put aside environmental  politics and work with the OEMs and the trucking fleets that will be impacted by the U.S. EPA changes, while also remaining sensitive to the need to reduce carbon emissions from heavy trucks in an operationally and technologically feasible manner that can be properly managed by the trucking industry and supply chain.”

Going it alone on a divergent path would be dangerous and costly for our industry. Canadian carriers are already generally at a cost disadvantage relative to our U.S. peers when buying new trucks, given our woeful exchange rate. Surely, the feds wouldn’t impose further pain on an already flailing industry by forging ahead with Canada-specific emissions requirements, would they?

I won’t hold my breath while waiting for them to clear the air on this matter.