Торговые тарифы вынуждают канадских производителей перестраивать логистику и запасы

Tariffs and other border frictions have caused disruptions and challenges for almost all industrial sectors in Canada, and the spare parts sector is no exception. Whether the parts are sourced from over the border, or are produced domestically but include imported components, the availability and affordability of parts have been affected by trade tensions. These disruptions are exposing the limits of how manufacturers have traditionally approached maintenance inventory and are reconfiguring conversations around risk and exposure. Danaka Porter, PhD, a regional managing partner with Iota Consulting specializing in supply chain strategy and operational performance, notes that many organizations were content to rely on a single supplier and hadn’t explored alternatives. As lead times grow, those organizations can find themselves scrambling to locate substitutes and hoping the quality is comparable. Even when a suitable alternative is found, the supplier may not be able to ramp up quickly enough to meet demand from other customers in the same position. “It’s all of the lack of planning upfront, of really knowing where your suppliers are, having alternatives, all the information and things that we went through with COVID,” says Porter. “It’s all that information that many organizations don’t necessarily keep. A lot of the ERPs (enterprise resource planning software) don’t typically have a drop down of area or region where this part is coming from, so that information can be difficult to find.” The long story, Porter says, is that many organizations just haven’t planned enough. Not enough risk management was done to understand how supply chains actually function under pressure. And that gap has been exacerbated by the volatility of the trade environment, as whether or not tariffs would be applied seemed to change month to month at one point. Porter says she does not expect these pressures to resolve longstanding debates over “just in time” versus “just in case” inventory strategies. Many organizations have aimed to carry as little inventory as possible, but that approach can limit resilience under current conditions. When parts are sourced across borders, they may no longer be available on a just‑in‑time basis. “Inventory is really seen as a dollar figure in terms of ‘how much money are we putting into this?’” says Porter when asked about how traditional inventory metrics, such as turns and carrying cost, fail to capture the risk during these volatile times. “What they fail to factor into that calculation is the cost of having a plant shut down, a line not producing, or the cost of an emergency order. Porter says those traditional metrics need to be recalibrated to account more directly for risk, particularly the operational impact of downtime. How much profit will be lost if a plant or production line is forced to shut down? How many hours will workers be paid while they sit idle waiting for a part? According to her, organizations still need to track traditional metrics such as inventory turns and obsolescence, but they also need to account for the cost of not having critical parts on hand — striking a balance between efficiency and resilience. “Both having too much inventory, as well as not enough inventory will have negative effects. But not having enough inventory is more detrimental,” she says. “There’s a big need to have more conversations to bring all the departments together to synthesize and have them collaborate on goals that don’t compete with each other.” To that point, Porter emphasized that more collaboration between maintenance teams and the inventory side would help synchronize efforts and ensure understanding of the issues. Then together those teams can weigh factors such as lead times and supplier location, exposure to tariffs, costs of a part versus the cost with tariffs and the operational safety and financial consequences of not having the part when needed. “On lead time, it’s also looking at lead time variability,” adds Porter. “What’s the best case, what’s the most common, what’s the worst? You have those three scenarios to deal with. ‘This is how much inventory in the best-case scenario, this is most likely, and this is if it’s the worst case’ and finding a balance in there so you can be covered.” New suppliers also need to be vetted to ensure they meet your technical requirements. Porter encourages organizations to look into performing their own quality tests, either by bringing in a small amount of product or visiting the producer themselves if possible to evaluate their production and quality assurance efforts directly. “Seeing that quality aspect will help solidify ‘yes, this is going to be a good supplier, they’re actually going to make a product that we can trust and feel good about,’” says Porter. For companies handling spare parts directly, those pressures are already showing up in day‑to‑day operations. After significant outreach, only one spare‑parts distributor agreed to speak on the record about the impact of tariffs. Brian Barber, CEO of Ottawa‑based Capital Auto Parts (CAP), said the company has had to pass along price increases of up to 30 per cent on some items. Canada’s retaliatory tariffs have also effectively eliminated its U.S. export business, which previously generated several million dollars annually for the company. To mitigate those impacts, CAP created a U.S.-based LLC to handle cross‑border transactions. “We created a U.S.-based LLC so that if we sell to an American customer, that entity takes the order, invoices the customer and acts as the importer of record, while the Canadian company sells to the U.S. entity,” says Barber. “All the high tariff products in the US market, you warehouse here in Canada, and you only pay the duty or tariff when you export or when you sell it. And then similarly, the other way around is you can import low tariff goods that are targeting for the U.S. directly into the U.S. first.” Barber said the company is also forecasting further ahead to better manage demand. The launch of the U.S.-based LLC also dovetails with CAP’s broader push to become a more global company, with a planned rebrand to Autrex set to follow shortly after publication. Barber cautions that the approach adds complexity and extra work, but says it has been effective so far. This article was originally publishes in the Summer 2026 issue of MRO.