Business
Broken ‘equalization’ program bad for all provinces
From the Fraser Institute
By Alex Whalen and Tegan Hill
Back in the summer at a meeting in Halifax, several provincial premiers discussed a lawsuit meant to force the federal government to make changes to Canada’s equalization program. The suit—filed by Newfoundland and Labrador and backed by British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Alberta—effectively argues that the current formula isn’t fair. But while the question of “fairness” can be subjective, its clear the equalization program is broken.
In theory, the program equalizes the ability of provinces to deliver reasonably comparable services at a reasonably comparable level of taxation. Any province’s ability to pay is based on its “fiscal capacity”—that is, its ability to raise revenue.
This year, equalization payments will total a projected $25.3 billion with all provinces except B.C., Alberta and Saskatchewan to receive some money. Whether due to higher incomes, higher employment or other factors, these three provinces have a greater ability to collect government revenue so they will not receive equalization.
However, contrary to the intent of the program, as recently as 2021, equalization program costs increased despite a decline in the fiscal capacity of oil-producing provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador. In other words, the fiscal capacity gap among provinces was shrinking, yet recipient provinces still received a larger equalization payment.
Why? Because a “fixed-growth rule,” introduced by the Harper government in 2009, ensures that payments grow roughly in line with the economy—even if the gap between richer and poorer provinces shrinks. The result? Total equalization payments (before adjusting for inflation) increased by 19 per cent between 2015/16 and 2020/21 despite the gap in fiscal capacities between provinces shrinking during this time.
Moreover, the structure of the equalization program is also causing problems, even for recipient provinces, because it generates strong disincentives to natural resource development and the resulting economic growth because the program “claws back” equalization dollars when provinces raise revenue from natural resource development. Despite some changes to reduce this problem, one study estimated that a recipient province wishing to increase its natural resource revenues by a modest 10 per cent could face up to a 97 per cent claw back in equalization payments.
Put simply, provinces that generally do not receive equalization such as Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan have been punished for developing their resources, whereas recipient provinces such as Quebec and in the Maritimes have been rewarded for not developing theirs.
Finally, the current program design also encourages recipient provinces to maintain high personal and business income tax rates. While higher tax rates can reduce the incentive to work, invest and be productive, they also raise the national standard average tax rate, which is used in the equalization allocation formula. Therefore, provinces are incentivized to maintain high and economically damaging tax rates to maximize equalization payments.
Unless premiers push for reforms that will improve economic incentives and contain program costs, all provinces—recipient and non-recipient—will suffer the consequences.
Authors:
From LifeSiteNews
A new report released by the Bank of Canada proposed a ‘promising architecture well-suited for basic payments’ through the use of a digital dollar, though most Canadians are wary of such an idea.
Canada’s central bank has been studying ways to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC) for use for online retailers, according to a new report, despite the fact that recent research suggests Canadians are wary of any type of digital dollar.
In a new 47-page report titled, “A Retail CBDC Design For Basic Payments Feasibility Study,” which was released on June 13, 2025, the Bank of Canada (BOC) identified a “promising architecture well-suited for basic payments” through the use of a digital dollar.
The report reads that CBDCs “can be fast and cheap for basic payments, with high privacy, although some areas such as integration with retail payments systems, performance of auditing and resilience of the core system state require further investigation.”
While the report authors stopped short of fully recommending a CBDC, they noted it is a decision that could happen “outside the scope of this analysis.”
“Our framing highlights other promising architectures for an online retail CBDC, whose analysis we leave as an area for further exploration,” reads the report.
When it comes to a digital Canadian dollar, the Bank of Canada last year found that Canadians are very wary of a government-backed digital currency, concluding that a “significant number” of citizens would resist the implementation of such a system.
Indeed, a 2023 study found that most Canadians, about 85 percent, do not want a digital dollar, as previously reported by LifeSiteNews.
The study found that a “significant number” of Canadians are suspicious of government overreach and would resist any measures by the government or central bank to create digital forms of official money.
The BOC has said that it would continue to look at other countries’ use and development of CBDCs and will work with other “central banks” to improve so-called cross border payments.
Last year, as reported by LifeSiteNews, the BOC has already said that plans to create a digital “dollar,” also known as a central bank digital currency (CBDC), have been shelved.
Digital currencies have been touted as the future by some government officials, but, as LifeSiteNews has reported before, many experts warn that such technology would restrict freedom and could be used as a “control tool” against citizens, similar to China’s pervasive social credit system.
The BOC last August admitted that the creation of a CBDC is not even necessary, as many people rely on cash to pay for things. The bank concluded that the introduction of a digital currency would only be feasible if consumers demanded its release.
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre has promised, should he ever form the government, he would oppose the creation of a digital dollar.
Contrast this to Canada’s current Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney. He has a history of supporting central bank digital currencies and in 2022 supported “choking off the money” donated to the Freedom Convoy protests against COVID mandates.
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the City of Calgary to scrap the Calgary Arts Development Authority after it spent $65,000 on a telephone line to the Bow River.
“If someone wants to listen to a river, they can go sit next to one, but the City of Calgary should not force taxpayers to pay for this,” said Kris Sims, CTF Alberta Director. “If phoning a river floats your boat, you do you, but don’t force your neighbour to pay for your art choices.”
The City of Calgary spent $65,194 of taxpayers’ money for an art project dubbed “Reconnecting to the Bow” to set up a telephone line so people could call the Bow River and listen to the sound of water.
The project is running between September 2024 and December 2025, according to documents obtained by the CTF.
The art installation is a rerun of a previous version set up back in 2014.
Emails obtained by the CTF show the bureaucrats responsible for the newest version of the project wanted a new local 403 area code phone number instead of an 1-855 number to “give the authority back to the Bow,” because “the original number highlighted a proprietary and commercial relationship with the river.”
Further correspondence obtained by the CTF shows the city did not want its logo included in the displays, stating the “City of Calgary (does NOT want to have its logo on the artworks or advertisements).”
Taxpayers pay about $19 million per year for the Calgary Arts Development Authority. That’s equivalent to the total property tax bill for about 7,000 households.
Calgary bureaucrats also expressed concern the project “may not be received well, perceived as a waste of money or simply foolish.”
“That city hall employee was pointing out the obvious: This is a foolish waste of taxpayers’ money and this slush fund should be scrapped,” said Sims. “Artists should work with willing donors for their projects instead of mooching off city hall and forcing taxpayers to pay for it.”
Central Alberta MP resigns to give Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre a chance to regain a seat in Parliament
Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling Inspires Hope For Future Energy Project Permitting
Calls for a new pipeline to the coast are only getting louder
Alberta health care blockbuster: Province eliminating AHS Health Zones in favour of local decision-making!
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling Inspires Hope For Future Energy Project Permitting
-
espionage2 days agoFBI Buried ‘Warning’ Intel on CCP Plot to Elect Biden Using TikTok, Fake IDs, CCP Sympathizers and PRC Students—Grassley Probes Withdrawal
-
Agriculture2 days agoUnstung Heroes: Canada’s Honey Bees are not Disappearing – They’re Thriving
-
conflict19 hours agoVictor Davis Hanson Makes a Disturbing Prediction About What Happens If Iran Survives
-
espionage2 days agoFrom Sidewinder to P.E.I.: Are Canada’s Political Elites Benefiting from Beijing’s Real Estate Reach?
-
Automotive20 hours agoSupreme Court Delivers Blow To California EV Mandates
-
Energy2 days agoWho put the energy illiterate in charge?
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta’s carbon diet – how to lose megatonnes in just three short decades