Connect with us

Automotive

Canada’s EV programs are crashing out

Published

5 minute read

Fr0m Resource Works

By

Consumer appetites and changes in the global economy are outpacing government incentives.

Canada’s bold electric vehicle (EV) plan was once the big deal in the country’s climate policy, but now that reality has set in, it looks like the program is going to fail.

For years, Canadian politicians proudly led the country towards an electric future with strong rebates, strict rules, and a commitment to meeting tough emission reduction targets. But recent events have revealed serious problems that have sent the country’s electric vehicle plans into a tailspin.

The first cracks showed up earlier this year when the federal and provincial rebate programs ended. The iZEV program in Ottawa, which gave up to $5,000 per vehicle, ended suddenly in January 2025 when the money ran out. Quebec followed suit and stopped its provincial rebates for a short time.

They came back at a much lower rate, dropping from $7,000 to $4,000 in April 2025. British Columbia ended its popular rebate program completely after making it harder to qualify, which meant about 75 percent of EV models were no longer eligible. This makes it much harder for people thinking of switching to electric vehicles to make a financial case for it.

The market reacted quickly and strongly. EV sales, which had been increasing, stopped right away. Statistics Canada says EV sales reached their highest point in December 2024 when they made up about 18.29 percent of all sales in Canada. By April 2025, they had dropped to 7.53 percent.

British Columbia, which used to be the leader in EV adoption, saw its market share drop from almost 25 percent in mid-2024 to about 15.4 percent by June 2025. Quebec, which is now the leader in Canada, had similar problems, with sales dropping sharply even though the province has always been enthusiastic about electrification.

There are harsh economic facts behind these numbers. People who want to buy electric vehicles say cost is the biggest problem. Middle-class Canadians can no longer afford electric vehicles because the rebates were taken away. Infrastructure problems make this worse; public charging networks are still not good enough or reliable enough, which makes owning an electric vehicle impractical for many potential buyers.

Even though the government has been working to install thousands of new charging stations, a recent survey found 41 percent of British Columbians thought the current infrastructure was not enough.

The Canadian government’s EV sales mandate has become the big problem, making things even worse. The mandate was meant to ensure 20 percent of all new cars sold by 2026 would be zero-emission and 100 percent by 2035. Now most people think this is impossible.

Auto industry representatives, including the CEOs of Ford, GM, and Stellantis Canada, have told Prime Minister Mark Carney in no uncertain terms that the targets can’t be met in the current market. They say enforcing these rules without any incentives could cost automakers up to $20,000 per vehicle and mean fewer jobs and less production in Canada.

At the same time, geopolitical factors have made things even tougher. The Trump administration’s U.S. tariffs and the end of U.S. EV incentives and mandates have had a huge impact on the Canadian auto industry, which sends 85 percent of its production to the U.S. market.

Critics say Canada’s whole EV policy is a case of good intentions running into hard economic and practical realities. The Fraser Institute says directly that the EV mandate is the wrong way to choose which technologies will succeed and which will fail, hurting markets and putting an unfair burden on lower-income people.

Even people who care about sustainability agree the mandates as they currently stand don’t fit the market and consumer behaviour.

Canada’s EV program needs major policy changes now if it’s to survive and grow. Barry Penner of the Energy Futures Institute and other industry leaders say a more gradual and flexible approach is better. This would include bringing back rebates, improving charging infrastructure, and making sure the mandates match market conditions.

If these changes aren’t made, the good intentions behind Canada’s EV plans will be derailed, and economic stability and real environmental progress will be at risk.

Photo credit to the Province of British Columbia

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

Automotive

Canada’s EV Mandate Is Running On Empty

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Marco Navarro-Genie

At what point does Ottawa admit its EV plan isn’t working?

Electric vehicles produce more pollution than the gas-powered cars they’re replacing.

This revelation, emerging from life-cycle and supply chain audits, exposes the false claim behind Ottawa’s more than $50 billion experiment. A Volvo study found that manufacturing an EV generates 70 per cent more emissions than building a comparable conventional vehicle because battery production is energy-intensive and often powered by coal in countries such as China. Depending on the electricity grid, it can take years or never for an EV to offset that initial carbon debt.

Prime Minister Mark Carney paused the federal electric vehicle (EV) mandate for 2026 due to public pressure and corporate failures while keeping the 2030 and 2035 targets. The mandate requires 20 per cent of new vehicles sold in 2026 to be zero-emission, rising to 60 per cent in 2030 and 100 per cent in 2035. Carney inherited this policy crisis but is reluctant to abandon it.

Industry failures and Trump tariffs forced Ottawa’s hand. Northvolt received $240 million in federal subsidies for a Quebec battery plant before filing for bankruptcy. Lion Electric burned through $100 million before announcing layoffs. Arrival, a U.K.-based electric van and bus manufacturer, collapsed entirely. Stellantis and LG Energy Solution extracted $15 billion for Windsor. Volkswagen secured $13 billion for St. Thomas.

The federal government committed more than $50 billion in subsidies and tax credits to prop up Canada’s EV industry. Ottawa defended these payouts as necessary to match the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act, which offers major incentives for EV and battery manufacturing. That is twice Manitoba’s annual operating budget. Every Manitoban could have had a two-year tax holiday with the public money Ottawa wasted on EVs.

Even with incentives, EVs reached only 15 per cent of new vehicle sales in 2024, far short of the mandated levels for 2026 and 2030. When federal subsidies ended in January 2025, sales collapsed to nine per cent, revealing the true level of consumer demand. Dealer lots overflowed with unsold inventory. EV sales also slowed in the U.S. and Europe in 2024, showing that cooling demand is a broader trend.

