Alberta
Alberta fighting federal “unconstitutional intrusion” into provincial jurisdiction
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6afd4/6afd490c474224fa93513c26892d2ac3be7a82c5" alt=""
Alberta to fight federal plastics ban once more
Alberta’s government will continue defending the province’s constitutional jurisdiction and economy by intervening in Ottawa’s appeal of the Federal Court’s ruling on plastics.
On Nov. 16, the Federal Court of Canada ruled that the federal order-in-council classifying plastics as toxic is not only unreasonable but unconstitutional. The federal government has chosen to appeal this decision, ignoring calls from Alberta and others to accept the court’s decision.
As a result, Alberta’s government will participate in the appeal and will argue that the federal government’s decision to label plastic as a “toxic substance” is an unconstitutional intrusion into provincial jurisdiction.
“It is past time for Ottawa to listen. We have told them they are overreaching their jurisdiction, the private sector has told them so, and so have both the Supreme Court and the Federal Court. Ottawa cannot assume regulatory authority over any substance simply by designating it as toxic. We will continue to push back against Ottawa’s unconstitutional actions, including through this legal action, until they listen.”
The toxic designation and bans have also had a detrimental impact on Alberta’s economy. Alberta’s Industrial Heartland Association estimates the designation will potentially jeopardize more than $30 billion in capital investment in the petrochemical sector by 2030. Those risks would also put Albertan and Canadian workers at risk of losing their jobs.
“The Federal Court clearly ruled that the federal government’s plastics ban policies were unconstitutional. The federal government’s environmental policies and constitutional overreach have been heavily criticized and this ruling further confirms the indisputable nature of provincial jurisdiction in these matters. We are intervening in this appeal and will continue to participate wherever and whenever necessary to protect Alberta’s interests.”
In addition to intervening in the appeal, Alberta will monitor any further legal action taken to remove plastic manufactured items from the current Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Several Calgary-based companies producing compostable plastic bags are now caught in the ban and will be barred from supplying Calgarians with low-emissions alternatives to traditional plastic shopping bags.
“Instead of listening to the courts and to Canadians, the federal government has chosen overreach once again. We will continue standing up for our constitutional jurisdiction while focusing on more effective ways to reduce plastic waste and keep it out of landfills.”
Alberta is committed to reducing plastic waste through initiatives like extended producer responsibility, which encourages businesses to find new ways to recycle materials and reduce waste. The province also advocates for strategies that create economies of scale, promote recycled content and develop local markets for transformed plastic waste.
Quick facts
- On April 23, 2021, the administrator in council issued an order-in-council directing that “plastic manufactured items” be added to Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA).
- The category of plastic manufactured items includes every piece of plastic that enters Alberta.
- Once a substance is designated as toxic under CEPA, CEPA allows the federal government to make regulations regulating every aspect of that substance’s life, from manufacture to sale to use and to disposal.
- Canada subsequently enacted the Single-use Plastics Prohibition Regulations (SUPPR) prohibiting the manufacture, import and sale of six single-use plastics. SUPPR is only valid if “plastic manufactured items” is listed as toxic on Schedule 1 of CEPA.
- The Responsible Plastic Use Coalition, Dow, Imperial Oil and Nova applied for a judicial review of the order. They challenged it as unreasonable on administrative law grounds and as unconstitutional on division of powers grounds.
- On Sept. 7, 2022, Alberta intervened in the application to address the constitutional questions. Saskatchewan intervened on Oct. 24, 2022.
- The application was heard March 7-9, 2023, and the court reserved its decision.
- On Nov. 16, the federal Court of Canada issued its decision. Justice Angela Furlanetto concluded that the order adding “plastic manufactured items” to the Schedule 1 was both unreasonable from an administrative law perspective, and unconstitutional.
Alberta
Alberta Income Tax cut is great but balanced budgets are needed
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/780c2/780c2736494ca85ce54e82f41f04ca526f1991d1" alt=""
By Kris Sims
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is applauding the Alberta government for giving Albertans a huge income tax cut in Budget 2025, but is strongly warning against its dive into debt by running a deficit.
