Ottawa’s new ‘climate disclosures’ another investment killer

The Trudeau government has demonstrated consistently that its policies—including higher capital gains taxes and a hostile regulatory environment—are entirely at odds with what investors want to see. Corporate head offices are fleeing Canada and business investment has declined significantly since the Trudeau Liberals came to power.

According to the Trudeau government’s emissions reduction plan, “putting a price on pollution is widely recognized as the most efficient means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” Fair enough, but a reasonable person might wonder why the same politicians who insist a price mechanism (i.e. carbon tax) is the most efficient policy recently announced relatively inefficient measures such “sustainable investment guidelines” and “mandatory climate disclosures” for large private companies.

The government claims that imposing mandatory climate disclosures will “attract more private capital into Canada’s largest corporations and ensure Canadian businesses can continue to effectively compete as the world races towards net-zero.” That is nonsense. How would politicians Ottawa know better than business owners about how their businesses should attract capital? If making climate disclosures were a good way to help businesses attract capital, the businesses that want to attract capital would make such disclosures voluntarily. There would be no need for a government mandate.

The government has not yet launched the regulatory process for the climate disclosures, so we don’t know exactly how onerous it will be, but one thing is for sure—the disclosures will be expensive and unnecessary, imposing useless costs onto businesses and investors without any measurable benefit, further discouraging investment in Canada. Again, if the disclosures were useful and worthwhile to investors, businesses seeking to attract investment would make them voluntarily.

Even the government’s own announcement casts doubt that increasing business investment is the likely outcome of mandatory climate disclosures. While the government says it’s “sending a clear signal to corporate boards and shareholders, at home and around the world, that Canada is their trusted partner for putting private capital to work in the race to net-zero,” most investors are not looking to put private capital to work to combat climate change. Most investors want to put their capital to work to earn a good financial return, after adjusting for the risk of the investment.

This latest announcement should come as no surprise. The Trudeau government has demonstrated consistently that its policies—including higher capital gains taxes and a hostile regulatory environment—are entirely at odds with what investors want to see. Corporate head offices are fleeing Canada and business investment has declined significantly since the Trudeau Liberals came to power. Capital per worker in Canada is declining due to weak business investment since 2015, and new capital per-Canadian worker in 2024 is barely half of what it is in the United States.

It’s also fair to ask, in the face of these onerous polices—where are the environmental benefits? The government says its climate disclosures are needed for Canada to progress to net-zero emissions and “uphold the Paris climate target of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels,” but its net-zero targets are neither feasible nor realistic and the economics literature does not support the 1.5 degrees target.

Finally, when announcing the new climate disclosures, Trudeau Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said they are an important stepping stone to a cleaner economy, which is a “major economic opportunity.” Yet even the Canada Energy Regulator (a federal agency) projects net-zero policies would reduce real GDP per capita, increase inflation of consumer prices and reduce residential space (in other words, reduce living standards).

A major economic opportunity that will increase business investment? Surely not—mandatory climate disclosures will only further reduce our standard of living and impose useless costs onto business and investors, with the sure effect of reducing investment.

Author:

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute

Related Topics:#EmissionsReductionPlan #MatthewLau CanadianEconomyTrudeau Fraser Institute OttawaClimateDisclosures OttawaInvestmentKiller

Up Next

‘He’s Willing To Hit Them Hard’: American Adversaries Pull Out The Stops To Derail Trump’s White House Bid

Don't Miss

Jeff Bezos Is Right: Legacy Media Must Self-Reflect

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

Reporter Exposed The Left’s $20 Billion Climate Slush Fund

Business / 2 hours ago

Trump gives top three U.S. automakers one-month break from tariffs

National / 3 hours ago

Trudeau fills Canadian courts with Liberal-appointed judges before resigning as prime minister 

Business

Next federal government has to unravel mess created by 10 years of Trudeau policies

Published on March 5, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

It’s no exaggeration to describe the Trudeau years as almost a “lost decade” for Canadian prosperity.

The Justin Trudeau era is ending, after nine-and-a-half years as prime minister. His exit coincides with the onset of a trade crisis with the United States. Trudeau leaves behind a stagnant Canadian economy crippled by dwindling productivity, a long stretch of weak business investment, and waning global competitiveness. These are problems Trudeau chose to ignore throughout his tenure. His successors will not have that luxury.

