Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Provincial governments should follow Manitoba’s lead and allow the online sale of alcoholic beverages from other provinces

Published

4 months ago

9 minute read

From the Montreal Economic Institute

By  Shal Marriott  and Gabriel Giguère

Removing Interprovincial Barriers to Online Alcohol Sales

Canada’s provincial and territorial governments should allow consumers to shop online for alcoholic beverages produced elsewhere in the country, indicates an MEI publication.

“The restrictions imposed by provincial alcohol monopolies are such that it is sometimes easier for a Canadian producer to sell its products on the other side of the world than in the province next door,” explains Shal Marriott, research associate at the MEI and author of the study. “By allowing producers to sell their products online, directly to consumers, our provincial governments would remove obstacles to their growth.”

In 2019, the federal, provincial, and territorial governments had committed to improving interprovincial trade in alcoholic beverages. This commitment stems directly from the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, signed two years before.

Manitoba is the only province to allow its residents to shop online for Canadian alcoholic beverages from other provinces, without restriction.

British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Nova Scotia have partial restrictions, allowing consumers to shop online for certain categories of products from specific parts of the country.

Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador each continue to prohibit consumers from shopping online for alcoholic beverages from outside the province.

“By opening the door to this online commerce, our provincial governments would allow consumers to discover new products that they otherwise cannot purchase at home,” says Ms. Marriott. “This is the kind of simple measure that could also give our microbreweries, our wineries, and our distilleries a helping hand.”

The alcoholic beverage sector contributes over $4.4 billion to the Canadian economy, according to the latest available data.

Viewpoint calling on Canada’s provincial governments to allow the unrestricted online purchase and shipment of alcoholic beverages from one province to another

* * *

This Viewpoint was prepared by Shal Marriott, Research Associate at the MEI, in collaboration with Gabriel Giguère, Senior Policy Analyst at the MEI. The MEI’s Regulation Series aims to examine the often unintended consequences for individuals and businesses of various laws and rules, in contrast with their stated goals.

In October 2012, retiree Gerard Comeau was stopped by the RCMP and fined for bringing a too large quantity of beer and liquor from Quebec into New Brunswick, violating the personal exemption limit in place. In its ruling on the Comeau case in April 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld provincial governments’ right to maintain such restrictions, provided they did not intentionally impede interprovincial alcohol trade.(1)

A year later, however, the federal government and the provinces agreed on an Action Plan “to enhance interprovincial trade of alcoholic beverages,” stemming from the 2017 Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA).(2) This included increasing, and ultimately eliminating, personal use exemption limits (which set the amount of alcohol one can bring back from another province) and creating e-commerce platforms.(3)

Some progress has been made to raise or remove personal exemption limits across the country, meaning that Canadians can now import and transport alcohol more easily across most provincial lines for personal consumption, without penalty.(4) Most provinces, however, have failed to liberalize other areas of interprovincial alcohol trade, such as interprovincial online retail sales of alcoholic products, thus depriving Canadians of the benefits of greater competition, namely a broader choice of products and lower prices.

The Current State of Online Alcohol Retail Sales

There have been some efforts to allow greater freedom in online alcohol sales, such as Saskatchewan and British Columbia allowing a limited form of direct-to-consumer sales and shipping of wine and craft spirits from producers in the other province.(5) However, most Canadian provinces continue to prohibit the online retail sale of alcoholic beverages from other provinces directly to their consumers. For example, the Société des alcools du Québec (SAQ) states that while producers are not restricted formally from offering to sell to residents of Quebec, it is illegal for those Quebec residents to make such purchases and have them shipped into the province.(6)

As can be seen in Table 1, few provinces allow producers from other provinces to ship directly to consumers. Manitoba is the only Canadian province with no interprovincial online purchasing restrictions. The restrictions that have been removed in Western provinces and Nova Scotia are also relatively limited (and mainly concern wine). Quebec and Ontario retain complete prohibitions, which is hardly surprising as they are also among the provinces that have made the least progress towards the liberalization of internal trade more broadly.(7)

While we see some improvement in Alberta’s willingness to allow some direct-to-consumer shipments, continued protectionism still exists in the province’s alcohol trade. For example, in January 2024, the Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis (AGLC) corporation argued that direct-to-consumer shipping was having a negative impact on the provincial liquor monopoly.(8) In reaction, it threatened to stop selling BC wines in its stores until this practice ceased, and this position was seemingly supported by the Alberta government as there was no action to condemn the stance of the AGLC.(9)