“Premier Danielle Smith keeping her promise to cut Alberta’s income tax is great news, because it means huge savings for most working families,” said Kris Sims, CTF Alberta Director. “Families are fighting to afford basics right now, and if they can save more than $1,500 per year thanks to this big tax cut, that would cover a month’s rent or more than a month’s worth of groceries.”
Finance Minister Nate Horner announced, effective this fiscal year, Alberta will drop its lowest income tax rate to eight per cent, down from 10 per cent, for the first $60,000 of earnings.
The government estimates this income tax cut will save the average Alberta worker about $750 per year, or more than $1,500 per year for a two-person working family.
Albertans earning less than $60,000 a year will see a 20 per cent reduction to their annual provincial income tax bill.
The budget also contained some bad news.
The province is running a $5.2 billion deficit in 2025-26 and the government is planning to keep running deficits for two more years.
Total spending has gone up from $73.1 billion from last budget to $79.3 billion this year, an increase of 8.4 per cent.
“If the government had frozen spending at last year’s budget level, the province could have a $1 billion surplus and still cut the income tax,” said Sims. “The debt is going up over the next few years, but we caught a lucky break with interest rates dropping this past year, so we aren’t paying as much in interest payments on the debt.”
The province’s debt is now estimated to be $82.8 billion for 2025-26.
Interest payments on the provincial debt are costing taxpayers about $2.9 billion, about a 12 per cent decrease from last year.
Alberta
Alberta 2025 Budget Review from the Alberta Institute
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f0981/f098176494dc9a957e760f3e4ad1e81035c54908" alt=""
The government has just tabled its budget in the Legislature.
We were invited to the government’s advance briefing, which gave us a few hours to review the documents, ask questions, and analyze the numbers before the official release.
Now that the embargo has been lifted, we can share our thoughts with you.
However, this is just our preliminary analysis – we’ll have a more in-depth breakdown for you next week.
*****
The 2025/26 Budget is a projection for the next year – what the government expects will happen from April 1st, 2025 to March 31st, 2026.
It represents the government’s best estimate of future revenue and its plan for expenditures.
In the budget (and in this email) this type of figure is referred to as a Budget figure.
*****
The actual final figures won’t be known until the 2025/26 Annual Report is released in the middle of next year.
Of course, as we’ve seen in the past, things don’t always go according to plan.
In the budget (and in this email) this type of figure is referred to as an Actual figure.
Importantly, this means that the 2024/25 Annual Report isn’t ready yet, either.
*****
Therefore, in the meantime, the Q3 2025/26 Fiscal Update, which has figures up to December 31st, 2024, provides a forecast for the 2024/25 year.
The government looks at the actual results three quarters of the way through the previous year, and uses those figures to get the most accurate forecast on what will be the final result in the annual report, to help with estimating the 2025-26 year.
In the budget (and in this email) this type of figure is referred to as a Forecast figure.
*****
Accurately estimating, and tracking these three types of figures is a key part of good budgeting.
Sometimes, the economy performs better than expected, oil prices could be higher than initially forecast, or more revenue may come in from other sources.
But, other times, there’s a recession or a drop in oil prices, leading to lower-than-expected revenue.
On the spending side, governments sometimes find savings, keeping expenses lower than planned.
Alternatively, unexpected costs, disasters, or just governments being governments can also drive spending higher than budgeted.
The best way to manage this uncertainty is:
- Be conservative in estimating revenue.
- Only plan to spend what is reasonably expected to come in.
- Stick to that spending plan to avoid overspending.
By following these principles, the risk of an unexpected deficit is minimized.
And if revenue exceeds expectations or expenses come in lower, the surplus can be used to pay down debt or be returned to taxpayers.
On these three measures, this year’s budget gets a mixed grade.
*****
On the first point, the government has indeed made some pretty conservative estimates of revenue – including assuming an oil price several dollars below where it currently stands, and well below the previous year’s predictions.
The government has also assumed there will be some significant (though not catastrophic) effects from a potential trade war.
