New tax bracket among features of Alberta’s 2024 Budget

Budget 2024: A responsible plan for a growing province

Budget 2024 is a responsible plan to strengthen health care and education, build safe communities and manage resources wisely to support a growing Alberta.

With a steady focus on fiscal responsibility and wise spending, Alberta’s government will continue to meet the needs of Albertans today and tomorrow. Budget 2024 presents three more years of balanced budgets, beginning with a forecast surplus of $367 million in 2024-25. Budget 2024 strengthens the vital services Albertans rely on and ensures those services remain sustainable over the long run.

“Alberta is growing. Budget 2024 is a plan that manages the pressures faced by a growing province today while securing the future for generations who follow. I’m proud of the choices we made in this budget that support Albertans’ top priorities and prepare our province to meet the challenges that lie ahead. Budget 2024 invests today and saves for tomorrow so we can continue to be the nation’s economic engine.”

Nate Horner, President of Treasury Board and Minister of Finance

Budget 2024 is a responsible plan that puts Albertans and Alberta families first by investing in their health, education, safety, and economic growth and success. Priority investments include:

Health and mental health supports: $26.2 billion in operating dollars, a 4.4 per cent increase over the forecast for 2023-24.
Education supports: $9.3 billion in operating expenses, a 4.4 per cent increase from last year, to support record enrolment growth, hire hundreds more education staff including teachers and educational assistants, and support students with specialized needs.
Social supports: $2.9 billion in 2024-25 to Albertans through the Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped program, the Alberta Seniors Benefit and other social support programs, plus $355 million for Alberta Child and Family Benefit payments to help low-income families, indexing payments to inflation and providing for more eligible clients.
Workforce supports: An increase of $102 million over three years to add 3,200 apprenticeship classroom seats in high-demand areas and support curriculum updates to the apprenticeship program, as well as $62.4 million over three years to expand physician education, including through rural health training centres.
Public safety supports: $1.2 billion in 2024-25 operating expense for Public Safety and Emergency Services to support police and mental health crisis teams, deploy street-level police officers to tackle crime in Calgary and Edmonton, and provide $74 million to the Alberta Emergency Management Agency.
Wildfire supports: $151 million operating expense over the next three years for enhancements to the Wildfire Management Program and $55 million in capital investment for new firefighting equipment and facilities.
- The fiscal framework provides the flexibility the government needs to respond quickly to disasters and emergencies as they arise, including a $2-billion contingency.
Water management and drought preparedness supports: $1.3 billion in capital funding over the next three years, including $251 million to better prepare the province for floods and droughts; $272 million for irrigation projects; and $539 million to support municipal water supply and wastewater infrastructure.
- Budget 2024 also provides additional operating support of $19 million over three years for the Strategy to Increase Water Availability and $9 million for water management initiatives.
Capital supports: In total, $25 billion over three years in capital funding to build schools, hospitals, roads and other infrastructure, supporting 24,000 direct jobs and 13,000 indirect jobs across the province.

Alberta is well-positioned to remain the economic engine of Canada, with real gross domestic product forecast to grow 2.9 per cent in 2024, but the province continues to face challenges. While Alberta’s growing population is supporting economic activity and helping to ease labour shortages, it is also increasing demand for housing, health care, education and other public services. Ongoing geopolitical turmoil, uncertainty from federal government policies and high consumer prices risk dampening growth. Budget 2024 prepares Alberta to face those headwinds, with its responsible plan that invests in Albertans today and builds prosperity for tomorrow.

The fiscal framework introduced in spring 2023 requires the government to use at least half of any available surplus cash to pay down debt, freeing up more money to support Albertans. Taxpayer-supported debt will be reduced by a forecast $3.2 billion in the 2023-24 fiscal year. With the government’s commitment to paying down debt, the total taxpayer-supported debt will be $78.4 billion at the end of 2024-25.

High interest rates and the need to refinance maturing debt are driving up debt-servicing costs (the interest payments and fees on the debt) paid by taxpayers. As a result, debt-servicing costs are growing by $229 million in 2024-25 to $3.4 billion. While high interest rates on refinanced maturing debt are driving up those costs in the short term, the government’s strategic debt repayment plan will save Albertans millions in the long term.

