Canadian Coast Guard Multi-Purpose Icebreaker (MPI). Source: Seaspan. This is the ship to be built by the Bollinger/Seaspan/Rauma Marine Constructions (Rauma)/Aker Arctic Team. Two will be built in Finland while four are be built in the US.
Note: The MPI image does not show the right propulsors; it will use Steerprop’s contra-rotating propulsors (CRP). Additionally according to Seaspan, the design could easily be upgraded to PC3. Confirmation from Seaspan and Aker Arctic.
An agreement between President Trump and Finnish President Alexander Stubb seems to have determined the plan for procurement of Coast Guard’s Arctic Security Cutter fleet.
It looks good, but it is not in the budget yet, it includes more ships than studies have shown the Coast Guard needs, and neither design has the propulsion power to be classed as “Medium” icebreaker under the terms the Arctic Security Cutter was previously defined, e.g.. 20,000 to 45,000 shaft HP. Even so I don’t expect any significant push back.
This is the ship to be built by the Davie/Helsinki Shipyard team. Two are to be built in Finland and three in Texas..
The agreement is relatively complex with many parties producing two classes of ships in two countries in four different shipyards. Perhaps the best explanation actually appeared before the official announcement in Peter Rybski’ Sixty Degrees North, “USA-Finland Icebreaker Deal Announcement Expected Today.” There is another very clear report here from Marine Link.
I used information from Sixty Degrees North in the captions of the two illustrations I used.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
It’s worth noting that while the USCG has its own way of classifying icebreakers as “light”, “medium” and “heavy” and both of these designs are referred to as “Arctic Security Cutters”, in practice together with the bigger PSCs the USCG will get a similar three-tiered icebreaker fleet like the Canadian Coast Guard: 6 × PC 4 + 5 × PC 3 + 3 × PC 2. While there are many overlapping capabilities, there are also differences that will make some ships more suitable for specific missions than others; that brings flexibility to planning the operations.
Anyway, it seems that this year Christmas came early.
I made an error when I said these ships were not in the budget. The “Big Beautiful Bill” did include money for three Arctic Security Cutters. This is what was listed in the CG news release as included in the “Big Beautiful Bill”: $3.5 billion for three Arctic Security Cutters, $816 million for light and medium Icebreaking Cutters. https://chuckhillscgblog.net/…/july-4-2025-u-s-coast…/
Latest estimate is that these 11 ships will cost $6.1 B
The Canadians plan on using their MPI design to work buoys. I can see a use case for sending the Aker design to the Great Lakes for winter icebreaking. It might be a little too large and deep draft to work GL ATON though.