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

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.
Business
Musk Slashes DOGE Savings Forecast By 85%

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Thomas English
Elon Musk announced Thursday that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is now targeting $150 billion in federal savings for fiscal year 2026 — dramatically scaling back earlier claims of slashing as much as $2 trillion.
Musk initially projected DOGE would deliver $2 trillion in savings by targeting government waste, fraud and abuse. That figure was halved to $1 trillion earlier this year, but Musk walked it back again at Thursday’s Cabinet meeting, saying the revised $150 billion projection will “result in better services for the American people” and ensure federal spending “in a way that is sensible and fair and good.”
“I’m excited to announce we anticipate saving in FY ’26 from a reduction of waste and fraud a reduction of $150 billion dollars,” Musk said. “And some of it is just absurd, like, people getting unemployment insurance who haven’t been born yet. I mean, I think anyone can appreciate — I mean, come on, that’s just crazy.”
The announcement marks the latest in a string of revised projections from Musk, who has become the face of President Donald Trump’s aggressive federal efficiency agenda.
“Your people are fantastic,” the president responded. “In fact, hopefully they’ll stay around for the long haul. We’d like to keep as many as we can. They’re great — smart, sharp, finding things that nobody would have thought of.”
Musk originally floated the $2 trillion figure during campaign appearances last fall.
“I think we could do at least $2 trillion,” Musk said at the Madison Square Garden campaign rally in November. “At the end of the day, you’re being taxed — all government spending is taxation … Your money is being wasted, and the Department of Government Efficiency is going to fix that.”
By January, he softened expectations to a “really quite achievable” $1 trillion target before downsizing that figure again this week.
“Our goal is to reduce the deficit by a trillion dollars,” Musk told Fox News’ Bret Baier “Looked at in total federal spending, to drop the federal spending from $7 trillion to $6 trillion by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse … Which seems really quite achievable.”
DOGE’s website, which tracks cost-saving initiatives and contract cancellations, currently calculates total federal savings at $150 billion.
2025 Federal Election
Taxpayers urge federal party leaders to drop home sale reporting to CRA

Party leaders must clarify position on home equity tax
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on all party leaders to prove they’re against home equity taxes by pledging to immediately remove the Canada Revenue Agency reporting requirement on the sale of primary residences.
“Canadians rely on the sale of their homes to pay for their golden years,” said Carson Binda, CTF B.C. Director. “After the government spent hundreds of thousands of dollars flirting with home taxes, taxpayers need party leaders to prove they won’t tax our homes by removing the CRA reporting requirement.”
Right now, the profit you make from selling your home is exempt from the capital gains tax. However, in 2016, the federal government mandated that Canadians report the sale of their homes to the CRA, even though it’s tax exempt.
The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation also spent at least $450,000 to study and influence public opinion in favour of home equity taxes. The report recommended a home equity tax targeting the “housing wealth windfalls gained by many homeowners while they sleep and watch TV.”
“A home equity tax would hurt seniors saving for their golden years and make homes more expensive for younger generations,” Binda said. “If the federal government isn’t planning on imposing a home equity tax, then Canadians shouldn’t be forced to report the sale of their home to the CRA.”
-
Business2 days ago
Stocks soar after Trump suspends tariffs
-
COVID-192 days ago
Biden Admin concealed report on earliest COVID cases from 2019
-
Business2 days ago
Scott Bessent Says Trump’s Goal Was Always To Get Trading Partners To Table After Major Pause Announcement
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Researchers Link China’s Intelligence and Elite Influence Arms to B.C. Government, Liberal Party, and Trudeau-Appointed Senator
-
Business1 day ago
Timeline: Panama Canal Politics, Policy, and Tensions
-
COVID-191 day ago
Fauci, top COVID officials have criminal referral requests filed against them in 7 states
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
RCMP memo warns of Chinese interference on Canadian university campuses to affect election
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
The status quo in Canadian politics isn’t sustainable for national unity