Automotive
Ottawa’s EV mandate may destroy Canadian auto industry
From the Fraser Institute
No one had to force the public to abandon land lines for cellphones, or vinyl records for CDs and then online streaming. When superior products appear, people will switch voluntarily. An EV mandate may be affordable by 2035—but only if the product quality and user costs have progressed to the point that people want to switch anyway, in which case the mandate is not needed.
According to energy transition and “net zero” enthusiasts, the future looks bright for electric vehicles (EVs). So bright that the federal government and some provincial governments have had to offer some $15 billion in subsidies to prompt carmakers to develop Canadian production facilities while also offering lavish subsidies to get people to buy EVs. And since even that isn’t enough, according to a Trudeau government mandate, all new light-duty vehicles sold in Canada must be electric or plug-in hybrid by 2035. In other words, the government wants to ban traditional internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs).
The fundamental problem is that EVs cost more to make and operate than most consumers are willing to pay. In a 2016 submission to the Quebec government, which was then considering an EV mandate of its own, the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturing Association warned that its members were then losing between $12,000 and $20,000 per EV sold. Since then, the situation has gotten worse, with Ford reporting first quarter 2024 losses of US$132,000 per EV.
What will be the economic consequences of a national EV mandate in Canada? In a new paper forthcoming in the peer-reviewed Canadian Journal of Economics, I develop and run a detailed inter-provincial model of the Canadian economy including the auto sector. I argue that during the phase-in period the auto sector will raise the price of ICEVs and earn above-market rents on them, but that won’t cover the losses on the EV side and the industry will go into overall losses by the late-2020s. The losses will be permanent unless and until EV production costs fall enough that a mandate is unnecessary. In short, the 2035 mandate is affordable only if it’s not needed. If it takes a mandate to force consumers to choose EVs over ICEVs, the mandate will destroy the Canadian auto industry.
The mandate sets up a race between regulation and technology. Some aspects of EV production are falling, such as batteries. Others, such as specialty metals used in motors, are sole-sourced from China and are not getting cheaper. Other user costs are rising including electricity, for which we can thank two decades of green energy madness. Taking all aspects together, suppose EV technology improves so quickly that by 2035 consumers are absolutely indifferent between an EV and an ICEV, so the mandate is costless thereafter. Getting to that point would still impose Canadian auto industry losses that total $140 billion compared to the no-policy base case. As of 2031 the losses in real GDP and industrial output compared to the base case would average more than $1,000 per worker across Canada. Greenhouse gas emissions would fall by just under 3 per cent relative to the base case as of 2035, but the abatement costs reach about $2,800 per tonne as of 2030.
That’s the best-case scenario. What if full EV cost parity takes until 2050? According to the model, the auto sector will lose $1.3 trillion relative to the base case between 2025 and 2050. Of course, in reality the sector would simply shut down, but in the model a sector must keep operating even at a loss. In absolute terms the national economy would continue to grow but much more slowly. Economic losses relative to the base case as of 2035 include a 4.8 per cent reduction in real GDP nationally (8.9 per cent in Ontario), a 2.6 per cent cut in real earnings per worker, 137,000 jobs lost, a 10.5 per cent drop in auto demand nationally and a 16.8 per cent drop in capital earnings relative to average. Greenhouse gas emissions would fall by just under 6 per cent against the base case as of 2035 but at a cost of more than $3,400 per tonne, 20 times the nominal carbon tax rate.
These are unprecedented costs, but then again we have never before proposed to ban the production and purchase of one of the most popular consumer products of all time. A large part of our economy is organized around making and using gasoline-powered cars, so if the government plans to outlaw them we should not be surprised that doing so will have harsh and far-reaching economic consequences. While production of EVs will partially offset the losses, it’s a classic error in economic reasoning to suppose the policy package as a whole could yield a net gain or offer a genuine economic opportunity. If it could, think of all the economic growth we could contrive simply by banning things. We could ban computers and make people read books instead—think of the boom in publishing. We could ban all forms of transportation and make people walk. Think of how much money they’d save, and the opportunities this would open up for shoemakers.
I better stop there before I put ideas in politicians’ heads. To be clear, people are willing to pay for computers, cars and lots of other things because they perceive that they get greater consumption value than the cost of buying the item. So far that has not proven to be true of EVs, so an EV mandate by definition must make people worse off. No one had to force the public to abandon land lines for cellphones, or vinyl records for CDs and then online streaming. When superior products appear, people will switch voluntarily. An EV mandate may be affordable by 2035—but only if the product quality and user costs have progressed to the point that people want to switch anyway, in which case the mandate is not needed.
