Cost of Ottawa’s gun ban fiasco may reach $6 billion

According to the government, it has already spent $67.2 million, which includes compensation for 60 federal employees working on the “buyback,” which still doesn’t exist.

Four years ago, the Trudeau government banned “1,500 types” of “assault-style firearms.” It’s time to ask if public safety has improved as promised.

This ban instantly made it a crime for federally-licensed firearms owners to buy, sell, transport, import, export or use hundreds of thousands formerly legal rifles and shotguns. According to the government, the ban targets “assault-style weapons,” which are actually classic semi-automatic rifles and shotguns that have been popular with hunters and sport shooters for more than 100 years. When announcing the ban, the prime minister said the government would confiscate the banned firearms and their legal owners would be “grandfathered” or receive “fair compensation.” That hasn’t happened.

As of October 2024, the government has revealed no plans about how it will collect the newly-banned firearms nor has it made any provisions for compensation in any federal budget since the announcement in 2020. Originally, the government enacted a two-year amnesty period to allow compliance with the ban. This amnesty expired in April 2022 and has been twice extended, first to Oct. 30, 2023, then to Oct. 30, 2025.

Clearly, the ban—which the government calls a “buyback”—has been a gong show from the beginning. Since Trudeau’s announcement four years ago, virtually none of the banned firearms have been surrendered. The Ontario government refuses to divert police resources to cooperate with this federal “buyback” scheme. The RCMP’s labour union has said it’s a “misdirected effort when it comes to public safety.” The Canadian Sporting Arms & Ammunition Association, which represents firearms retailers, said it will have “zero involvement” in helping confiscate these firearms. Even Canada Post wants nothing to do with Trudeau’s “buyback” plan. And again, the government has revealed no plan for compensation—fair or otherwise.

And yet, according to the government, it has already spent $67.2 million, which includes compensation for 60 federal employees working on the “buyback,” which still doesn’t exist.

It remains unclear just how many firearms the 2020 ban includes. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates range between 150,000 to more than 500,000, with an estimated total value between $47 million and $756 million. These costs only include the value of the confiscated firearms and exclude the administrative costs to collect them and the costs of destroying the collected firearms. The total cost of this ban to taxpayers will be more than $4 billion and possibly more than $6 billion.

Nevertheless, while the ban of remains a confusing mess, after four years we should be able to answer one key question. Has the ban made Canadians safer?

According to Statistics Canada, firearm-related violent crime swelled by 10 per cent from 2020 to 2022 (the latest year of comparable data), from 12,614 incidents to 13,937 incidents. And in “2022, the rate of firearm-related violent crime was 36.7 incidents per 100,000 population, an 8.9% increase from 2021 (33.7 incidents per 100,000 population). This is the highest rate recorded since comparable data were first collected in 2009.”

Nor have firearm homicides decreased since 2020. Perhaps this is because lawfully-held firearms are not the problem. According to StatsCan, “the firearms used in homicides were rarely legal firearms used by their legal owners.” However, crimes committed by organized crime have increased by more than 170 per cent since 2016 (from 4,810 to 13,056 crimes).

Meanwhile, the banned firearms remain locked in the safes of their legal owners who have been vetted by the RCMP and are monitored nightly for any infractions that might endanger public safety.

Indeed, hunters and sport shooters are among the most law-abiding people in Canada. Many Canadian families and Indigenous peoples depend on hunting to provide food for the family dinner table through legal harvesting, with the added benefit of getting out in the wilderness and spending time with family and friends. In 2015, hunting and firearm businesses alone contributed more than $5.9 billion to Canada’s economy and supported more than 45,000 jobs. Hunters are the largest contributors to conservation efforts, contributing hundreds of millions of dollars to secure conservation lands and manage wildlife. The number of licensed firearms owners has increased 17 per cent since 2015 (from 2.026 million to 2.365 million) in 2023.

If policymakers in Ottawa and across the country want to reduce crime and increase public safety, they should enact policies that actually target criminals and use our scarce tax dollars wisely to achieve these goals.

Author:

Gary Mauser

Related Topics:#FraserInstitute feature GaryMauser OttawaGunBan OttawaGunBuybackProgram

Up Next

Canada’s immigration system and Islamist terror threats

Don't Miss

Taxpayers Federation calls on premiers to join carbon tax court fight

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

New children’s book demonstrates how the everyday world is connected to natural resources

conflict / 7 hours ago

Hamas, Palestinians paraded dead babies coffins through streets before handover to Israel

Health / 8 hours ago

RFK Jr: There’s no medical justification for vaccinating one-day-old babies for Hepatitis B

Business

Worst kept secret—red tape strangling Canada’s economy

Published on February 22, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

In the past nine years, business investment in Canada has fallen while increasing more than 30 per cent in the U.S. on a real per-person basis. Workers in Canada now receive barely half as much new capital per worker than in the U.S.

According to a new Statistics Canada report, government regulation has grown over the years and it’s hurting Canada’s economy. The report, which uses a regulatory burden measure devised by KPMG and Transport Canada, shows government regulatory requirements increased 2.1 per cent annually from 2006 to 2021, with the effect of reducing the business sector’s GDP, employment, labour productivity and investment.

Specifically, the growth in regulation over these years cut business-sector investment by an estimated nine per cent and “reduced business start-ups and business dynamism,” cut GDP in the business sector by 1.7 percentage points, cut employment growth by 1.3 percentage points, and labour productivity by 0.4 percentage points.