It’s no exaggeration to describe the Trudeau years as almost a “lost decade” for Canadian prosperity. Measured on a per-person basis, national income today is barely higher than it was in 2015, after stripping out the effects of inflation. On this core metric of citizen wellbeing, Canada has one of the worst records among all advanced economies. We have fallen far behind the U.S., where average real income has grown by 15 per cent over the same period, and most of Europe and Japan, where growth has been in the range of 5-6 per cent.

Meanwhile, Ottawa’s debt has doubled on Trudeau’s watch, and both federal government spending and the size of the public service have ballooned, even as service levels have generally deteriorated. Housing in Canada has never been more expensive relative to average household incomes, and health care has never been harder to access. The statistics on crime point to a decline in public safety in the last decade.

Reviving prosperity will be the most critical task facing Trudeau’s successor. It won’t be easy, due in part to a brewing trade war with the U.S. and the retreat from open markets and free trade in much of the world. But a difficult external environment is no reason for Canada to avoid tackling the domestic impediments that discourage economic growth, business innovation and entrepreneurial wealth creation.

In a recent study, a group of economists and policy advisors outlined an agenda for renewed Canadian prosperity. Several of their main recommendations are briefly summarized below.

Return to the balanced budget policies embraced by the Chretien/Martin and Harper governments from 1995 to 2015. Absent a recession, the federal government should not run deficits. And the next government should eliminate ineffective spending programs and poor-performing federally-funded agencies.

Reform and reduce both personal and business income taxes. Canada’s overall income tax system is increasingly out of line with global best practise and has become a major barrier to attracting private-sector investment, top talent and world-class companies. A significant overhaul of the country’s tax policies is urgently needed.

Retool Ottawa’s existing suite of climate and energy policies to reduce the economic damage done by the long list of regulations, taxes, subsidies and other measures adopted Trudeau. Canada should establish realistic goals for lowering greenhouse gas emissions, not politically manufactured “targets” that are manifestly out of reach. Our climate policy should reflect the fact that Canada’s primary global comparative advantage is as a producer and exporter of energy and energy-intensive goods, agri-food products, minerals and other industrial raw materials which collectively supply more than half of the country’s exports.

Finally, take a knife to interprovincial barriers to trade, investment and labour mobility. These long-standing internal restrictions on commerce increase prices for consumers, inhibit the growth of Canadian-based companies, and result in tens of billions of dollars in lost economic output. The next federal government should lead a national effort to strengthen the Canadian “common market” by eliminating such barriers.

Jock Finlayson

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Business

Trump promises tariff revenue, fair trade and more jobs

Published on March 5, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Brett Rowland

President Donald Trump told Congress on Tuesday that tariffs would make America rich again, but predicted minor “disturbances” on the path ahead.

Trump said he would put reciprocal tariffs on foreign countries starting April 2.

“Whatever they tariff us, we tariff them. Whatever they tax us, we tax them,” Trump said. “If they do non-monetary tariffs to keep us out of their market, then we do non-monetary barriers to keep them out of our market. We will take in trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.”

Trump didn’t detail the potential disturbance in his speech, but economists and business groups have raised concerns about higher prices for U.S. consumers.

Trump also promised Congress would balance the federal budget and reduce taxes. Making good on those promises could come with challenges.

Trump previously said he wants a balanced budget, but his promise to extend the tax cuts in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act could make that difficult for both the House and Senate. Extending the tax rates could cost about $4 trillion in federal revenue, independent groups say.

In the past 50 years, the federal government has ended with a fiscal year-end budget surplus four times, most recently in 2001. Congress has run a deficit every year since then.

During his inauguration, Trump touted the benefits of tariffs. He said tariff revenue would make the U.S. “rich as hell ” and lower the tax burden on American taxpayers.

Trump’s comments Tuesday before a joint session of Congress came after he put 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada and added an additional 10% duty on imports from China. He has said he plans to keep those tariffs in place until Mexico and Canada stop illegal immigration and drug trafficking at the U.S. borders.

The tariffs spooked investors on Wall Street, causing a second day of market losses Tuesday. Consumers and economists have raised concerns about higher prices on a wide range of products as a result of the tariffs.

Tariffs are taxes on imported goods paid by the importer, which are often passed along to consumers through higher prices on the imported products.

Canada responded with plans to put 25% tariffs on nearly $100 billion of U.S. imports. Mexico said it would retaliate with moves to be announced Sunday. China filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Farm Bureau Federation called on Trump to change course on tariffs.

Later Tuesday, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Trump could announce trade compromises with Canada and Mexico as soon as Wednesday.