As economist Friedrich Hayek observed, “The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.” Politicians and bureaucrats cannot know what millions of Canadians know about their own needs. When federal ministers mandate which vehicles Canadians must buy and which companies deserve billions, they substitute the judgment of a few hundred officials for the collective wisdom of an entire market.

Bureaucrats draft regulations that determine the vehicles Canadians must purchase years from now, as if they can predict technology and consumer preferences better than markets.

Green ideology provided perfect cover. Invoke a climate emergency and fiscal responsibility vanishes. Question more than $50 billion in subsidies and you are labelled a climate denier. Point out the environmental costs of battery production, and you are accused of spreading misinformation.

History repeatedly teaches that central planning always fails. Soviet five-year plans, Venezuela’s resource nationalization and Britain’s industrial policy failures all show the same pattern. Every attempt to run economies from political offices ends in misallocation, waste and outcomes opposite to those promised. Concentrated political power cannot ever match the intelligence of free markets responding to real prices and constraints.

Markets collect information that no central planner can access. Prices signal scarcity and value. Profits and losses reward accuracy and punish error. When governments override these mechanisms with mandates and subsidies, they impair the information system that enables rational economic decisions.

The EV mandate forced a technological shift and failed. Billions in subsidies went to failing companies. Taxpayers absorbed losses while corporations walked away. Workers lost their jobs.

Canada needs a full repeal of the EV mandate and a retreat from PMO planners directing market decisions. The law must be struck, not paused. The contrived 2030 and 2035 targets must be abandoned.

Markets, not cabinet ministers, must determine what technologies Canadians choose.

Marco Navarro-Genie is vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).

Continue Reading

Automotive

Trump Deals Biden’s EV Dreams A Death Blow

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

President Donald Trump dealt the dreams of former President Joe Biden for an all-electric fleet of American cars a fatal blow on Thursday by terminating the onerous Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards Biden invoked in 2022 and further tightened in 2024.

“We’re officially terminating Joe Biden’s ridiculously burdensome, horrible actually, CAFE standards, that imposed expensive restrictions… It puts tremendous pressure on upward car prices,” Trump said during a press conference held in the Oval Office Thursday afternoon.

The Biden standards, which cranked down on allowable tailpipe emissions and raised industry-wide average car mileage to a stratospheric 50.4 miles per gallon requirement by 2030, were the centerpiece of his strategy to force American consumers to buy electric vehicles by intentionally forcing up prices for traditional internal combustion models.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

That’s right, America: Your government, led by Joe Biden’s autopen and the woke staffers who wielded it, intentionally and with malice aforethought drove up the prices of the gas powered cars you actually want to buy to try to force you to purchase electric models that poll after poll proves most of you don’t want. They did this all in the name of the global climate alarm religion, which far too many U.S. politicians use to justify a vast array of authoritarian actions.

The unbridled hubris involved in even entertaining this concept would have in the past been considered scandalous. Yet, today, it is completely in keeping with one of the central goals of the energy transition movement to drive up the costs of all traditional forms of energy to try to make the subsidized alternatives favored by the Democratic Party – wind, solar, and electric vehicles – competitive in the market. Activists in the climate alarm movement no longer even try to deny this goal – they proudly boast about it.

This was the real enterprise behind Biden’s ridiculous CAFE standards, and it is what President Trump interrupted on Thursday. It was just the latest in a series of body blows Trump and his officials have dealt the U.S. EV industry, one that could well prove fatal to many pure-play electric car companies and force major reallocations of capital budgets inside integrated automakers like Ford, GM, and Stellantis.

Naturally, the climate alarm activist community was outraged. “Trump’s action will feed America’s destructive use of oil, while hamstringing us in the green tech race against … foreign carmakers,” said Dan Becker, Director of the notorious far-left conflict group, the Center for Biological Diversity, according to the Guardian.

But here’s the thing: U.S. consumers don’t want to buy the alternative the climate alarm community and Biden administration were trying to force. Even with the attraction of Biden’s economically ruinous $7,500 per unit IRA subsidies, U.S. car buyers made clear their strong preference for big, full-size, gas-or-diesel-powered pickups and SUVs.

This reality is why Stellantis announced in September it was abandoning plans to introduce a full-size electric pickup to compete with Ford’s F-150 Lightning. Even worse for EV boosters, Ford has already cut back on production of the Lightning model, and is planning to eliminate it entirely soon, according to the Wall Street Journal. These decisions and plans were already underway long before Trump’s decision to rescind the CAFE standards, based on simple consumer demand.

Interestingly, many consumers believe Trump didn’t go far enough on Thursday, and that he should simply eliminate mileage requirements altogether. One commenter to my Substack newsletter writes, “why didn’t they just kill CAFE standards once and for all? From what clause in the Constitution does the federal government have the right to limit what type of car I can buy?…They should have just killed it outright.”

It’s a legitimate question: Why do federal regulators believe they have the right to control consumer behavior in the name of climate alarmism? In light of last year’s decision by the Supreme Court to rescind the Chevron deference – which helped facilitate the massive expansion of the federal bureaucracy for 40 long years – it’s a question that could be litigated in the months and years to come.

Joe Biden’s EV dreams are dead now, but that doesn’t mean the situation can’t possibly get even worse for the EV industry in America. Stay tuned.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Continue Reading

Trending

X