WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced on Wednesday that the State Department no longer considered Hong Kong to have significant autonomy under Chinese rule, a move that indicated that the Trump administration was likely to end some or all of the United States government’s special trade and economic relations with the territory in southern China.

Such actions have been discussed for days by foreign policy aides, and they would be among the harshest punishments imposed by the administration over the last three years on China. They could have far-reaching consequences for global commerce and transform the ways that Chinese and foreign companies operate, as well as upend the lives of many residents of the territory, who have already been under enormous pressure from years of the Chinese Communist Party’s political crackdowns.

Hong Kong has been a global financial and commercial hub since late last century. China relies on the bustling metropolis of ports and skyscrapers on the edge of the South China Sea for transactions with other countries. Many Chinese and foreign firms use Hong Kong as an international or regional base, and members of elite Chinese Communist Party families or executives with ties to them do business and own property there. Many companies also raise capital by listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

Mr. Pompeo’s announcement came the day before Beijing was expected to pass a national security law that would allow Chinese security agencies to severely limit civil liberties in Hong Kong. Mr. Pompeo has said that would be a “death knell” for Hong Kong, which has had liberties under a semiautonomous system of governance that does not exist in mainland China, including freedoms of speech, the press and assembly, as well as an independent judiciary.

For days, protesters in Hong Kong have taken to the streets to voice outrage at the national security law proposed by Beijing, only to be beaten back by police officers clad in riot gear and firing tear gas.

If it proceeds with punishments, the Trump administration could impose the same tariffs on exports from Hong Kong that it puts on goods from mainland China, according to officials with knowledge of the discussions. That could happen soon after the Chinese government approves the national security law on Thursday. Other trade restrictions that apply to China, including bans or limits on what American companies can sell to Chinese companies because of national security or human rights concerns, may be imposed on Hong Kong as well.

“I certified to Congress today that Hong Kong does not continue to warrant treatment under United States laws in the same manner as U.S. laws were applied to Hong Kong before July 1997,” Mr. Pompeo said Wednesday. “No reasonable person can assert today that Hong Kong maintains a high degree of autonomy from China, given facts on the ground.”

Mr. Pompeo said that “Hong Kong and its dynamic, enterprising and free people have flourished for decades as a bastion of liberty, and this decision gives me no pleasure.” He added: “But sound policymaking requires a recognition of reality. While the United States once hoped that free and prosperous Hong Kong would provide a model for authoritarian China, it is now clear that China is modeling Hong Kong after itself.”

Mr. Pompeo is the most vocal of a group of national security officials who advocate tough policies on China. Some of Mr. Trump’s top economic advisers prefer a more conciliatory approach to dealing with the world’s second-largest economy, and they will likely urge caution as Mr. Trump reviews his options. American corporate executives have already said the administration should act with care.

Mr. Trump has rarely made any strong comments on the situation in Hong Kong, and he has praised Xi Jinping, the president of China, throughout his time in office, even insisting that they have a strong friendship. Mr. Trump has also been eager to promote a trade agreement he signed with China in January as an economic win for the United States and wants to avoid jeopardizing that deal, even though Beijing is not meeting purchasing quotas outlined in it.

But on Tuesday, when asked by reporters about China’s proposed national security law, Mr. Trump said he planned to take action before the end of the week. “I think you’ll find it very interesting,” he said, adding that his response would come “very powerfully.”

The certification by the State Department is a recommendation on policy direction and does not itself catalyze any actions immediately. American officials, including Mr. Trump, will now weigh what steps to take.

The United States is likely to choose specific areas in which to break off cooperation first with Hong Kong, including on trade. The president would need to issue an executive order to end the special relationship entirely, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Britain handed Hong Kong to China in 1997, after the two nations reached an agreement on the colony 13 years earlier. In 1992, the United States passed a law that said the American government would continue to treat Hong Kong under the same conditions that applied when Britain ruled the territory.

In November, after months of pro-democracy protests and crackdowns by the police in Hong Kong, Mr. Trump signed into law a bill with bipartisan support that said the State Department would have to provide an annual certification to Congress on whether the United States should continue the special relationship with Hong Kong.

That certification depends on a judgment by State Department officials of whether the Chinese government was ceding enough autonomy to Hong Kong.

The announcement by Mr. Pompeo is certain to draw condemnation from Beijing, where the government is holding its annual legislative session this week. Officials announced details of the proposed national security law on Friday, at the start of the session.