The province is retaining more than $1 billion in investment earnings from 2023-24 in the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund. Alberta’s government will also deposit another $2 billion from the Alberta Fund, increasing the value of the Heritage Savings Trust Fund to a forecast $25 billion. This is a significant investment in the future of Albertans and the province’s main long-term savings fund

Revenue

In 2024-25, total revenue is estimated to be $73.5 billion, which is $2.1 billion lower than the third-quarter forecast for 2023-24.
Revenue from personal income taxes is estimated to increase to $15.6 billion in 2024-25, up $365 million from the third-quarter forecast, and grow in the following two years as more people continue to move to Alberta.
Corporate income tax revenue is estimated at $7 billion in 2024-25, down $176 million from the third-quarter forecast for 2023-24, but rising over the next two years.
Non-renewable resource revenue is estimated to drop to $17.3 billion in 2024-25, from $19.4 billion forecast for 2023-24, and is forecast to pick up over the medium term.

Expense

Total expense in 2024-25 is $73.2 billion, a 3.9 per cent increase from the forecast for 2023-24.
Total expense is expected to be $74.6 billion in 2025-26 and $76.2 billion in 2026-27.
Total operating expense in 2024-25 is $60.1 billion, a 3.9 per cent increase from the 2023-24 forecast.
A contingency of $2 billion will help the province respond to disasters and emergencies and other in-year expense pressures, a $500-million increase from 2023-24.

Surplus

A surplus of $367 million is forecast for 2024-25.
Surpluses of $1.4 billion and $2.6 billion are forecast for 2024-25 and 2025-26, respectively.

Economic outlook

In 2024, real gross domestic product is expected to grow by 2.9 per cent, up from the 2.6 per cent forecast at mid-year.
Strong population growth is expected to continue at 3.7 per cent in the 2024 calendar year, down from 4.1 per cent growth in 2023.

Energy and economic assumptions, 2024-25

West Texas Intermediate oil (USD/bbl) $74
Western Canadian Select @ Hardisty (CND/bbl) $76.80
Light-heavy differential (USD/bbl) $16
ARP natural gas (CND/GJ) $2.90
Conventional crude production (000s barrels/day) 507
Raw bitumen production (000s barrels/day) 3,429
Canadian dollar exchange rate (USD¢/CDN$) 75.90
Interest rate (10-year Canada bonds, per cent) 3.70

Related information

Budget 2024

With $15 a day flat rate, Alberta transitions to publicly funded child care

Published on January 30, 2025

Government of Alberta

Introducing $15 a day child care for families

Alberta is introducing a flat monthly parent fee of $326.25 for full-time licensed child care, or roughly $15 a day.

As part of the $3.8-billion Canada-Alberta Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care Agreement, Alberta is supporting families to access affordable child care across the province with their choice in provider.

Starting Apr. 1, parents with children zero to kindergarten age attending full-time licensed daycare facilities and family day home programs across the province will be eligible for a flat parent fee of $326.25 per month, or roughly $15 a day. Parents requiring part-time care will pay $230 per month.

To support these changes and high-quality child care, about 85 per cent of licensed daycare providers will receive a funding increase once the new fee structure is in place on Apr. 1.

Every day, parents and families across Alberta rely on licensed child-care providers to support their children’s growth and development while going to work or school. Licensed child-care providers and early childhood educators play a crucial role in helping children build the skills they need to support their growth and overall health. As Alberta’s population grows, the need for high-quality, affordable and accessible licensed and regulated child care is increasing.

While Alberta already reduced parent fees to an average of $15 a day in January 2024, many families are still paying much more depending on where they live, the age of their child and the child-care provider they choose, which has led to inconsistency and confusion. Many families find it difficult to estimate their child-care fees if they move or switch providers, and providers have expressed concerns about the fairness and complexity of the current funding framework.

A flat monthly fee will provide transparency and predictability for families in every part of the province while also improving fairness to providers and increasing overall system efficiency. On behalf of families, Alberta’s government will cover about 80 per cent of child-care fees through grants to daycare facilities and family day homes.

This means a family using full-time daycare could save, on average, $11,000 per child per year. A flat monthly parent fee will ensure child care is affordable for everyone and that providers are compensated for the important services they offer.

