We are pretty lucky in that regard. It is by design. Open trade among the states was a primary point of argument in ratification of the US Constitution. States were concerned with a federal government having any power to restrict the engine of their own success.

As a result the US system was designed to prohibit restricting trade between states and encourage restricting trade at the national border through tariffs. The goal was to encourage internal trade and production that builds national wealth and skills. The government was to make profit off of international trade through tariffs. That structure encouraged government to protect the economic engine domestically to continue profiting from international trade.

The big one in Canada is licensed labor, and the US has the same problem. Hairdressers not being able to work across state lines without getting another license, for instance.

I’ve been reading a presidential bio every year (I’m currently up to Monroe and I hope that I’ll be dead or not reading before I’ll be reading the 44th bio¹) and it’s an interesting way to get focused senses of American history and trade between the former colonies was a big issue before the constitution was instituted.

⸻

1. Cleveland doesn’t get two bios.

Thank the founders for the Commerce Clause, at least when it's applied correctly and isn't being abused.

Note we’re only talking about alcohol here. It’s funny how people read something, skip the specifics, assume it applies to everything and then spread misinformation.

So if you want a comparison in USA it needs to be something that is regulated by the US government, like hydroxacloroquine.