Business
DOJ Takes Aim at Breaking Up Google
News release from Reclaim The Net
|
On Tuesday, the United States announced potential plans to request a court mandate directing Alphabet Inc to divest significant segments of its operations, including its Chrome browser and Android operating system. This move aims to dismantle what is described as an illegal monopoly held by Google in the online search sector. A judge had previously concluded in August that Google, which handles 90% of internet searches in the US, had established this monopoly unlawfully.
We obtained a copy of the proposals for you here. The Justice Department has outlined remedies that could dramatically alter the landscape of how information is accessed on the internet by Americans, potentially diminishing Google’s revenue and enabling competitors to expand. These proposed remedies are designed to prevent Google’s historical dominance from expanding into emerging sectors like artificial intelligence. The department emphasized that effectively addressing the harm caused necessitates “not only ending Google’s control of distribution today but also ensuring Google cannot control the distribution of tomorrow.” Additionally, the Justice Department is considering urging the court to halt Google’s substantial payments to secure its search engine as the pre-installed or default option on new devices. In 2021, Google paid $26.3 billion to various companies, including Apple, to maintain its search engine as the default on devices, which has helped preserve its dominant market position. Google, planning to appeal, described the proposals on a corporate blog as “radical” and “far beyond the specific legal issues in this case.” The company asserts that its search engine remains a top choice due to its quality and contends it faces significant competition from entities like Amazon. Google also noted that users have the freedom to select alternative search engines. The Justice Department’s efforts also include proposals to forestall Google’s control over future technology developments in AI. They may require Google to make its indexes, data, and models used for search and AI features accessible to competitors and proposes restrictions on Google’s agreements that could limit other AI firms’ access to web content. The department suggests allowing websites to opt out of having their content used by Google to train AI models. Google warned that these AI-focused proposals might inhibit the industry’s growth. The company argued, “There are enormous risks to the government putting its thumb on the scale of this vital industry — skewing investment, distorting incentives, hobbling emerging business models — all at precisely the moment that we need to encourage investment.” A detailed proposal from the Justice Department is expected to be submitted to the court by November 20, with Google set to present its counter-proposals by December 20. |
Business
Major tax changes in 2026: Report
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation released its annual New Year’s Tax Changes report today to highlight the major tax changes in 2026.
“There’s some good news and bad news for taxpayers in 2026,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “The federal government cut income taxes, but it’s hiking payroll taxes. The government cancelled the consumer carbon tax, but it’s hammering Canadian businesses with a higher industrial carbon tax.”
Payroll taxes: The federal government is raising the maximum mandatory Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance contributions in 2026. These payroll tax increases will cost a worker up to an additional $262 next year.
For workers making $85,000 or more, federal payroll taxes (CPP and EI tax) will cost $5,770 in 2026. Their employers will also be forced to pay $6,219.
Income tax: The federal government cut the lowest income tax rate from 15 to 14 per cent. This will save the average taxpayer $190 in 2026, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Carbon taxes: The government cancelled its consumer carbon tax effective April 1, 2025. However, the government still charges carbon taxes through its industrial carbon tax and a hidden carbon tax embedded in fuel regulations.
The industrial carbon tax will increase to $110 per tonne in 2026. While the government hasn’t provided further details on how much the industrial carbon tax will cost Canadians, 70 per cent of Canadians believe businesses pass on most or some of the cost of the tax to consumers, according to a Leger poll.
Alcohol taxes: Federal alcohol taxes are expected to increase by two per cent on April 1, 2026. This alcohol tax hike will cost taxpayers about $41 million in 2026-27, according to industry estimates.
First passed in the 2017 federal budget, the alcohol escalator tax automatically increases excise taxes on beer, wine and spirits every year without a vote in Parliament. Since being imposed, the alcohol escalator tax has cost taxpayers about $1.6 billion, according to industry estimates.
“Canadians pay too much tax because the government wastes too much money,” Terrazzano said. “Canadians are overtaxed and need serious tax cuts to help make life more affordable and our economy more competitive.
“Prime Minister Mark Carney needs to significantly cut spending, provide major tax relief and scrap all carbon taxes.”