“If anyone insists on harming China’s interests, China is determined to take all necessary countermeasures,” Zhao Lijian, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, said at a regularly scheduled news conference earlier Wednesday in Beijing. “The national security law for Hong Kong is purely China’s internal affair that allows no foreign interference.”

Some American business executives are advising the Trump administration to tread carefully on changes to the economic relationship with Hong Kong.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents American companies in Hong Kong, said in a statement Tuesday that it was “deeply concerned” about the proposed national security law. It asked the Chinese government to “peacefully de-escalate” the situation and preserve the semi-autonomy of the “one country, two systems” framework that, under the 1984 treaty between Beijing and London, is supposed to exist until 2047.

“We likewise urge the Trump administration to continue to prioritize the maintenance of a positive and constructive relationship between the United States and Hong Kong,” the group said.

It added that “far-reaching changes” to Hong Kong’s status “in economic and trade matters would have serious implications for Hong Kong and for U.S. business, particularly those with business operations located there who exercise a positive influence in favor of Hong Kong’s core values.”

Julian Ku, a law professor at Hofstra University, said the Trump administration has flexibility on what options to exercise in changing the relationship with Hong Kong.

“I would expect the president would act on some agreements, but not on others,” Mr. Ku said. For example, he noted, the administration might terminate the extradition treaty with Hong Kong, since the national security law makes fair adjudication less credible, or it could extend to Hong Kong the controls that limit American technology exports to China.

“But he might leave the visa waiver treatment that Hong Kong residents currently receive when coming to the U.S. alone for now,” he added.

Mark Williams, the chief Asia economist at Capital Economics, said Mr. Trump’s tariffs on imports from mainland China — which are paid by American companies — would not automatically extend to Hong Kong despite the new State Department determination. But the cumulative effect of various actions would erode Hong Kong’s status as an international business center, Mr. Williams wrote in a note to clients.

“The irony is that in punishing Hong Kong, we wind up martyring it rather than saving it,” said Daniel Russel, an assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific in the Obama administration. As for diplomacy between Washington and Beijing, he said: “The brake pads in the relationship have worn very, very thin. And it’s hard to see this confrontation going anywhere except escalation.”

In Congress, Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and a sponsor of the bill on Hong Kong that passed last fall, cheered Mr. Pompeo’s announcement.

“For years, the Chinese government and Communist Party have walked back on its commitment to ensure autonomy and freedom for Hong Kong,” Mr. Rubio said. “We cannot let Beijing profit from breaking the Sino-British Joint Declaration and trying to crush the spirit of Hong Kong’s people.”

Michael Crowley and Ana Swanson contributed reporting.

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — The chief financial officer of the Chinese technology giant Huawei came one step closer to standing trial in the United States on sweeping fraud charges after a Canadian court ruled on Wednesday that prosecutors had satisfied a critical legal requirement for her extradition from Canada.

The executive, Meng Wanzhou, will have another chance to fight for her release at a June 15 hearing on the defense’s argument that her rights were violated during her arrest. That hearing may be delayed, however, because the defense and prosecution are wrangling over the release of documents.

Her arrest immediately thrust Canada into the middle of a diplomatic struggle between the United States and China — over trade, theft of technology secrets and whether Huawei’s efforts in helping countries build 5G next-generation mobile networks present a threat to national security.

It also severely strained Canada’s own relations with China. Shortly after Ms. Meng’s arrest, China detained — in retaliation, some say — two Canadians and accused them of espionage. They are still in secret jails in China.

The relationship has since become even more fraught, with Canadians criticizing China’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic and its human rights policies. Wednesday’s decision is expected to aggravate those tensions.

“We are likely in for several more years of worsening relations between Canada and China, with both sides hardening their stances at a moment when countries are already questioning China’s role in the pandemic,” said Guy Saint-Jacques, a former Canadian ambassador to China.

Wednesday’s court ruling, from Heather Holmes, associate chief justice of the British Columbia Supreme Court, found that prosecutors had cleared a fundamental hurdle for Ms. Meng’s extradition under Canadian law — demonstrating that the conduct she is accused of in the United States, if proved, also constitutes a crime in Canada.

The legal concept is known as “double criminality.”

The judge ruled that double criminality was met in this case, because the conduct Ms. Meng is accused of meets the essence of fraud, by “the making of intentionally false statements.”

“Canada’s law of fraud looks beyond international boundaries to encompass all the relevant details that make up the factual matrix, including foreign laws that may give meaning to some of the facts,” the judge wrote.

