Ottawa’s EV mandate may destroy Canadian auto industry

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:

Ross McKitrick

Professor of Economics, University of Guelph

Related Topics:#CanadianAutoIndustry #FraserInstitute #Ottawa'sEVMandate #RossMcKitrick

Up Next

Taxpayers call on Trudeau to scrap Digital Services Tax as US threatens trade action

Don't Miss

Feds spending $1.7 million pushing carbon tax on other countries

Todayville

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

Inside the Convoy Verdict with Trish Wood

Carbon Tax / 10 hours ago

The book the carbon taxers don’t want you to read

Immigration / 10 hours ago

Immigrant background checks are unrelated to national security?

Automotive

Dark Web Tesla Doxxers Used Widely-Popular Parking App Data To Find Targets, Analysis Shows

Published on April 5, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Thomas English

A dark web doxxing website targeting Tesla owners and allies of Elon Musk appears to be compiled from hacked data originally stolen from a massive ParkMobile app breach in 2021, according to records obtained by a data privacy group.

The site, known as DogeQuest, first appeared in March and publishes names, home addresses, contact details and other personal information tied to Tesla drivers and DOGE staff. Marketed as a hub for anti-Musk “creative expressions of protest,” the platform has been linked to real-world vandalism and remains live on the dark web. Federal investigations into DogeQuest are already underway, the New York Post first reported.

“If you’re on the hunt for a Tesla to unleash your artistic flair with a spray can, just step outside — no map needed! At DOGEQUEST, we believe in empowering creative expressions of protest that you can execute from the comfort of your own home,” the surface-web DogeQuest site reads. “DOGEQUEST neither endorses nor condemns any actions.”

A screenshot of the DogeQuest surface website captured on April 3, 2025. (Captured by Thomas English/Daily Caller News Foundation)

ObscureIQ, a data privacy group, compiled a breakdown of the data — obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation — and determined 98.2% of records used to populate the site matched individuals affected by the 2021 ParkMobile breach.

Encouraging destruction of Teslas throughout the country is extreme domestic terrorism!! https://t.co/8TCNIbrQxA

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 18, 2025

DogeQuest originally appeared as a surface web doxxing hub, encouraging vandalism of Teslas and displaying names, addresses, contact details and, in some cases, employment information for roughly 1,700 individuals. The site used stolen ParkMobile records along with data purchased from brokers, flagging anyone who had a Tesla listed in their vehicle registration profile, according to ObscureIQ’s analysis.

The platform — now operating as “DogeQuest Unleashed” via a .onion dark web address — has also published personal details of high-value targets including senior military officials, federal employees and private sector executives in Silicon Valley. A spreadsheet reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation indicates several individuals targeted work areas like cybersecurity, defense contracting, public health and diplomatic policy. DOGE staff and their families appear prominently throughout the data.

A screenshot of DogeQuest’s surface website, captured on April 3, 2025. (Captured by Thomas English/Daily Caller News Foundation)

No other reporting has yet tied DogeQuest directly to the ParkMobile breach, which impacted over 21 million users in 2021. The company, which facilitates cashless parking across the U.S., quietly disclosed the breach in April of that year, admitting that “basic user information” had been accessed. ObscureIQ’s research shows that exposed data included email addresses, license plate numbers and phone numbers — enough to triangulate identity when paired with commercial data brokers.

The company agreed to a $32 million settlement to resolve a class-action lawsuit stemming from the data breach. The lawsuit alleged that ParkMobile failed to secure its Amazon Web Services cloud storage, allowing access to the data. Although payment data were reportedly not compromised, plaintiffs argued the exposed information still posed serious privacy risks — a claim now reinforced by its use in the DogeQuest doxxing campaign.

Despite federal attention, the site has proven difficult to keep offline, as the dark web mirror incorporates anonymized hosting methods, frustrating law enforcement takedown efforts.

The Department of Justice charged three suspects last week linked to physical attacks on Tesla vehicles, charging stations and dealerships across multiple states, though it has not publicly confirmed any link between those suspects and DogeQuest. Meanwhile, the FBI has acknowledged it is “actively working” on both the doxxing campaign and a parallel rise in swatting incidents affecting DOGE affiliates.

Automotive

Auto giant shuts down foreign plants as Trump moves to protect U.S. industry

Published on April 4, 2025

Todayville

MxM News

Quick Hit:

Stellantis is pausing vehicle production at two North American facilities—one in Canada and another in Mexico—following President Donald Trump’s announcement of 25% tariffs on foreign-made cars. The move marks one of the first corporate responses to the administration’s push to bring back American manufacturing.

Key Details:

In an email to workers Thursday, Stellantis North America chief Antonio Filosa directly tied the production pause to the new tariffs, writing that the company is “continuing to assess the medium- and long-term effects” but is “temporarily pausing production” at select assembly plants outside the U.S.
Production at the Windsor Assembly Plant in Ontario will be paused for two weeks, while the Toluca Assembly Plant in Mexico will be offline for the entire month of April.
These plants produce the Chrysler Pacifica minivan, the new Dodge Charger Daytona EV, the Jeep Compass SUV, and the Jeep Wagoneer S EV.

Diving Deeper:

On Wednesday afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, President Trump announced sweeping new tariffs aimed at revitalizing America’s auto manufacturing industry. The 25% tariffs on all imported cars are part of a broader “reciprocal tariffs” strategy, which Trump described as ending decades of globalist trade policies that hollowed out U.S. industry.

Just a day later, Stellantis became the first major automaker to act on the new policy, halting production at two of its international plants. According to an internal email obtained by CNBC, Stellantis North American COO Antonio Filosa said the company is “taking immediate actions” to respond to the tariff policy while continuing to evaluate the broader impact.

“These actions will impact some employees at several of our U.S. powertrain and stamping facilities that support those operations,” Filosa wrote.

The Windsor, Ontario plant, which builds the Chrysler Pacifica and the newly introduced Dodge Charger Daytona EV, will shut down for two weeks. The Toluca facility in Mexico, responsible for the Jeep Compass and Jeep Wagoneer S EV, will suspend operations for the entire month of April.

The move comes as Stellantis continues to face scrutiny for its reliance on low-wage labor in foreign markets. As reported by Breitbart News, the company has spent years shifting production and engineering jobs to countries like Brazil, India, Morocco, and Mexico—often at the expense of American workers. Last year alone, Stellantis cut around 400 U.S.-based engineering positions while ramping up operations overseas.

Meanwhile, General Motors appears to be responding differently. According to Reuters, GM told employees in a webcast Thursday that it will increase production of light-duty trucks at its Fort Wayne, Indiana plant—where it builds the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra. These models are also assembled in Mexico and Canada, but GM’s decision suggests a shift in production to the U.S. could be underway in light of the tariffs.

As Trump’s trade reset takes effect, more automakers are expected to recalibrate their production strategies—potentially signaling a long-awaited shift away from offshoring and toward rebuilding American industry.