Bad federal policy helps increase airfare in Canada

Canadian air travel can be summed up in a few words—poor service, high ticket prices and little choice. And as a federal election looms, Canadians should understand that bad federal policy is to blame.

According to the International Air Transport Association, Canada ranks 101st out of 116 countries for the cost of air travel. And customer complaints against Canadian airlines have grown more than sixfold between fiscal years 2018/19 and 2022/23.

Why are ticket prices so high?

For starters, taxes and fees (imposed by governments and airports) comprise a large portion (25 to 35 per cent) of airfare costs in Canada. For example, “airport improvement” fees average $32.20 per departing passenger at Canada’s largest airports compared to $6.47 in the United States and $16.38 in Australia. For air traffic control (ATC), airlines pay charges based on distance, geography and other factors, and these costs are passed to consumers. In one illustrative example, to fly a Boeing 777 in Canada, airlines must pay an estimated $802 in ATC fees compared to between $192 and $478 in the United States and $493 in Mexico (all figures in Canadian dollars).

Moreover, Canadians pay between $9.46 and $34.42 per ticket in “security” fees, more than Americans (C$7.65) and Australians (C$4.80). Canada’s “landing” fees—charged by the airports based on the weight of the plane—are among the highest in the world and 35 to 75 per cent higher than at U.S. airports.

Our high fees originate in part due to Canada’s flawed airport ownership structure. The federal government owns the land where Canada’s major airports are built, and leases it back to not-for-profit airport authorities that pay rent—up to 12 per cent of airport revenue—to Ottawa. The airports impose fees on passengers to recoup this revenue.

But while fees help increase costs for airfare in Canada, another culprit is the lack of competition among airlines. Crucially, the federal government prevents foreign airlines from operating domestic routes within Canada’s borders, which severely limits choice and competition. While the government allows a foreign airline such as Lufthansa to fly from Frankfurt to Toronto, it prevents Lufthansa from flying passengers from Toronto to another Canadian city. As a result, there’s little competitive pressure for Canadian airlines to lower their prices for air travel within Canada’s borders.

The European Union, in contrast, removed such restrictions for member-states. The result? More competition including from new low-cost carriers such as Ryanair, a 34 per cent decline in ticket prices, more cross-border routes, and greater flight frequencies. The entry of new low-cost carriers alone helped lower airfares by 20 per cent.

Given the sorry state of air travel in Canada, our new study identifies four ways the federal government can improve competitiveness and lower airfare.

First, the government should reduce taxes and fees to be more in line with other countries. Second, the government should negotiate deals with other countries including the United States to allow foreign airlines to operate within Canada in exchange for Canadian airlines operating in those countries, which would help both Canadian consumers and Canadian airlines. Indeed, according to a 2016 report from the federal government, restrictions on foreign airlines increase air travel costs for Canadians and have outlived their usefulness. The report recommended Canada work towards an “open common market for air services” with peer countries. The key is reciprocity—if U.S. airlines, for example, are allowed access to the Canadian domestic air travel market, Canadian airlines must also have access to the U.S. market.

Third, the federal government should follow in the footsteps of Europe, Australia and New Zealand, and sell its remaining interests in airport leases and allow for-profit organizations to own and operate airports in Canada.

Lastly, the government should reduce the regulatory burden on the airline industry while maintaining strong safety standards. On this front, Canada can emulate the successful deregulation effort undertaken in the United States in the late 1970s and 1980s when widespread reform helped produce more competition, more consumer choice, lower fares and safety improvements.

Canadians will likely head to polls sometime this spring. If the next federal government wants to help improve air travel service quality, increase consumer choice and lower airfares, it should reform Canada’s antiquated airline policies.

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Alex Whalen

Director, Atlantic Canada Prosperity, Fraser Institute

Up Next

Where To Draw The Line: Is Carney’s Daughter Off-Limits to Media?

Don't Miss

Poilieve introduces “Canada First Shovel-Ready Zones” pre-approved areas to build mines, data centres, pipelines, LNG plants and more

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

FBI’s Dan Bongino may resign after dispute about Epstein files with Pam Bondi

National / 10 hours ago

How Long Will Mark Carney’s Post-Election Honeymoon Last? – Michelle Rempel Garner

Business / 11 hours ago

Trump confirms 35% tariff on Canada, warns more could come

Business

Trump confirms 35% tariff on Canada, warns more could come

Published on July 11, 2025

Todayville

MxM News

Quick Hit:

President Trump on Thursday confirmed a sweeping new 35% tariff on Canadian imports starting August 1, citing Canada’s failure to curb fentanyl trafficking and retaliatory trade actions.