Although a memorandum of understanding was reached six months later, ending a temporary ban that had been imposed, this showcases that provincial liquor monopolies, and provincial governments, are willing to enforce interprovincial trade barriers that ultimately deprive Canadian producers and consumers.(10)

The Benefits of Direct-to-Consumer Purchasing Online

There has been a general growth in the online consumer goods market, but Canadian producers and consumers of alcohol products have been unable to fully participate in, and benefit from, this opportunity. This protects provincial alcohol monopolies with their brick-and-mortar stores, which are thus shielded from online competition, at the expense of consumers and producers, whose ability to engage in trade with each other is limited.(11)

Liquor monopolies thus find it easier to impose artificially high prices on the products they retail. The SAQ, for instance, imposes markups on bottles of wine which, when combined with excise and sales taxes, can account for over 75% of the retail price of the product.(12)

Abolishing these restrictions on interprovincial shipping directly to consumers would allow Canadians in any province to freely order online from alcohol producers anywhere in the country. Online sales are one of the most convenient ways for consumers to purchase alcohol from other provinces. Opening up this type of commerce would also be good for smaller breweries, wineries, and distilleries, allowing them to expand their reach within the domestic market.

The federal government has declared a commitment to an increasingly liberalized domestic alcohol market.(13) Yet, this liberalization is being hindered by provincial governments and alcohol monopolies that limit the growth of the domestic market. For the sake of Canadian consumers and producers alike, the provinces should simply allow the unrestricted online purchase and shipment of alcohol from other provinces.

Before Post

Related Topics:

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

More from this author
International / 3 hours ago

Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ defense shield must be built now, Lt. Gen. warns

Alberta / 5 hours ago

The beauty of economic corridors: Inside Alberta’s work to link products with new markets

Energy / 5 hours ago

Why are Western Canadian oil prices so strong?

Business

Saskatchewan becomes first Canadian province to fully eliminate carbon tax

Published on April 1, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Saskatchewan has become the first Canadian province to free itself entirely of the carbon tax.

On March 27, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe announced the removal of the provincial industrial carbon tax beginning April 1, boosting the province’s industry and making Saskatchewan the first carbon tax free province.

“The immediate effect is the removal of the carbon tax on your Sask Power bills, saving Saskatchewan families and small businesses hundreds of dollars a year. And in the longer term, it will reduce the cost of other consumer products that have the industrial carbon tax built right into their price,” said Moe.

Under Moe’s direction, Saskatchewan has dropped the industrial carbon tax which he says will allow Saskatchewan to thrive under a “tariff environment.”

“I would hope that all of the parties running in the federal election would agree with those objectives and allow the provinces to regulate in this area without imposing the federal backstop,” he continued.

The removal of the tax is estimated to save Saskatchewan residents up to 18 cents a liter in gas prices.

The removal of the tax will take place on April 1, the same day the consumer carbon tax will reduce to 0 percent under Prime Minister Mark Carney’s direction. Notably, Carney did not scrap the carbon tax legislation: he just reduced its current rate to zero. This means it could come back at any time.

Furthermore, while Carney has dropped the consumer carbon tax, he has previously revealed that he wishes to implement a corporation carbon tax, the effects of which many argued would trickle down to all Canadians.

The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) celebrated Moe’s move, noting that the carbon tax was especially difficult on farmers.

“It puts our farming community and our business people in rural municipalities at a competitive disadvantage, having to pay this and compete on the world stage,” he continued.

“We’ve got a carbon tax on power — and that’s going to be gone now — and propane and natural gas and we use them more and more every year, with grain drying and different things in our farming operations,” he explained.

“I know most producers that have grain drying systems have three-phase power. If they haven’t got natural gas, they have propane to fire those dryers. And that cost goes on and on at a high level, and it’s made us more noncompetitive on a world stage,” Huber decalred.

The carbon tax is wildly unpopular and blamed for the rising cost of living throughout Canada. Currently, Canadians living in provinces under the federal carbon pricing scheme pay $80 per tonne.

