From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

By Devin Drover 

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is demanding the Canada Revenue Agency to immediately halt enforcement of the proposed capital gains tax hike which has not passed a final vote in Parliament.

“The CRA is trying to enforce a tax increase without it ever becoming law,” said Devin Drover, CTF General Counsel and Atlantic Director. “Taxation should only be based on laws duly passed by elected representatives and not assumptions by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats.”

The controversy stems from a proposal by the Trudeau government to raise the capital gains inclusion rate for the first time in 25 years. While a ways and means motion for the hike passed last year, the necessary legislation was never introduced, debated or passed.

But now that Parliament has prorogued, the tax hike is stalled until March 24, 2025, when the House of Commons resumes. Given promises from both the Conservatives and the NDP to bring down the Liberal government, it’s unlikely the legislation will pass before the next election.

Despite this, the CRA continues to move forward with enforcing the tax hike.

“It’s a central role of Parliament to vote on tax hikes before the government takes more money from you,” Drover said. “It’s wrong for the prime minister and CRA to treat your elected representative like a rubberstamp.

“The CRA must immediately halt plans to enforce legislation that hasn’t been passed and will undemocratically cost Canadians billions.”

From the Fraser Institute

By Ben Eisen and Jake Fuss

Over the next weeks and months, there will be much discussion about Justin Trudeau’s legacy as prime minister. To provide some context, it’s worth comparing Trudeau’s fiscal record with that of another long-serving Liberal prime minister—Jean Chrétien.

In the early 1990s Canada’s federal finances were in shambles. Thanks to years of large budget deficits (and high interest rates), debt interest payments were consuming one-third of all federal revenue and the country stood at the brink of a full-blown fiscal crisis. Paul Martin, Chrétien’s finance minister, recognized the gravity of the threat and famously promised to eliminate the deficit “come hell or high water.” And that’s exactly what the Chrétien government did, thanks primarily to reductions in federal spending.

How’d they do it?

The government launched a program review, which examined all dimensions of spending in search of savings. The review led to a substantial reduction in federal government employment, which shrunk by nearly 15 per cent. While there were many components to the federal reforms of the 1990s, this reduction in the size of the federal bureaucracy clearly helped Chrétien and Martin eliminate the federal deficit.

Fast-forward to the present day and Justin Trudeau, who does not share his Liberal predecessors’ commitment to balanced budgets. Federal government employment has increased rapidly in recent years, with the Trudeau government adding more bureaucrats (in absolute and percentage terms) than were reduced during the Chrétien/Martin reform era.

Specifically, from 2015/16 to 2022/23, federal government employment (as measured in fulltime equivalents) increased by 26.1 per cent. By comparison, the Canadian population increased by 9.1 per cent over the same period.

Just as the reduction in federal employment contributed to the deficit reduction in the 1990s, the growth in federal employment has helped fuel the Trudeau government’s unending string of budget deficits since 2015/16. Incidentally, if during its nine years in power the Trudeau government had simply held the rate of growth in federal employment to the rate of population growth, federal spending would be $7.5 billion lower than it is today.

According to the Trudeau government’s latest projections, the federal deficit will reach an eye-popping $48.3 billion this fiscal year. And thanks to years of record-high spending under Trudeau, total federal debt will eclipse $2.15 trillion. Consequently, the federal government will spend $53.7 billion this year on debt interest payments—or $1,301 per Canadian.

Canadian history is clear—it’s difficult to predict the policy orientation of any premier or prime minister based on their political stripe. Prime Ministers Chrétien and Trudeau prove this point. Chrétien reduced federal employment with an eye on eliminating the federal deficit. Trudeau reversed this legacy by rapidly growing the federal bureaucracy. This is one important reason for the divergent fiscal outcomes between the two governments.

Under Prime Minister Chrétien, Canadians saw a string of balanced budgets. Under Prime Minister Trudeau, an unending series of deficits and massive debt accumulation, which Canadians must pay for today and for many years to come.

Ben Eisen

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute