Economy
Federal government’s recent fiscal record includes unprecedented levels of spending and debt
From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro
As of 2024, Ottawa’s debt equals $51,467 per Canadian—12.3 per cent more than in 1995 when Canada reached a near-debt crisis.
According to an Angus Reid poll from earlier this year, 59 per cent of Canadians believe the federal government is spending too much and 64 per cent said they’re concerned about the size of the budget deficit. Nanos Research had similar polling results, finding 63 per cent of Canadians want Ottawa to reduce spending. These polling results are not surprising given the alarming state of federal finances.
The Trudeau government has consistently spent at record-high levels before, during and after COVID. In fact, Prime Minister Trudeau is on track to record the seven-highest years of per-person spending in Canadian history between 2018 and 2024. Inflation-adjusted spending (excluding debt interest costs) is expected to reach $11,856 per person this year—10.2 per cent higher than during the 2008-09 financial crisis and 28.7 per cent higher than during the peak of the Second World War.
Consequently, the Trudeau government has posted 10 consecutive deficits since taking office. The projected deficit in 2024/25 is a whopping $39.8 billion. This string of deficits has spurred a dramatic increase in federal debt. From 2014/15 (Prime Minister Harper’s last full year) to 2024/25, total federal debt is expected to have nearly doubled to $2.1 trillion. To make matters worse, the government plans to run more deficits until at least 2028/29 and total debt could rise by an additional $400.1 billion by March 2029.
Indeed, due to reckless decisions, the Trudeau government is on track to record the five-highest years of per-person debt (inflation-adjusted) in Canadian history between 2020 and 2024. As of 2024, Ottawa’s debt equals $51,467 per Canadian—12.3 per cent more than in 1995 when Canada reached a near-debt crisis.
Worse still, that doesn’t include any provincial or municipal debt, so the total government debt burden per Canadian is considerably higher.
Of course, to pay for this sky-high spending, the Trudeau government has borrowed and raised taxes. In addition to recently raising taxes on capital gains—harming entrepreneurship, investment and growth—the government has raised personal income taxes on middle-income families. Today, 86 per cent of middle-income Canadian families pay more in taxes than they did in 2015.
And what has this combination of tax increases and record-high spending and debt delivered for Canadians?
Amid widespread concerns about the rising cost of living, the average Canadian family is spending more on taxes than on food, shelter and clothing combined. Despite a recent federal budget supposedly focused on “fairness for every generation,” younger generations face a disproportionately higher tax burden in the future due to debt accumulated today. Meanwhile, Canadian living standards (as measured by inflation-adjusted GDP per person) are in a historic decline and (as of June 2024) stood 3.2 per cent below 2019 levels.
The current state of federal finances is simply unacceptable. Ottawa can and must do better. Canadians are already feeling the consequences, and it will only continue to get worse for future generations if we don’t constrain spending and return to balanced budgets soon.
Authors:
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Has the time come for America to seriously reassess its participation in and support for the United Nations (U.N.)?
It’s a question that some prominent people are asking this week after the increasingly woke and essentially useless globalist body attempted to sneak a global carbon tax in through the back door while no one was looking.
Except someone was looking, as it turns out. Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee, who chairs the powerful Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and is part of the majority on both the Senate Judiciary and Senate Foreign Relations Committees, said in an X post Thursday evening that this latest bit of anti-American action “warrants our withdrawal from the UN.”
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in his own X post on the matter on Wednesday that the Trump administration “will not allow the UN to tax American citizens and companies. Under the leadership of POTUS (President Donald Trump), the U.S. will be a hard NO. We call on other nations to stand alongside the United States in defense of our citizens and sovereignty.”
On Friday afternoon, Mr. Rubio took to X again to announce the news that efforts by himself and others in the Trump administration succeeded in killing an effort to move the tax forward during a meeting in London. However, the proposal is not fully dead – a final vote on it was simply delayed for a year.
The issue at hand stems from an attempt by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) – an agency of the U.N. – to impose net-zero rules on fuels used for seaborne shipping operations. The Trump administration estimates the imposition of the new requirements will increase the cost of shipping goods by about 10%, thus creating yet another round of inflation hitting the poorest citizens the hardest thanks to the globalist obsession with the amount of plant food – carbon dioxide – in the atmosphere.
Known as the IMO Net-Zero Framework, the proposal claims it would effectively “zero out” emissions from the shipping industry by 2050.
The potential implications if the U.N. ultimately succeeds in implementing its own global carbon tax are obvious. If this unelected, unaccountable globalist body can levy a carbon tax on Americans, a concept that America’s own elected officials have steadfastly rejected across the terms of the last five U.S. presidents, what would then prevent it from imposing other kinds of taxes on the world to support its ideological goals?