While the report only covered regulatory growth through 2021, in the past four years an avalanche of new regulations has made the already existing problem of overregulation worse.

The Trudeau government in particular has intensified its regulatory assault on the extraction sector with a greenhouse gas emissions cap, new fuel regulations and new methane emissions regulations. In the last few years, federal diktats and expansions of bureaucratic control have swept the auto industry, child care, supermarkets and many other sectors.

Again, the negative results are evident. Over the past nine years, Canada’s cumulative real growth in per-person GDP (an indicator of incomes and living standards) has been a paltry 1.7 per cent and trending downward, compared to 18.6 per cent and trending upward in the United States. Put differently, if the Canadian economy had tracked with the U.S. economy over the past nine years, average incomes in Canada would be much higher today.

Also in the past nine years, business investment in Canada has fallen while increasing more than 30 per cent in the U.S. on a real per-person basis. Workers in Canada now receive barely half as much new capital per worker than in the U.S., and only about two-thirds as much new capital (on average) as workers in other developed countries.

Consequently, Canada is mired in an economic growth crisis—a fact that even the Trudeau government does not deny. “We have more work to do,” said Anita Anand, then-president of the Treasury Board, last August, “to examine the causes of low productivity levels.” The Statistics Canada report, if nothing else, confirms what economists and the business community already knew—the regulatory burden is much of the problem.

Of course, regulation is not the only factor hurting Canada’s economy. Higher federal carbon taxes, higher payroll taxes and higher top marginal income tax rates are also weakening Canada’s productivity, GDP, business investment and entrepreneurship.

Finally, while the Statistics Canada report shows significant economic costs of regulation, the authors note that their estimate of the effect of regulatory accumulation on GDP is “much smaller” than the effect estimated in an American study published several years ago in the Review of Economic Dynamics. In other words, the negative effects of regulation in Canada may be even higher than StatsCan suggests.

Whether Statistics Canada has underestimated the economic costs of regulation or not, one thing is clear: reducing regulation and reversing the policy course of recent years would help get Canada out of its current economic rut. The country is effectively in a recession even if, as a result of rapid population growth fuelled by record levels of immigration, the GDP statistics do not meet the technical definition of a recession.

With dismal GDP and business investment numbers, a turnaround—both in policy and outcomes—can’t come quickly enough for Canadians.

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute

Business

New climate plan simply hides the costs to Canadians

Published on February 20, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

Mark Carney, who wants to be your next prime minister, recently released his plan for Canada’s climate policies through 2035. It’s a sprawling plan (climate plans always are), encompassing industrial and manufacturing emissions, vehicle emissions, building emissions, appliance emissions, cross-border emissions, more “green” energy, more “heat pumps” replacing HVAC, more electric vehicle (EV) subsidies, more subsidies to consumers, more subsidies to companies, and more charging stations for the EV revolution that does not seem to be happening. And while the plan seeks to eliminate the “consumer carbon tax” on “fuels, such as gasoline, natural gas, diesel, home heating oil, etc.” it’s basically Trudeau’s climate plans on steroids.

Consider this. Instead of paying the “consumer carbon tax” directly, under the Carney plan Canadians will pay more—but less visibly. The plan would “tighten” (i.e. raise) the carbon tax on “large industrial emitters” (you know, the people who make the stuff you buy) who will undoubtedly pass some or all of that cost to consumers. Second, the plan wants to force those same large emitters to somehow fund subsidy programs for consumer purchases to offset the losses to Canadians currently profiting from consumer carbon tax rebates. No doubt the costs of those subsidy programs will also be folded into the costs of the products that flow from Canada’s “large industrial emitters,” but the cause of rising prices will be less visible to the general public. And the plan wants more consumer home energy audits and retrofit programs, some of the most notoriously wasteful climate policies ever developed.

But the ironic icing on this plan’s climate cake is the desire to implement tariffs (excuse me, a “carbon border adjustment mechanism”) on U.S. products in association with “key stakeholders and international partners to ensure fairness for Canadian industries.” Yes, you read that right, the plan seeks to kick off a carbon-emission tariff war with the United States, not only for Canada’s trade, but to bring in European allies to pile on. And this, all while posturing in high dudgeon over Donald Trump’s plans to impose tariffs on Canadian products based on perceived injustices in the U.S./Canada trade relationship.

To recap, while grudgingly admitting that the “consumer carbon tax” is wildly unpopular, poorly designed and easily dispensable in Canada’s greenhouse gas reduction efforts, the Carney plan intends to double down on all of the economically damaging climate policies of the last 10 years.

But that doubling down will be more out of sight and out of mind to Canadians. Instead of directly seeing how they pay for Canada’s climate crusade, Canadians will see prices rise for goods and services as government stamps climate mandates on Canada’s largest manufacturers and producers, and those costs trickle down onto consumer pocketbooks.

In this regard, the plan is truly old school—historically, governments and bureaucrats preferred to hide their taxes inside of obscure regulations and programs invisible to the public. Canadians will also see prices rise as tariffs imposed on imported American goods (and potentially services) force American businesses to raise prices on goods that Canadians purchase.

The Carney climate plan is a return to the hidden European-style technocratic/bureaucratic/administrative mindset that has led Canada’s economy into record underperformance. Hopefully, whether Carney becomes our next prime minister or not, this plan becomes another dead letter pack of political promises.