If oil prices end up higher, or Canada avoids a trade war with the US, then revenue could be significantly higher than planned.
Interestingly, this year’s budget looks very different depending on whether you compare it to last year’s budget, or the latest forecast.
This year’s budget revenue is $6.6 billion lower than what actually happened in last year’s forecast revenue.
But, this year’s budget revenue is actually $600 million higher than what was expected to happen in last year’s budget revenue.
In other words, if you compare this year’s budget to what the government expected to happen last year, revenue is up a small amount, but when you compare this year’s budget to what actually happened last year, revenue is down a lot.
*****
On the second point, unfortunately, the government doesn’t score so well.
Expenses are up quite a bit, even though revenue is expected to drop.
According to some measurements, expenditures are increasing slower than the combined rate of population growth and inflation – which is the goal the government set for itself in 2023.
But, when other expenses like contingencies for emergencies are included, or when expenses are measured in other ways, spending is increasing faster than that benchmark.
This year’s budget expenses are $4.4 billion higher than what was actually spent in last year’s forecast expenses.
But, this year’s budget expenses are $6.1 billion higher than what was expected to happen in last year’s budget expenses.
Perhaps the bigger question is why is expenditure increasing at all when revenue is expected to drop?
If there’s less money coming in, the government should really be using this as an opportunity to reduce overall expenditures.
*****
On the third point, we will – of course – have to wait and see what the final accounts look like next year!
*****
Before we wrap up this initial analysis, there’s one aspect of the budget that is likely to receive significant attention, and that is a tax cut.
Originally planned to be phased in over the next few years, a tax cut will now be back-dated to January 1st of this year.
Previously, any income below about $150,000 was subject to a 10% provincial tax, while incomes above $150,000 attract higher and higher tax rates of 12%, 13%, 14%, and 15% as incomes increase.
Under the new tax plan, incomes under $60,000 would only be taxed at 8%, with incomes between $60,000 and $150,000 still paying 10%, and incomes above $150,000 still paying 12%, 13%, 14%, and 15%, as before.
Some commentators are likely to question the wisdom of a tax cut that reduces revenue when the budget is going to be in deficit.
But, the reality is that this tax cut doesn’t actually cost much.
We’ll have the exact figures for you by next week, but suffice to say that it’s a pretty small portion of the overall deficit, and there’s a deficit because spending is up a lot, not because of a small tax cut.
In general, lower taxes are good, but we would have preferred the government work towards a lower, flatter tax instead.
The Alberta Advantage was built on Alberta’s unique flat tax system where everyone paid the same low flat tax (not the same amount, the same percentage!) and so wasn’t punished for succeeding.
Alberta needs a plan to get back to a low flat tax, and we will continue to advocate for this at the Alberta Institute.
Maybe we can do better than just returning to the old 10% flat tax, though?
Maybe we should aim for a flat tax of 8%, instead?
That’s it for today’s quick initial analysis.
In next week’s analysis, we’ll break down the pros and cons of these decisions and outline where we might have taken a different approach.
In the meantime, if you appreciate our work and want to support more of this kind of independent analysis of Alberta’s finances, please consider making a donation here:
-
Business22 hours ago
Trudeau billed taxpayers $81,000 for groceries in one year
-
Business1 day ago
DEA’s Most Wanted in U.S. Custody: Mexico Extradites Dozens Amid Trump Trade Standoff
-
International1 day ago
France seeks to deploy nuclear shield across Europe
-
Business2 days ago
‘Dark Truth’ Of USAID: House Lawmakers Spotlight Biden’s Foreign Aid Abuses In Fiery Oversight Hearing
-
Addictions1 day ago
“Unscientific and bizarre”: Yet another Toronto addiction physician criticizes Canada’s “safer supply” experiment
-
conflict20 hours ago
White House diplomatic brawl: Trump, Vance tell Zelenskyy he’s “gambling with WWIII” in tense exchange
-
COVID-192 days ago
RFK Jr. pauses $240 million contract for new ‘oral COVID vaccine’
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Budget 2025: Health and education