President Trump’s opposition to exactly this kind of international intrusion into America’s domestic policy choices is the reason why he has twice won the presidency, each time de-committing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords.
It has become increasingly obvious in recent years that the central goal of the global climate alarm movement is to dramatically raise the cost of all kinds of energy in order to force the masses to live smaller, more restricted lives and make their behavior easier for authoritarian governments to control. This camel’s nose under the tent move by the U.N. to sneak a global carbon tax into reality is just the latest in a long parade of examples that serve as proof points for that thesis.
At some point, U.S. officials must seriously reassess the value proposition in continuing to spend billions of dollars each year supporting and hosting a globalist organization whose every action seems designed to inflict damage on our country and its people. Now would be a good time to do that, in fact.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
A United Nations (UN) proposal for a global carbon tax, which threatened to raise consumer costs, was tabled on Friday following pressure from the Trump administration.
Members of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a UN body based in London, met this week to vote on a “Net-Zero Framework,” which would have imposed steep penalties on ship emissions. A majority of countries at the agency voted on Friday to postpone the decision for a year after the Trump administration pushed back and threatened retaliation against states supporting the measure.
“Common sense prevailed. The Trump Administration will not stand for the UN or any organization forcing American taxpayers to foot the bill for their environmental pet projects,” a senior State Department official told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
The proposed IMO Net-Zero Framework, aimed at achieving global shipping emissions neutrality by 2050, would have imposed taxes of $100 to $380 per ton of CO2 on ships that failed to meet targets. If the global fleet fell even 10% short of the targets, costs could soar to $20 to $30 billion by 2030 and exceed $300 billion by 2035, by some estimates.
The Trump administration has warned the plan could raise global shipping costs by as much as 10%, forcing higher prices for American consumers.
“The collapse of the UN-backed shipping emissions deal is not the disaster portrayed by climate activists — it’s a victory for sovereignty over what amounted to taxation without representation,” Anthony Watts, Senior Fellow at The Heartland Institute, told the DCNF. “Shipping may account for 3% of global emissions, but it moves 90% of global trade; taxing it in the name of ‘net zero’ would have punished consumers and developing nations alike while enriching bureaucrats and consultants in Geneva and New York.”
President Donald Trump personally weighed in against the measure.
“The United States will NOT stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping, and will not adhere to it in any way, shape, or form. We will not tolerate increased prices on American Consumers OR, the creation of a Green New Scam Bureaucracy to spend YOUR money on their Green dreams,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform Thursday. “Stand with the United States, and vote NO in London tomorrow!”
The Trump administration had threatened that member states backing the measures could face a range of repercussions, including probes into anti-competitive practices, visa restrictions on maritime crews, commercial and financial penalties, increased port fees, and sanctions targeting officials promoting climate policies.
“Better than merely not signing a UN climate treaty is promising to punish countries that do sign. The result is no treaty. Thank you, President Trump,” Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team advisor, told the DCNF.
Frank Lasee, president of Truth in Energy and Climate, said the president’s stance helped protect consumers from “neocolonial mandates that enrich China at our expense.”
“This global carbon tax isn’t climate action; it’s economic sabotage,” Lasee told the DCNF. “Trump’s masterstroke preserves innovation, low taxes, and freedom from globalist overreach — ensuring our future remains bright without new well-funded UN mischief.”
Canada’s privacy commissioner says he was not consulted on bill to ban dissidents from internet
Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline
Oil Sands are the Costco of world energy – dependable and you know exactly where to find it
Hamas releases all living hostages under Trump peace plan
Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships
Indigenous Communities Support Pipelines, Why No One Talks About That
Truckers see pay surge as ICE sweeps illegal drivers off U.S. highways
-
International2 days agoPoland’s president signs new zero income tax law for parents with two children
-
Business1 day agoFord’s Whisky War
-
Agriculture10 hours agoIs the CFIA a Rogue Agency or Just Taking Orders from a Rogue Federal Government?
-
COVID-192 days agoFreedom Convoy leader Tamara Lich says ‘I am not to leave the house’ while serving sentence
-
International2 days agoAustralian territory bans men from women’s prisons in national first
-
National2 days agoPoilievre accuses Canada’s top police force of ‘covering up’ alleged Trudeau crimes
-
Focal Points1 day agoTrump Walks Back His Tomahawk Tease from Zelensky
-
Automotive1 day ago$15 Billion, Zero Assurances: Stellantis Abandons Brampton as Trudeau-Era Green Deal Collapses