In their indictment against Ms. Meng, now 48, United States prosecutors charged her with fraudulently deceiving four banks into making transactions that would help Huawei evade United States sanctions against Iran.

Her defense team argued that the extradition request did not satisfy the requirement of double criminality because it was based on the accusation that U.S. sanctions against Iran had been breached — sanctions that Canada no longer has in place

Prosecutors said Ms. Meng lied to representatives of the bank HSBC in 2013 about Huawei’s relationship with Skycom, a company that would clear transactions between Huawei and HSBC in Iran, by saying Skycom was a partner, rather than a subsidiary of Huawei.

They said that misrepresentation amounted to fraud by exposing HSBC to reputational and economic risk in light of the American sanctions.

“Lying to a bank in order to get banking services that creates a risk of economic prejudice is fraud,” said Robert Frater, Canada’s chief general counsel for the Department of Justice, arguing the United States’ case in court earlier this year.

Ms. Meng, the eldest daughter of Huawei’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, one of China’s most prominent businessmen, has denied the allegations.

The U.S. indictment charging Ms. Meng also accused Huawei of stealing trade secrets, and obstructing a criminal investigation into whether the company tried to evade economic sanctions on Iran by destroying or concealing evidence.

The United States has repeatedly accused Huawei of stealing technology from its Western rivals and argues that the company’s ties to the Chinese government make it a threat to the national security of countries who adopt its technology in their next generation mobile networks. Huawei vehemently denies that.

The Trump administration escalated its campaign against the company this month by restricting its ability to work with chip makers that produce many crucial components in its smartphones and telecom equipment.

Canada itself has been reviewing whether it should allow Huawei technology in the country’s 5G network.

China experts said the Meng case has spurred Canadians to rethink how to deal with the economic superpower.

In addition to detaining the two Canadians — the former diplomat Michael Kovrig and the businessman Michael Spavor — China also restricted imports of pork, canola oil and other Canadian products after Ms. Meng’s arrest.

David Mulroney, another former Canadian ambassador to China, said China’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, its jailing of the two Canadians, its infringements of human rights in Hong Kong and its mass detention of minorities in Xinjiang meant Ottawa could no longer return to the status quo in its relations with Beijing.

“There has been a global awakening prompted by the pandemic that China is an unreliable partner,” he said.

Last week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said China had linked the detention of the two Canadians with Ms. Meng’s case from the beginning, and had failed to understand that Canada had an independent judicial system, free from “political intervention.”

“China doesn’t work quite the same way,” he said.

Ms. Meng’s defense has filed a separate civil case against Canadian authorities, arguing that her rights were breached when border officials questioned her for three hours before making an arrest, seized her phones, asked for her passcodes and searched her eight pieces of luggage.

The defense also argues that Canadian officials improperly shared Ms. Meng’s SIM cards and her phone’s serial numbers with American law-enforcement officials.

Government prosecutors counter that the border guards had every right to search her and were just doing their jobs.

In early 2019, Ms. Meng was released on bail of 10 million Canadian dollars. She has spent the time since living in two different mansions that her family owns in wealthy areas of Vancouver.

Most recently, she has lived in a gated $14 million, seven-bedroom mansion in the city’s exclusive Shaughnessy neighborhood. Until the pandemic hit, she was able to travel relatively freely around the city — shopping and attending musical concerts — though she had to wear a GPS tracker on her ankle.

She takes daily painting lessons and her mother has been living with her.

Last weekend, she appeared at the steps of the imposing modernist British Columbia Supreme Court, making a thumbs-up gesture for photographers.

Many in Canada have noted the contrast between her circumstances and those of the Canadians imprisoned in China, whose access to lawyers and their families is severely limited.

Ms. Meng appeared in court for several hearings, cutting a glamorous figure in either casual outfits or colorful designer dresses and at times wearing stiletto heels adorned with glitter, which drew attention to the GPS tracker on her left ankle.

On the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, she wore a bright red Gucci dress, adorned with an enamel Chinese flag pin.

Ms. Meng could appeal a final decision on extradition to the Supreme Court of Canada, a protracted process that experts say could drag on for years.

After a ruling from the Supreme Court, the case would move to the political arena, with the justice minister of Canada making the final decision on whether she must be sent to the United States to stand trial.

Tracy Sherlock reported from Vancouver, British Columbia, and Dan Bilefsky from Montreal. Raymond Zhong contributed reporting from Taipei, Taiwan.