Will an EV mandate destroy the Canadian auto industry and impose serious harm on the Canadian economy? There’s a simple way to tell: if the government perceives, based on trends in vehicle sales data, that a mandate is necessary to force consumers to switch, the answer is yes.
Author:
David Krayden
General Motors laid off 500 workers at his Electric Vehicle (EV) plant in Ingersoll, ON.
It had nothing to do with the tariffs.
It had everything to do with the plummeting fascination that Canadians have for EVs. They are selling like used Edsels in the late 1950s. In a useless attempt to create a demand for these “green” vehicles (which aren’t actually green at all because the production of electricity does not result from magic) the governments of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Ontario Premier Doug Ford wasted $42 billions of your tax money. And it was all to bolster an ideology not a demand for cars. There is no demand for these vehicles.
“You just lost 500 jobs. They’ve nuked those jobs. They’re not there anymore.”
-Dan McTeague
Ford, who saw this coming when he called an early provincial election that he knew he probably was going to lose if he waited for the anticipated vote, was actually honest to reporters when he admitted the layoffs had nothing to do with the dreaded Trump tariff but everything to do with public taste.
“What I understand from the president of General Motors that I spoke to, it’s going to be about 500 employees. Has nothing to do with the tariffs. He said, the volume is not there. People are not purchasing like they thought they would. So, they have thousands of vehicles sitting there. We make sure we support the workers and make sure that we get the government, especially Canada Post, to pick up some of these vehicles, because that’s what it’s geared for you.”
So, Ford expects Canada Post, another government agency on its last legs, to come to the rescue and pick up all these excess EVs? Sounds like it. The irony is that Ford came into office largely because the previous Liberal government had gone hog wild with its green energy program and hydro rates were among the highest in North America. Ford used to say that a industrialized province like Ontario can’t possibly prosper or even subsist on the energy provided by windmills and solar panels. He was right then but over the years he became firmly ensconced in the pocket of Trudeau and the Liberals, just as he is today with Mark Carney.
I spoke to my old friend Dan McTeague on Saturday about this mess. McTeague is a former Liberal MP from the GTA who is the president of Canadians for Affordable Energy today and well known for predicting gas prices across Canada as the @ gaspricewizard on X. As an MP, he always put principal above expediency, and he is no different today. McTeague is anxious for a Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) victory in this federal election and he is actively campaigning for a CPC nominee.
McTeague was not surprised over the dismal outlook for EVs.
“This is about Pierre Poilievre saying your policies are garbage. They’ve hurt Canadians. They’ve undermined the financial feasibility and sustainability of the federal government and the provincial government, and we’re going to get rid of them, just like we’re going to get rid of the CBC.”
-Dan McTeague
“Well, on the 22nd of March after having gone to the Ingersoll plant. I just tweeted a little while ago. I actually went there, filmed what was there in inventory. There were thousands of these vehicles just sitting there doing nothing. Obviously, Doug Ford didn’t get it on the 22nd of March. I said it says a lot about why the Ford nation is giddy about supporting Carney, he’s committed billions in world EV and battery manufacturing like this one in Ingersoll, where the provincial Feds kicked in over half a billion for bright drops. Was supposed to sell 100,000 units. Only sold 2100 actually, it got wrong. It was 2500 they might have probably given that a few away there. But look, this is anticipating what was there. It’s pretty obvious. I mean, I don’t just predict gas prices. Pretty good idea policies, EV mandates, the entire nets,” McTeague said.
McTeague explained that the “EV mandates are toast,” not just because President Donald Trump eliminated them but because they simply never had traction with consumers. He noted that Carney is playing games with the consumer carbon tax – because he hasn’t eliminated it but merely reduced it temporarily to zero – and has continued to keep emissions caps in place.
“Why are they doubling down on forcing us to have California-style appliances, which are extraordinarily costly to consumers. There are thousands of these things that are coming up. GFANZ, the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero that Mark Carney put forward, is now subject to antitrust review in the United States. This guy could be charged and billions of dollars taken away from the GFANZ organization,” McTeague said, adding that “anybody who hopped on the bandwagon a few years ago on net zero is now looking pretty damn foolish, and it’s amazing to see so many stunned Canadians falling in for this.”
“You just lost 500 jobs. They’ve nuked those jobs. They’re not there anymore.”
