The year 2025 marked a significant and concerning shift in economic policy across North America, characterized by a sharp rise in state capitalism in both Canada and the United States. This increased government involvement in directing corporate behaviour represents a stark departure from the traditional economic approaches of both nations, according to analyst Jack M. Mintz.
A New Economic Framework Takes Hold
State capitalism, as observed in 2025, establishes a distinct framework separate from both Marxism and pure free-market capitalism. It does not involve a full government takeover of production, nor does it allow for complete market autonomy. Instead, it attempts to forge a partnership where governments leverage influence to steer corporate decisions.
This influence manifests in various forms, including governments acquiring equity positions or "golden shares" in companies, granting tariff relief in exchange for compliance with directives, or other targeted interventions. Mintz warns that in many cases, these actions serve the interests of policymakers and corporate owners, potentially at the expense of consumers, workers, and taxpayers.
Concrete Examples of Government Intervention
The trend moved from theory to concrete action throughout the year. In the United States, the Trump administration's "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) policies placed state capitalism at the centre of economic strategy. Several high-profile deals exemplified this shift.
In June 2025, Japan's Nippon Steel was permitted to acquire U.S. Steel only on the condition that the U.S. government received a board seat and a golden share granting it veto power over major decisions. Later, in August 2025, Washington acquired a 10 per cent stake in semiconductor giant Intel to secure a domestic chip supply for national security. This investment followed extensive public support, including $8.5 billion in grants and $11 billion in loans.
Simultaneously, a brokered agreement allowed Nvidia to sell advanced chips to China, contingent on the U.S. government receiving a growing share of related revenues and Nvidia investing US$5 billion in Intel. In another case, drug manufacturer Pfizer received tariff relief in exchange for agreeing to reduce selected prices for U.S. consumers and invest in domestic manufacturing. Pfizer later leveraged its administration relationship to acquire Metsera, a company previously targeted by Denmark's Novo Nordisk.
A Departure from History and a Recipe for Failure
Mintz contends this new direction ignores historical lessons. The traditional U.S. approach has prioritized competition, deregulation, and neutral tax policy over state intervention, a formula that helped build the world's largest economy. Historically, when American governments have taken ownership positions, it was temporary and reserved for wartime or acute financial crises.
In Canada, a similar shift is evident under initiatives like Mark Carney's "nation-building" concepts, which assign the government a key role in trying to influence economic outcomes. Mintz argues that governments taking ownership positions or lending in exchange for corporate direction are destined to "screw up as badly as in the past." He concludes that this experiment in state capitalism, while a defining development of 2025, is a strategy that simply will not work for North America.