As opposed to a flat monthly parent fee, Alberta’s government will reimburse preschools up to $100 per month per child on parents’ behalf, up from $75.

“Albertans deserve affordable child-care options, no matter where they are or which type of care works best for them. We are bringing in flat parent fees for families so they can all access high-quality child care for the same affordable, predictable fee.”

Matt Jones, Minister of Jobs, Economy and Trade

“Reducing child care fees makes life more affordable for families and gives them the freedom to make choices that work for them—whether that’s working, studying or growing their family. We’ll keep working to bring costs down, create more spots, and reduce waitlists for families in Alberta and across the country, while ensuring every child gets the best start in life.”

Jenna Sudds, federal minister of Families, Children, and Social Development

To make Alberta’s child-care system affordable for all families, the flat monthly parent fee is replacing the Child Care Subsidy Program for children zero to kindergarten age attending child care during regular school hours. The subsidy for children attending out-of-school care is not changing.

As the province transitions to the new flat parent fee, child-care providers will have flexibility to offer optional services for an additional supplemental parent fee. These optional services must be over and above the services that are provided to all children in individual child-care programs. Clear requirements will be in place for providers to prevent preferential child-care access for families choosing to pay for optional services.

Cutting red tape and supporting child-care providers

By moving to a flat monthly parent fee, Alberta’s government is continuing the transition to a primarily publicly funded child care system. To support high-quality child care, approximately 85 per cent of licensed daycare providers will receive a funding increase once the new structure is in place on Apr. 1.

The province is enhancing the system to streamline the child-care claims process used to reimburse licensed child-care providers on behalf of Alberta parents. Alberta’s government is also putting technological solutions in place to reduce administrative burden and red tape.

Looking ahead

Over the final year of the federal agreement, Alberta’s government is working to support the child-care system while preparing to negotiate the next term of the agreement, reflective of the needs of Albertans and providers. Alberta joins its provincial and territorial partners across the country in calling for a sustainable, adequately funded system that works for parents and providers long term.

Quick facts

In line with requirements under the Canada-Alberta Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care Agreement, the flat monthly parent fee only applies to children zero to kindergarten age requiring care during regular school hours.
Children attending 100 or more hours in a month are considered full-time and parents will pay $326.25 a month. Children attending between 50 and 99 hours are considered part-time and parents will pay $230 a month.
Families with children attending preschool for up to four hours a day are eligible for up to $100 per month.
There are no changes to the out-of-school care Child Care Subsidy Program for children requiring care outside of school hours in grades 1 to 6 and attending full-time kindergarten.
Programs may choose to provide optional services for a supplemental fee. Examples may include transportation, field trips and food. Child-care programs are not required to charge parents additional supplemental fees.

Related information

Federal-provincial child care agreement

Alberta

AMA challenged to debate Alberta COVID-19 Review

Published on January 29, 2025

Todayville

Justice Centre President sends an open letter to Dr. Shelley Duggan, President of the Alberta Medical Association

Dear Dr. Duggan,

I write in response to the AMA’s Statement regarding the Final Report of the Alberta Covid Pandemic Data Review Task Force. Although you did not sign your name to the AMA Statement, I assume that you approved of it, and that you agree with its contents.

I hereby request your response to my questions about your AMA Statement.

You assert that this Final Report “advances misinformation.” Can you provide me with one or two examples of this “misinformation”?

Why, specifically, do you see this Final Report as “anti–science and anti–evidence”? Can you provide an example or two?

Considering that you denounced the entire 269-page report as “anti–science and anti–evidence,” it should be very easy for you to choose from among dozens and dozens of examples.

You assert that the Final Report “speaks against the broadest, and most diligent, international scientific collaboration and consensus in history.”

As a medical doctor, you are no doubt aware of the “consensus” whereby medical authorities in Canada and around the world approved the use of thalidomide for pregnant women in the 1950s and 1960s, resulting in miscarriages and deformed babies. No doubt you are aware that for many centuries the “consensus” amongst scientists was that physicians need not wash their hands before delivering babies, resulting in high death rates among women after giving birth. This “international scientific consensus” was disrupted in the 1850s by a true scientist, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, who advocated for hand-washing.

As a medical doctor, you should know that science is not consensus, and that consensus is not science.

It is unfortunate that your AMA Statement appeals to consensus rather than to science. In fact, your AMA Statement is devoid of science, and appeals to nothing other than consensus. A scientific Statement from the AMA would challenge specific assertions in the Final Report, point to inadequate evidence, debunk flawed methodologies, and expose incorrect conclusions. Your Statement does none of the foregoing.

You assert that “science and evidence brought us through [Covid] and saved millions of lives.” Considering your use of the word “millions,” I assume this statement refers to the lockdowns and vaccine mandates imposed by governments and medical establishments around the world, and not the response of the Alberta government alone.

What evidence do you rely on for your assertion that lockdowns saved lives? You are no doubt aware that lockdowns did not stop Covid from spreading to every city, town, village and hamlet, and that lockdowns did not stop Covid from spreading into nursing homes (long-term care facilities) where Covid claimed about 80% of its victims. How, then, did lockdowns save lives? If your assertion about “saving millions of lives” is true, it should be very easy for you to explain how lockdowns saved lives, rather than merely asserting that they did.

Seeing as you are confident that the governments’ response to Covid saved “millions” of lives, have you balanced that vague number against the number of people who died as a result of lockdowns? Have you studied or even considered what harms lockdowns inflicted on people?

If you are confident that lockdowns did more good than harm, on what is your confidence based? Can you provide data to support your position?

As a medical doctor, you are no doubt aware that the mRNA vaccine, introduced and then made mandatory in 2021, did not stop the transmission of Covid. Nor did the mRNA vaccine prevent people from getting sick with Covid, or dying from Covid. Why would it not have sufficed in 2021 to let each individual make her or his own choice about getting injected with the mRNA vaccine? Do you still believe today that mandatory vaccination policies had an actual scientific basis? If yes, what was that basis?

You assert that the Final Report “sows distrust” and “criticizes proven preventive public health measures while advancing fringe approaches.”

When the AMA Statement mentions “proven preventive public health measures,” I assume you are referring to lockdowns. If my assumption is correct, can you explain when, where and how lockdowns were “proven” to be effective, prior to 2020? Or would you agree with me that locking down billions of healthy people across the globe in 2020 was a brand new experiment, never tried before in human history? If it was a brand new experiment, how could it have been previously “proven” effective prior to 2020? Alternatively, if you are asserting that lockdowns and vaccine passports were “proven” effective in the years 2020-2022, what is your evidentiary basis for that assertion?

Your reference to “fringe approaches” is particularly troubling, because it suggests that the majority must be right just because it’s the majority, which is the antithesis of science.

Remember that the first doctors to advocate against the use of thalidomide by pregnant women, along with Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis advocating for hand-washing, were also viewed as “advancing fringe approaches” by those in authority. It would not be difficult to provide dozens, and likely hundreds, of other examples showing that true science is a process of open-minded discovery and honest debate, not a process of dismissing as “fringe” the individuals who challenge the reigning “consensus.”

The AMA Statement asserts that the Final Report “makes recommendations for the future that have real potential to cause harm.” Specifically, which of the Final Report’s recommendations have a real potential to cause harm? Can you provide even one example of such a recommendation, and explain the nature of the harm you have in mind?

The AMA Statement asserts that “many colleagues and experts have commented eloquently on the deficiencies and biases [the Final Report] presents.” Could you provide some examples of these eloquent comments? Did any of your colleagues and “experts” point to specific deficiencies in the Final Report, or provide specific examples of bias? Or were these “eloquent” comments limited to innuendo and generalized assertions like those contained in the AMA Statement?

In closing, I invite you to a public, livestreamed debate on the merits of Alberta’s lockdowns and vaccine passports. I would argue for the following: “Be it resolved that lockdowns and vaccine passports imposed on Albertans from 2020 to 2022 did more harm than good,” and you would argue against this resolution.

Seeing as you are a medical doctor who has a much greater knowledge and a much deeper understanding of these issues than I do, I’m sure you will have an easy time defending the Alberta government’s response to Covid.

If you are not available, I would be happy to debate one of your colleagues, or any AMA member.

I request your answers to the questions I have asked of you in this letter.

Further, please let me know if you are willing to debate publicly the merits of lockdowns and vaccine passports, or if one of your colleagues is available to do so.

Yours sincerely,