The former Liberal MP said the EV program is just one example of a failed economic record from the Trudeau-Carney regime. “However you slice it, the Liberals have had 10 years of failed policies. Net Zero has laid an egg. It’s not doing anything. And what they’re going to try to do is use a lot more public money and hopefully put enough wool over everyone’s eyes, so that we continue to go down this road of more recklessness as a result of what we’ve seen on EVs.
“Anybody who hopped on the bandwagon a few years ago on net zero is now looking pretty damn foolish, and it’s amazing to see so many stunned Canadians falling in for this.”
McTeague also wondered how the Ontario premier has moved from a commonsense politician on green energy to a cheerleader for Trudeau’s environmental authoritarianism. “For Doug Ford to have signed onto this. I mean, Shame on him, but it probably explains why he doesn’t want to support Pierre Poilievre.”
Said McTeague: “This is about Pierre Poilievre saying your policies are garbage. They’ve hurt Canadians. They’ve undermined the financial feasibility and sustainability of the federal government and the provincial government, and we’re going to get rid of them, just like we’re going to get rid of the CBC.”
“And so, for those reasons, you’re going to see why people are not supporting Pierre Poilievre, because they know, you know, they know which side of the bread is going to get buttered and for guys like Doug Ford, Bad mistake, back the wrong horse, and now we’re holding the bag. That’s why he called the election early.”
McTeague said the federal election is a watershed moment for people to decide what kind of future they want: prosperity or poverty. “If Canadians can’t get their head out of the sand and realize that they’re being duped that they can’t afford, you know, the saddling of the debts that these things are incurring for generations to come, and they think that somehow crapping on pipelines or putting emission caps that won’t allow us to make any more oil or gas to send these pipelines that they now suddenly have discovered are important … If we don’t wake up real soon, next two weeks, I can say confidently the next four years is basically cutting people.”
The energy expert predicted that the worst if yet to come if Carney wins a mandate to govern from the voters. “Nothing has changed, if anything, Mr. Carney and his company, as we well know, has lied on so many fronts. And here’s the big one that I’m going to say it here now, because I’ve said it many places before, but to be absolutely clear, you’re going to get a carbon tax, and that 20 cents you think you’re getting off. It’s going to be 40 cents by 2030, likely by the end of another government, “should they form a majority government.”
McTeague cautioned against Canadians becoming deluded and declaring, “Oh, we’re not worried about the future; we just don’t like Donald Trump, and we think Pierre Poilievre is like him.” Give your head a shake — because you know what, I’m going to spend a lot of time over the next few years, pointing back to the stupidity and frivolity of people. And make no mistake, David, these people know what they’re doing. They’re just trying to be cool and friendly because they made mistakes in 2015, 2019 and again in 2021 and they want to somehow think that they can justify bad decisions. What’s coming at the expense of the country? Coming at the expense of our economic sustainability? It’s likely coming at the expense of what concerns me even more so: the future of the federation of this country.”
“I’ve said it many places before, but to be absolutely clear, you’re going to get a carbon tax, and that 20 cents you think you’re getting off. It’s going to be 40 cents by 2030.”
Dan and I also discussed how he has discovered that much of the polling being conducted during this campaign is over-sampling people over 60, which comprise at least 50 percent of the respondents included in the surveys. This bodes well for Poilievre and the Conservatives.
Tomorrow I will be examining how the Consevatives are appealing to working class Canadians, labor union leaders and blue collar workers. Seeking and winning the “hard hat vote” worked for President Richard Nixon in 1972 and President Ronald Reagan in 1984. It can work for Poilevre too in 2025 — and somehow I think he realizes that.
WATCH: The Ugly Truth About Carney: Trudeau Subsidies Fail
CHECK OUT OUR KR NEWS INVESTIGATIVE SERIES ON MARK CARNEY
Rich Banker Man Mark Carney Caught by CBC & CTV Dodging Taxes
Liberal MP Encouraged the Abduction of Conservative Rival for Chinese Bounty
KR NEWSLETTER: Mark Carney to “Fold” “After the vote.” Carney’s Wife’s Eurasia Group Boss Spills the Beans on the Liberals’ “Elbows Up” Master Plan
GFANZ, Mark Carney’s Climate Cabal That Won’t Leave Us Alone
Mark Carney’s is China’s Man
KRN NEWSLETTER: Mark Carney Deep Dive + Disastrous Liberal Leadership Debates
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Hudson Crozier
People damaging Teslas in anger toward their owners and Elon Musk aren’t picking up on the fact that the vehicles have multiple cameras capable of catching them in the act.