You can read the CTF’s New Year’s Tax Changes report here.
Automotive
Politicians should be honest about environmental pros and cons of electric vehicles
From the Fraser Institute
By Annika Segelhorst and Elmira Aliakbari
According to Steven Guilbeault, former environment minister under Justin Trudeau and former member of Prime Minister Carney’s cabinet, “Switching to an electric vehicle is one of the most impactful things Canadians can do to help fight climate change.”
And the Carney government has only paused Trudeau’s electric vehicle (EV) sales mandate to conduct a “review” of the policy, despite industry pressure to scrap the policy altogether.
So clearly, according to policymakers in Ottawa, EVs are essentially “zero emission” and thus good for environment.
But is that true?
Clearly, EVs have some environmental advantages over traditional gasoline-powered vehicles. Unlike cars with engines that directly burn fossil fuels, EVs do not produce tailpipe emissions of pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide, and do not release greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide. These benefits are real. But when you consider the entire lifecycle of an EV, the picture becomes much more complicated.
Unlike traditional gasoline-powered vehicles, battery-powered EVs and plug-in hybrids generate most of their GHG emissions before the vehicles roll off the assembly line. Compared with conventional gas-powered cars, EVs typically require more fossil fuel energy to manufacture, largely because to produce EVs batteries, producers require a variety of mined materials including cobalt, graphite, lithium, manganese and nickel, which all take lots of energy to extract and process. Once these raw materials are mined, processed and transported across often vast distances to manufacturing sites, they must be assembled into battery packs. Consequently, the manufacturing process of an EV—from the initial mining of materials to final assembly—produces twice the quantity of GHGs (on average) as the manufacturing process for a comparable gas-powered car.
Once an EV is on the road, its carbon footprint depends on how the electricity used to charge its battery is generated. According to a report from the Canada Energy Regulator (the federal agency responsible for overseeing oil, gas and electric utilities), in British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec and Ontario, electricity is largely produced from low- or even zero-carbon sources such as hydro, so EVs in these provinces have a low level of “indirect” emissions.
However, in other provinces—particularly Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia—electricity generation is more heavily reliant on fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, so EVs produce much higher indirect emissions. And according to research from the University of Toronto, in coal-dependent U.S. states such as West Virginia, an EV can emit about 6 per cent more GHG emissions over its entire lifetime—from initial mining, manufacturing and charging to eventual disposal—than a gas-powered vehicle of the same size. This means that in regions with especially coal-dependent energy grids, EVs could impose more climate costs than benefits. Put simply, for an EV to help meaningfully reduce emissions while on the road, its electricity must come from low-carbon electricity sources—something that does not happen in certain areas of Canada and the United States.
Finally, even after an EV is off the road, it continues to produce emissions, mainly because of the battery. EV batteries contain components that are energy-intensive to extract but also notoriously challenging to recycle. While EV battery recycling technologies are still emerging, approximately 5 per cent of lithium-ion batteries, which are commonly used in EVs, are actually recycled worldwide. This means that most new EVs feature batteries with no recycled components—further weakening the environmental benefit of EVs.
So what’s the final analysis? The technology continues to evolve and therefore the calculations will continue to change. But right now, while electric vehicles clearly help reduce tailpipe emissions, they’re not necessarily “zero emission” vehicles. And after you consider the full lifecycle—manufacturing, charging, scrapping—a more accurate picture of their environmental impact comes into view.
-
Automotive2 days agoThe $50 Billion Question: EVs Never Delivered What Ottawa Promised
-
COVID-191 day agoTrump DOJ seeks to quash Pfizer whistleblower’s lawsuit over COVID shots
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta introducing three “all-season resort areas” to provide more summer activities in Alberta’s mountain parks
-
Business2 days agoStorm clouds of uncertainty as BC courts deal another blow to industry and investment
-
Agriculture1 day agoGrowing Alberta’s fresh food future
-
International1 day agoTrump admin wants to help Canadian woman rethink euthanasia, Glenn Beck says
-
Alberta1 day agoThe case for expanding Canada’s energy exports
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoOttawa’s New Hate Law Goes Too Far



