It’s time for an honest conversation about the costs of new federal programs

The Trudeau government will table its next budget on April 16, and with the government’s push on the initial steps of national pharmacare, it’s important to remember there’s a cost Canadians must pay for new and expanded government services.

In March, the Trudeau government and the NDP reached an agreement to introduce the first steps of a national pharmacare program that will initially cover diabetes drugs and contraceptives, but may eventually grow to cover far more. This marks the third major national social program introduced by the Trudeau government in recent years, accompanying the $10-a-day daycare and national dental care programs promised in Budget 2022.

These policies represent an approach by the federal government to expand its role in the funding and provision of social services—an approach which has support among Canadians. Polling data from 2022, which sought to understand Canadian views on new spending programs, revealed the majority of respondents supported $10-a-day daycare (69 per cent), pharmacare (79 per cent) and dental care (72 per cent)—when there were no costs attached.

The Trudeau government has chosen to fund these new programs primarily using debt. Through planned deficits and rising debt interest costs for the foreseeable future, Ottawa is shifting much of the burden of paying for today’s services onto future generations of Canadians. Put differently, the new services are not free, and must ultimately be paid for through higher taxes in the future because debt comes with costs.

It’s therefore informative to look at what happens to the popularity of these programs when the true costs are communicated to Canadians. Polling data clearly shows these new programs lose considerable support when linked to a direct cost in the form of an increase in the federal goods and services tax (GST). Indeed, support for government-funded pharmacare, dental care and daycare plummeted to well below 50 per cent of respondents if the services are paid for by increased taxes.

This is the key difference between Canada and countries such as Sweden or Denmark, which are often used as examples of countries that maintain expansive social services and income supports. These countries have gone much further than Canada regarding government provision of services, but have paid for it through corresponding tax increases applied to individuals and families today rather than through borrowed money. Moreover, the tax burden falls primarily on the middle class, which utilizes these services the most, as opposed to concentrating tax hikes on top income earners.

For example, Swedes earning more than US$62,000 per year face the country’s top marginal personal income tax rate of 52.3 per cent. In comparison, although Canada’s top marginal rate (53.5 per cent) is roughly the same level as Sweden’s, it doesn’t kick in until earnings of nearly US$177,000. Moreover, both Sweden and Denmark maintain a national sales tax rate of 25 per cent, while Canadians face sales taxes ranging from 5 per cent to 15 per cent (depending on the province). Simply put, the Nordic countries fund expansive government through high taxes on their citizens.

To put the cost of national dental care, day care and the first steps of pharmacare in context, an increase in the GST to 6 per cent from its current 5 per cent would be insufficient to pay for an estimated annual cost of at least $13 billion on these programs.

In recent years, the Trudeau government has introduced substantial social services without the corresponding tax increases required to pay for them. But increased federal spending will require higher taxes for families either today or in the future, and Canadians must remember this when deciding if they truly want these new programs.

Authors:

Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

Up Next

Canada’s border agency says low risk of COVID spreading via paper used to justify ArriveCAN

Don't Miss

Canada wallows on LNG sidelines, paralyzed by Ottawa’s onerous regulatory system

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

Canadian interest in electric vehicles falls for second year in a row: survey

Business / 7 hours ago

Ottawa’s capital gains tax hike—final nail in ‘business investment’ coffin

Alberta / 7 hours ago

Alberta threatens to fight Trudeau government restrictions on Canada’s plastics industry

Automotive

Canadian interest in electric vehicles falls for second year in a row: survey

Published on April 29, 2024

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Canadians’ disinterest in electric vehicles comes as the Trudeau government recently mandated that all new light-duty vehicles in Canada are zero emission by 2035.

Research has revealed that Canadians are increasingly unwilling to purchase an electric vehicle (EV).

According to an April 22 survey from AutoTrader, Canadians remain skeptical of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s electric vehicle mandate and ongoing advertisement surrounding electric vehicles, as interest in owning one dropped for a second year in a row.

“Overall, while almost half of non-EV owners are open to buying an EV for their next vehicle, interest in EVs has declined for the second year in a row,” reported Tiffany Ding, director of insights and intelligence at AutoTrader.

In 2022, at least 68 percent of Canadians were interested in buying an electric vehicle. However, by 2023, the number declined to 56 percent. So far in 2024, there is even less interest, with only 46 percent saying they were open to purchasing one.