At least nine perpetrators have been caught on video keying, writing graffiti or otherwise defacing Tesla vehicles in parking lots across the U.S. in the month of March alone. Most have led to an arrest or warrant based partly on the footage, which Tesla’s “Sentry Mode” automatically films from the side of the unattended vehicle when it detects human activity nearby.
“Smile, you’re on camera,” Tesla warned in a March 20 X post about its Sentry Mode feature. Musk’s company has been working to upgrade Sentry Mode so that the vehicles will soon blast music at full volume when vandals attack it. The camera system, however, has not stopped an increasing number of vandals from singling out Tesla owners, usually in protest of Musk’s work in the Trump administration for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
One incident happened on March 29, the same day leftists coordinated protests around the country for a “Global Day of Action” against Musk. That Saturday also saw alleged instances of violence at protests. The demonstrations stemmed from an online call to action by groups such as the Disruption Project, which encourages activists to foment “uprisings,” find a “target’s” home address and other confrontational tactics.
Tesla’s press team did not respond to a request for comment.
One man allegedly caught on camera keying a Tesla SUV on March 24 apologized to the owner who confronted him in a parking lot in Pennsylvania, police and media reports said. The man faces charges of criminal mischief, harassment and disorderly conduct for allegedly carving a swastika onto the vehicle.
“I have nothing against your car, and I have nothing against you,” the suspect said while the owner filmed him in the parking lot. “Obviously, I have something against Elon Musk.” The man called his own behavior “misguided.”
The defendant’s lawyer told Fox News his “client is a proud father, long-time resident, and is currently undergoing cancer treatment” and that he would not comment publicly “pending the outcome of the case.”
One of the most aggressive acts caught by Sentry Mode was in the case of a man who drove an ATV-style vehicle into a Tesla on March 25. Texas police identified the man as Demarqeyun Marquize Cox, arrested him and said he allegedly gave two other nearby Teslas the same treatment while also writing “Elon” on them. The public defender office representing Cox did not respond to a voicemail from the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Tesla cameras also caught three other people in Florida, Texas and Arizona keying and smearing bubble gum on the vehicles in March. The three suspects named by police do not have attorneys listed in county records available for contact.
Many of the vandalism cases since Trump’s return have reportedly caused thousands of dollars in damage for individual owners. For example, the bubble gum incident in Florida brought $2,623.66 in costs, while another keying incident in Minnesota brought $3,200.
Some reported attacks on Tesla vehicles and chargers have gotten the attention of federal law enforcement, including cases of alleged firebombing or shooting.
Two other suspected vandals in New York, one in Minnesota and one in Mississippi have reportedly avoided arrest for now — with one owner declining to press charges — but were all seen on the Teslas’ cameras scratching up the vehicles. Police identified the Mississippi suspect as an illegal migrant from Cuba.
One Tesla owner in North Dakota ridiculed a man who allegedly carved the letter “F” into his Cybertruck in a Costco parking lot — as seen on the Cybertruck’s camera. The defendant faces charges of criminal mischief, and county records say he is representing himself in court.
“I can’t believe this guy is potentially ruining his life to follow a political ideology,” the owner told WDAY News.
“If you’re going to vandalize these vehicles, you’re going to get caught,” the owner said.
MEI-Ipsos poll: 56 per cent of Canadians support increasing access to non-governmental healthcare providers
Ex-NYPD Cop Jailed in Beijing’s Transnational Repatriation Plot, Canada Remains Soft Target
Bureau Exclusive: Chinese Election Interference Network Tied to Senate Breach Investigation
BREAKING from THE BUREAU: Pro-Beijing Group That Pushed Erin O’Toole’s Exit Warns Chinese Canadians to “Vote Carefully”
Neil Young + Carney / Freedom Bros
The “Hardhat Vote” Has Embraced Pierre Poilievre
The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence
-
International2 days agoPope Francis has died aged 88
-
International1 day agoJD Vance was one of the last people to meet Pope Francis
-
2025 Federal Election21 hours agoOttawa Confirms China interfering with 2025 federal election: Beijing Seeks to Block Joe Tay’s Election
-
2025 Federal Election20 hours agoHow Canada’s Mainstream Media Lost the Public Trust
-
Business2 days agoCanada Urgently Needs A Watchdog For Government Waste
-
International1 day agoPope Francis Dies on Day after Easter
-
2025 Federal Election21 hours agoReal Homes vs. Modular Shoeboxes: The Housing Battle Between Poilievre and Carney
-
COVID-1921 hours agoNearly Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Were Not Due to COVID-19 – Scientific Reports Journal