Continue Reading

Automotive

Electric cars just another poor climate policy

Published on April 1, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Bjørn Lomborg

The electric car is widely seen as a symbol of a simple, clean solution to climate change. In reality, it’s inefficient, reliant on massive subsidies, and leaves behind a trail of pollution and death that is seldom acknowledged.

We are constantly reminded by climate activists and politicians that electric cars are cleaner, cheaper, and better. Canada and many other countries have promised to prohibit the sale of new gas and diesel cars within a decade. But if electric cars are really so good, why would we need to ban the alternatives?

And why has Canada needed to subsidize each electric car with a minimum $5,000 from the federal government and more from provincial governments to get them bought? Many people are not sold on the idea of an electric car because they worry about having to plan out where and when to recharge. They don’t want to wait for an uncomfortable amount of time while recharging; they don’t want to pay significantly more for the electric car and then see its used-car value decline much faster. For people not privileged to own their own house, recharging is a real challenge. Surveys show that only 15 per cent of Canadians and 11 per cent of Americans want to buy an electric car.

The main environmental selling point of an electric car is that it doesn’t pollute. It is true that its engine doesn’t produce any CO₂ while driving, but it still emits carbon in other ways. Manufacturing the car generates emissions—especially producing the battery which requires a large amount of energy, mostly achieved with coal in China. So even when an electric car is being recharged with clean power in BC, over its lifetime it will emit about one-third of an equivalent gasoline car. When recharged in Alberta, it will emit almost three-quarters.

In some parts of the world, like India, so much of the power comes from coal that electric cars end up emitting more CO₂ than gasoline cars. Across the world, on average, the International Energy Agency estimates that an electric car using the global average mix of power sources over its lifetime will emit nearly half as much CO₂ as a gasoline-driven car, saving about 22 tonnes of CO₂.

But using an electric car to cut emissions is incredibly ineffective. On America’s longest-established carbon trading system, you could buy 22 tonnes of carbon emission cuts for about $660 (US$460). Yet, Ottawa is subsidizing every electric car to the tune of $5,000 or nearly ten times as much, which increases even more if provincial subsidies are included. And since about half of those electrical vehicles would have been bought anyway, it is likely that Canada has spent nearly twenty-times too much cutting CO₂ with electric cars than it could have. To put it differently, Canada could have cut twenty-times more CO₂ for the same amount of money.

Moreover, all these estimates assume that electric cars are driven as far as gasoline cars. They are not. In the US, nine-in-ten households with an electric car actually have one, two or more non-electric cars, with most including an SUV, truck or minivan. Moreover, the electric car is usually driven less than half as much as the other vehicles, which means the CO₂ emission reduction is much smaller. Subsidized electric cars are typically a ‘second’ car for rich people to show off their environmental credentials.

Electric cars are also 320–440 kilograms heavier than equivalent gasoline cars because of their enormous batteries. This means they will wear down roads faster, and cost societies more. They will also cause more air pollution by shredding more particulates from tire and road wear along with their brakes. Now, gasoline cars also pollute through combustion, but electric cars in total pollute more, both from tire and road wear and from forcing more power stations online, often the most polluting ones. The latest meta-study shows that overall electric cars are worse on particulate air pollution. Another study found that in two-thirds of US states, electric cars cause more of the most dangerous particulate air pollution than gasoline-powered cars.

These heavy electric cars are also more dangerous when involved in accidents, because heavy cars more often kill the other party. A study in Nature shows that in total, heavier electric cars will cause so many more deaths that the toll could outweigh the total climate benefits from reduced CO₂ emissions.

Many pundits suggest electric car sales will dominate gasoline cars within a few decades, but the reality is starkly different. A 2023-estimate from the Biden Administration shows that even in 2050, more than two-thirds of all cars globally will still be powered by gas or diesel.

Source: US Energy Information Administration, reference scenario, October 2023
Fossil fuel cars, vast majority is gasoline, also some diesel, all light duty vehicles, the remaining % is mostly LPG.

Electric vehicles will only take over when innovation has made them better and cheaper for real. For now, electric cars run not mostly on electricity but on bad policy and subsidies, costing hundreds of billions of dollars, blocking consumers from choosing the cars they want, and achieving virtually nothing for climate change.

Bjørn Lomborg

Continue Reading

Trending

X