“AutoTrader data shows a direct correlation to gas prices and EV interest, and since gas prices have normalized from their peak in 2022, EV interest has also dropped,” a summary of the survey explained.

However, Canadians did show a slight increase of interest in hybrid vehicles, with 62 percent of those looking to purchase an electric vehicle saying they would look at a gas-electric hybrid, compared with 60 percent in 2023.

The survey also questioned Canadians regarding Trudeau’s Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate, which requires all new light-duty vehicles in Canada are zero-emission by 2035, essentially banning the sale of new gasoline/diesel-only powered cars.

The mandate comes despite warnings that it would cause massive chaos by threatening to collapse the nation’s power grids.

“Over 75 percent of respondents are aware of the federal government’s ZEV mandate, which requires all new light-duty vehicles sold in Canada to be zero-emission by 2035,” the survey found.

Canadians’ concerns in buying an electric vehicle include limited travel range/distance, inadequate availability of charging stations, higher purchasing costs, and concerns that they do not perform well in cold weather.

Indeed, this winter, western Canadians experienced firsthand the unreliability of Trudeau’s “renewable” energy scheme as Alberta’s power grid nearly collapsed due to a failure of wind and solar power.

Trudeau’s plan has been roundly condemned by Canadians, including Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. In 2022, Smith denounced a federal mandate that will require all new cars sold after 2035 to be “zero emission” electric (EVs) vehicles and promised that Albertans will always have the choice to buy gasoline-powered cars.

Since taking office in 2015, Trudeau has continued to push a radical environmental agenda similar to the agendas being pushed the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.”

The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has also been pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization in which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.

The Trudeau government’s electric vehicle plan comes despite the fact Canada has the third largest oil reserves in the world. Electric cars cost thousands more to make and buy, are largely considered unsuitable for Canada’s climate as they offer poor range and long charging times during cold winters and have batteries that take tremendous resources to make and are difficult to recycle.

Business

Ottawa’s capital gains tax hike—final nail in ‘business investment’ coffin

Published on April 29, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Jake Fuss

From 2014 to 2022, inflation-adjusted total business investment (in plants, machinery, equipment and new technologies but excluding residential construction) in Canada declined by C$34 billion. During the same period, after adjusting for inflation, business investment declined by a total of $3,748 per worker

According to the recent federal budget, the Trudeau government plans to increase the inclusion rate from 50 per cent to 66.7 per cent on capital gains over $250,000 for individuals and on all capital gains realized by corporations and trusts. Unfortunately, this tax hike will be the final nail in the coffin for business investment in Canada, which likely means even harder economic times ahead.

Canada already faces a business investment crisis. From 2014 to 2022, inflation-adjusted total business investment (in plants, machinery, equipment and new technologies but excluding residential construction) in Canada declined by C$34 billion. During the same period, after adjusting for inflation, business investment declined by a total of $3,748 per worker—from $20,264 per worker in 2014 to $16,515 per worker in 2022.

While business investment has declined in Canada since 2014, in other countries, including the United States, it’s continued to grow. This isn’t a post-COVID problem—this is a Canada problem.

And Canadians should be worried. Businesses investment is key for strong economic growth and higher living standards because when businesses invest in physical and intellectual capital they equip workers with the tools and technology (e.g. machinery, computer programs, artificial intelligence) to produce more and provide higher quality goods and services, which fuels innovation and higher productivity. And as firms become more efficient and increase profits, they’re able to pay higher wages, which is why business investment remains a key factor for higher incomes and living standards.

The Trudeau government’s policies—increased regulation, particularly in the energy and mining sectors (which makes Canada a relatively unattractive place to do business), higher and uncompetitive taxes, and massive federal deficits (which imply future tax increases)—have damaged business investment.

Unsurprisingly, weak business investment has correlated with a weak economy. In the fourth quarter of 2023, real economic growth per person ($58,111) officially fell below 2014 levels ($58,162). In other words, Canadian living standards have completely stagnated. In fact, over the last decade economic growth per person has been the weakest on record since the 1930s.

Instead of helping fix the problem, the Trudeau government’s capital gains tax hike will further damage Canada’s economy by reducing the return on investment and encouraging an exodus of capital from the country. Indeed, capital gains taxes are among the most economically-damaging forms of taxation because they reduce the incentive to invest.

Once again, the Trudeau government has enacted a policy that will deter business investment, which Canada desperately needs for strong economic growth. The key takeaway for Canadians? Barring a change in policy, you can expect harder times ahead.