Implications of the US Decertification Threat Against Bombardier Aircraft

By Garth Calitz

The recent announcement by US President Donald Trump to pursue the “decertification” of Bombardier aircraft in the United States has sent shockwaves through the global aerospace industry. While the proposal has yet to be fully implemented, the political signal alone has raised serious concerns among manufacturers, operators, regulators, and investors about the stability of international aviation certification frameworks.

At the centre of the dispute is Bombardier’s Canadian-built business jet portfolio, particularly the Global and Challenger families, which represent a significant share of the US business aviation market. Trump’s statement framed the move as leverage in a broader trade disagreement with Canada, specifically over what he described as delays in the certification of US-built Gulfstream aircraft by Canadian authorities. Donald Trump accused Canada of "illegal protectionism" to favour its domestic manufacturers. The threat was accompanied by proposals for steep tariffs on Canadian-manufactured aircraft entering the US market.

Although the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has already certified the aircraft, the certification process in Canada remains stalled due to several concerns raised by Transport Canada. Regulators have identified potential fuel-icing risks, where ice could accumulate in fuel lines or filters at high altitudes, increasing the possibility of engine power loss or failure. The FAA granted Gulfstream a temporary exemption allowing deliveries to proceed until December 31, 2026, as full-scale icing tests continue.

Transport Canada has declined to issue a similar waiver. Citing Canada’s more demanding Arctic operating environment, the Canadian authority insists that all required technical testing be fully completed before certification. This position is reinforced by increased regulatory scrutiny following the Boeing 737 MAX crisis, which has made Canadian regulators less inclined to automatically accept FAA approvals and more committed to conducting independent safety validations for critical systems.

From an operational standpoint, US authorities later clarified that any decertification action would apply primarily to new aircraft deliveries, not to Bombardier jets already in service. This distinction has helped calm immediate safety and operational fears among current owners and operators, as existing aircraft remain airworthy under current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approvals. However, uncertainty persists around future sales, fleet expansion plans and long-term asset values.

For Bombardier, the US represents its single largest market. Any disruption to certification would effectively halt new aircraft deliveries to American customers, placing the manufacturer at a competitive disadvantage against US and European rivals. The announcement triggered an immediate negative reaction in financial markets, with Bombardier’s share price falling sharply amid investor concerns about revenue exposure, order cancellations and potential delivery deferrals.

Beyond Bombardier itself, the ripple effects extend across the North American aerospace supply chain. Bombardier aircraft contain a high proportion of US-sourced components, systems and avionics. Reduced production rates would therefore affect American suppliers, maintenance organisations, completion centres and thousands of skilled jobs on both sides of the border. Industry analysts have noted that decertification could paradoxically harm US aerospace workers as much as Canadian ones.

Aircraft owners and business aviation operators also face uncertainty. While existing fleets are unaffected for now, concerns remain about long-term residual values, resale prospects and future support should political disputes escalate. The mere suggestion that certification could be used as a trade weapon has unsettled a sector that relies heavily on regulatory predictability and mutual recognition agreements between aviation authorities.

From a regulatory perspective, the situation has raised alarm within the global aviation community. Aircraft certification has historically been governed by technical safety standards, not political considerations. The FAA and Transport Canada maintain one of the world’s most robust bilateral aviation safety agreements, enabling streamlined cross-certification of aircraft. Any erosion of this framework risks undermining international confidence in the independence of aviation regulators.

Diplomatically, the move has added strain to US–Canada relations, particularly in high-value industrial sectors such as aerospace. Canadian officials have reiterated their support for Bombardier and warned of possible reciprocal measures should trade tensions escalate. Observers note that prolonged disputes could invite World Trade Organisation challenges or retaliatory action affecting other aerospace products.

In the broader context, the Bombardier decertification threat highlights the vulnerability of globally integrated aviation industries to political intervention. While the outcome remains uncertain, the episode has already demonstrated how quickly confidence can be shaken when long-standing regulatory norms are called into question. For manufacturers, operators and regulators alike, the situation underscores the importance of keeping aviation safety oversight insulated from geopolitical disputes.