Key Details:

In a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said the new 35% levy is in response to Canada’s “financial retaliation” and its inability to stop fentanyl from reaching the U.S.
Trump emphasized that Canadian businesses that relocate manufacturing to the U.S. will be exempt and promised expedited approvals for such moves.
The administration has already notified 23 countries of impending tariffs following the expiration of a 90-day negotiation window under Trump’s “Liberation Day” trade policy.

Diving Deeper:

President Trump escalated his tariff strategy on Thursday, formally announcing a 35% duty on all Canadian imports effective August 1. The move follows what Trump described as a breakdown in trade cooperation and a failure by Canada to address its role in the U.S. fentanyl crisis.

“It is a Great Honor for me to send you this letter in that it demonstrates the strength and commitment of our Trading Relationship,” Trump wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney. He added that the tariff response comes after Canada “financially retaliated” against the U.S. rather than working to resolve the flow of fentanyl across the northern border.

Trump’s letter made clear the tariff will apply broadly, separate from any existing sector-specific levies, and included a warning that “goods transshipped to evade this higher Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff.” The president also hinted that further retaliation from Canada could push rates even higher.

However, Trump left the door open for possible revisions. “If Canada works with me to stop the flow of Fentanyl, we will, perhaps, consider an adjustment to this letter,” he said, adding that tariffs “may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship.”

Canadian companies that move operations to the U.S. would be exempt, Trump said, noting his administration “will do everything possible to get approvals quickly, professionally, and routinely — In other words, in a matter of weeks.”

The U.S. traded over $762 billion in goods with Canada in 2024, with a trade deficit of $63.3 billion, a figure Trump called a “major threat” to both the economy and national security.

Speaking with NBC News on Thursday, Trump suggested even broader tariff hikes are coming, floating the idea of a 15% or 20% blanket rate on all imports. “We’re just going to say all of the remaining countries are going to pay,” he told Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker, adding that “the tariffs have been very well-received” and noting that the stock market had hit new highs that day.

The Canadian announcement is part of a broader global tariff rollout. In recent days, Trump has notified at least 23 countries of new levies and revealed a separate 50% tariff on copper imports.

“Not everybody has to get a letter,” Trump said when asked if other leaders would be formally notified. “You know that. We’re just setting our tariffs.”

Business

Trump slaps Brazil with tariffs over social media censorship

Published on July 11, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Dan Frieth

In his letter dated July 9, 2025, addressed to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Trump ties new U.S. trade measures directly to Brazilian censorship.

U.S. President Donald Trump has launched a fierce rebuke of Brazil’s moves to silence American-run social media platforms, particularly Rumble and X.

In his letter dated July 9, 2025, addressed to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Trump ties new U.S. trade measures directly to Brazilian censorship.

He calls attention to “SECRET and UNLAWFUL Censorship Orders to U.S. Social Media platforms,” pointing out that Brazil’s Supreme Court has been “threatening them with Millions of Dollars in Fines and Eviction from the Brazilian Social Media market.”

Trump warns that these actions are “due in part to Brazil’s insidious attacks on Free Elections, and the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans,” and states: “starting on August 1, 2025, we will charge Brazil a Tariff of 50% on any and all Brazilian products sent into the United States, separate from all Sectoral Tariffs.” He also adds that “Goods transshipped to evade this 50% Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff.”

Brazil’s crackdown has targeted Rumble after it refused to comply with orders to block the account of Allan dos Santos, a Brazilian streamer living in the United States.

On February 21, 2025, Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered Rumble’s suspension for non‑compliance, saying it failed “to comply with court orders.”

Earlier, from August to October 2024, Moraes had similarly ordered a nationwide block on X.

The court directed ISPs to suspend access and imposed fines after the platform refused to designate a legal representative and remove certain accounts.

Elon Musk responded: “Free speech is the bedrock of democracy and an unelected pseudo‑judge in Brazil is destroying it for political purposes.”

By linking censorship actions, particularly those targeting Rumble and X, to U.S. trade policy, Trump’s letter asserts that Brazil’s judiciary has moved into the arena of foreign policy and economic consequences.

The tariffs, he makes clear, are meant, at least in part, as a response to Brazil’s suppression of American free speech.

Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on Brazil for censoring American platforms may also serve as a clear signal to the European Union, which is advancing similar regulatory efforts under the guise of “disinformation” and “online safety.”

With the EU’s Digital Services Act and proposed “hate speech” legislation expanding government authority over content moderation, American companies face mounting pressure to comply with vague and sweeping takedown demands.

By framing censorship as a violation of U.S. free speech rights and linking it to trade consequences, Trump is effectively warning that any foreign attempt to suppress American voices or platforms could trigger similar economic retaliation.

Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.