Economy
Federal budget: You can’t solve a productivity emergency with tax hikes
News release from the Montreal Economic Institute
- Ottawa still has no plan to return to a balanced budget.
- Under Justin Trudeau, the federal government has hired over 98,000 new bureaucrats.
Montreal, April 16, 2024 – The increase in the capital gains tax inclusion rate will further exacerbate Canada’s productivity lag, asserted the Montreal Economic Institute in response to the publication of the federal budget this afternoon.
“Canada’s productivity is in crisis and the best way to get it back up is to attract new investments,” explains Renaud Brossard, Vice-President of Communications at the MEI. “And few are those who have been able to lure investments and job creators with promises of higher taxes.
“With this budget, the Trudeau government is shooting us in the foot.”
In the budget, the Trudeau government has announced the capital gains inclusion rate from 50 per cent to 66 per cent for capital gains superior to $250,000 per year.
Last March, the deputy governor of the Bank of Canada, Carolyn Rogers, spoke of a “productivity emergency” in Canada.
Canadians rank second to last among G7 countries in terms of productivity per hour worked, according to an MEI study published last August.
The Institute explains that this lag arises from a shortfall in private non-residential investment. In 2018, this investment amounted to an estimated $27,307 per American worker, but only $17,389 per Canadian worker.
“Every dollar the government expects to subtract from the pockets of investors with this tax hike is a dollar of potential investment lost,” explains Brossard. “It’s time for the Trudeau government to realize it doesn’t have a revenue problem, but rather a spending problem.”
The budget tabled by the Trudeau government today forecasts a shortfall of $39.8 billion for the year 2024-2025.
High interest rates are contributing to this situation, with interest payments on the federal debt estimated to reach $54.1 billion dollars this year, up 14.6 per cent over last year.
The MEI observes that one of the major sources of increased spending is the massive hiring of federal public servants under the Trudeau government.
Since the first Trudeau budget in 2016, the federal public service workforce has grown by more than 98,268 employees. Considered in terms of the number of government employees per Canadian, this represents a 28% increase according to an MEI study published in January.
“The explosion in the number of bureaucrats in recent years is symptomatic of a government that has lost all control over the growth of its spending,” explains Brossard. “There are now 28 per cent more federal public servants per capita, but very few Canadians would tell you that Ottawa is doing 28 per cent more for them.”
* * *

The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policy-makers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.
Business
Carney government should retire misleading ‘G7’ talking point on economic growth
From the Fraser Institute
By Ben Eisen and Milagros Palacios
If you use the more appropriate measure for measuring economic wellbeing and living standards—growth in per-person GDP—the happy narrative about Canada’s performance simply falls apart.
Tuesday, Nov. 4, the Carney government will table its long-awaited first budget. Don’t be surprised if it mentions Canada’s economic performance relative to peer countries in the G7.
In the past, this talking point was frequently used by prime ministers Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau and their senior cabinet officials. And it’s apparently survived the transition to the Carney government, as the finance minister earlier this year triumphantly tweeted that Canada’s economic growth was “among the strongest in the G7.”
But here’s the problem. Canada’s rate of economic growth relative to the rest of the G7 is almost completely irrelevant as an indicator of economic strength because it’s heavily influenced by Canada’s much faster rate of population growth. In other words, Canada’s faster pace of overall economic growth (measured by GDP) compared to most other developed countries has not been due to Canadians becoming more productive and generating more income for their families, but rather primarily because there are more people in Canada working and producing things.
In reality, if you use the more appropriate measure for measuring economic wellbeing and living standards—growth in per-person GDP—the happy narrative about Canada’s performance simply falls apart.
According to a recent study published by the Fraser Institute, if you simply look at total economic growth in the G7 in recent years (2020-24) without reference to population, Canada does indeed look good. Canada’s economy has had the second-most total economic growth in the G7 behind only the United States.
However, if you make a simple adjustment for differences in population change over this same time, a completely different picture emerges. Canada’s per-person GDP actually declined by 2 per cent from 2020 to 2024. This is the worst five-year decline since the Great Depression nearly a century ago. And on this much more important measure of wellbeing, Canada goes from second in the G7 to dead last.
Due to Canada’s rapid population growth in recent years, fuelled by record-high levels of immigration, aggregate GDP growth is quite simply a misleading economic indicator for comparing our performance to other countries that aren’t experiencing similar increases in the size of their labour markets. As such, it’s long past time for politicians to retire misleading talking points about Canada’s “strong” growth performance in the G7.
After making a simple adjustment to account for Canada’s rapidly growing population, it becomes clear that the government has nothing to brag about. In fact, Canada is a growth laggard and has been for a long time, with living standards that have actually declined appreciably over the last half-decade.
Business
Canada’s combative trade tactics are backfiring
This article supplied by Troy Media.
Defiant messaging may play well at home, but abroad it fuels mistrust, higher tariffs and a steady erosion of Canada’s agri-food exports
The real threat to Canadian exporters isn’t U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs, it’s Ottawa and Queen’s Park’s reckless diplomacy.
The latest tariff hike, whether triggered by Ontario’s anti-tariff ad campaign or not, is only a symptom. The deeper problem is Canada’s escalating loss of credibility at the trade table. Washington’s move to raise duties from 35 per cent to 45 per cent on nonCUSMA imports (goods not covered under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, the successor to NAFTA) reflects a diplomatic climate that is quickly souring, with very real consequences for Canadian exporters.
Some analysts argue that a 10-point tariff increase is inconsequential. It is not. The issue isn’t just what is being tariffed; it is the tone of the relationship. Canada is increasingly seen as erratic and reactive, negotiating from emotion rather than strategy. That kind of reputation is dangerous when dealing with the U.S., which remains Canada’s most important trade partner by a wide margin.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s stand up to America messaging, complete with a nostalgic Ronald Reagan cameo, may have been rooted in genuine conviction. Many Canadians share his instinct to defend the country’s interests with bold language. But in diplomacy, tone often outweighs intent. What plays well domestically can sound defiant abroad, and the consequences are already being felt in boardrooms and warehouses across the country.
Ford’s public criticisms of companies such as Crown Royal, accused of abandoning Ontario, and Stellantis, which recently announced it will shift production of its Jeep Compass from Brampton to Illinois as part of a US$13 billion U.S. investment, may appeal to voters who like to see politicians get tough. But those theatrics reinforce the impression that Canada is hostile to
international investors. At a time when global capital can move freely, that perception is damaging. Collaboration, not confrontation, is what’s needed most to secure investment in Canada’s economy.
Such rhetoric fuels uncertainty on both sides of the border. The results are clear: higher tariffs, weaker investor confidence and American partners quietly pivoting away from Canadian suppliers.
Many Canadian food exporters are already losing U.S. accounts, not because of trade rules but because of eroding trust. Executives in the agri-food sector are beginning to wonder whether Canada can still be counted on as a reliable partner, and some have already shifted contracts southward.
Ford’s political campaigns may win applause locally, but Washington’s retaliatory measures do not distinguish between provinces. They hit all exporters, including Canada’s food manufacturers that rely heavily on the U.S. market, which purchases more than half of Canada’s agri-food exports. That means farmers, processors and transportation companies across the country are caught in the crossfire.
Those who believe the new 45 per cent rate will have little effect are mistaken. Some Canadian importers now face steeper duties than competitors in Vietnam, Laos or even Myanmar. And while tariffs matter, perception matters more. Right now, the optics for Canada’s agri-food sector are poor, and once confidence is lost, it is difficult to regain.
While many Canadians dismiss Trump as unpredictable, the deeper question is what happened to Canada’s once-cohesive Team Canada approach to trade. The agri-food industry depends on stability and predictability. Alienating our largest customer, representing 34 per cent of the global consumer market and millions of Canadian jobs tied to trade, is not just short-sighted, it’s economically reckless.
There is no trade war. What we are witnessing is an American recalibration of domestic fiscal policy with global consequences. Canada must adapt with prudence, not posturing.
The lesson is simple: reckless rhetoric is costing Canada far more than tariffs. It’s time to change course, especially at Queen’s Park.
Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country
-
Business1 day agoTrans Mountain executive says it’s time to fix the system, expand access, and think like a nation builder
-
Economy2 days agoIn his own words: Stunning Climate Change pivot from Bill Gates. Poverty and disease should be top concern.
-
International1 day agoBiden’s Autopen Orders declared “null and void”
-
Business2 days agoClean energy transition price tag over $150 billion and climbing, with very little to show for it
-
MAiD1 day agoStudy promotes liver transplants from Canadian euthanasia victims
-
Internet1 day agoMusk launches Grokipedia to break Wikipedia’s information monopoly
-
Business1 day agoCanada has given $109 million to Communist China for ‘sustainable development’ since 2015
-
Business1 day agoCanada’s combative trade tactics are backfiring




