Speaking to CNBC’s Becky Quick on July 15, the Oracle of Omaha said, “It’s tough to find values when everybody is preferring gambling.” It’s a blunt line from an investor who has spent six decades separating businesses worth owning from stocks people are simply betting on.

While Buffett wasn’t talking about Canada, the same U.S. mega-cap stocks he’s warning about make up a growing share of the index-tracking ETFs millions of Canadians hold inside their registered accounts. Here’s what the warning means and what Canadian investors should actually do about it.

What Buffett is really warning about

Buffett draws a sharp line between investing — buying a business because its economics justify the price — and speculation, or purchasing because the price has been rising. His “gambling” comment falls on the speculation side of that binary.

Berkshire Hathaway was a net seller of stocks for 14 consecutive quarters before reversing course in the second quarter of 2026. That reversal isn’t a call to buy everything; Buffett has said Berkshire would rather hold less cash and more stock, but only once it finds a business worth the price.

Why the valuation numbers back him up

Two gauges support Buffett’s caution. The Buffett indicator, which compares total U.S. stock market value to gross domestic product, sits near 238% — the highest level ever recorded. Buffett himself warned in 2001 that investors were “playing with fire” once that ratio neared 200%, a level last seen near the peak of the dot-com bubble and months before a bear market began in 2021.

The S&P 500’s Shiller cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio, which weighs prices against a decade of inflation-adjusted earnings, is above 41 — a level briefly touched only once before, near the top of the tech bubble. High valuations don’t guarantee a crash and can persist for years. But they typically shrink the returns investors can expect from stocks bought at those prices.

The catch for Canadians holding S&P 500 ETFs

Canadian-listed funds like the Vanguard S&P 500 Index ETF (VFV), the BMO S&P 500 Index ETF (ZSP) and the iShares Core S&P 500 Index ETF (XUS) are among the most common holdings inside Canadian TFSAs and RRSPs. This is largely because they offer access to sectors barely represented on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX).

That access comes with a catch. The so-called Magnificent Seven — Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Alphabet, Meta, Amazon and Tesla — now make up roughly 30% to 33% of the index’s total weighting. A Canadian who assumes their S&P 500 ETF spreads risk across 500 companies is, in practice, making a concentrated bet on a handful of expensive technology stocks.

Even Buffett found an exception

Buffett’s caution about the broader market didn’t stop Berkshire from buying. Its biggest purchase in the second quarter was Alphabet, which Buffett confirmed he chose personally. At the time, Alphabet traded at roughly 16.8 times forward earnings, well below the S&P 500’s roughly 19.9 times — the cheapest of the Magnificent Seven by that measure.

The lesson isn’t to sell and hide. An expensive market rewards selectivity: Fewer, better-priced holdings instead of broad, indiscriminate buying.

What Canadian investors should do now

Buffett’s warning isn’t a signal to abandon a TFSA or RRSP built around index investing — it’s a reminder to know what’s actually inside that index.

• Check your S&P 500 ETF’s top holdings before assuming it’s diversified — most fund providers publish this online
• Avoid putting all new contributions into U.S. mega-cap tech; consider adding Canadian or international equities to spread the risk
• Keep contributing on a regular schedule instead of trying to time a pullback — dollar-cost averaging softens the impact of a downturn either way
• Revisit your risk tolerance if a 20% to 30% drop in a concentrated position would derail a near-term goal, such as a home purchase or retirement date

None of this means a crash is coming. It means that at a Buffett indicator of 238% and a CAPE ratio above 41, the price a Canadian investor pays today matters more than it has in years — and it’s worth checking exactly what’s inside the fund doing the buying.

Barton spent 30 years climbing the ranks at McKinsey and Company, a top global management consulting firm that advises businesses, governments and non-profits on strategy, operations and technology. He was running this consulting giant as its global managing partner before Ottawa sent him to Beijing as Canada’s ambassador to China. Now, at 63 years old, Barton will assume a new title: Chair of Invest in Canada.

And the stakes are real — for Canada and for Canadians’ wallets.

Carney’s government wants to catalyze $1 trillion in total investment in Canada over the next five years, including $500 billion in new private-sector capital. And this ambitious goal comes at the exact moment US tariffs are squeezing Canadian exporters, manufacturers and consumers. But if Carney’s bet pays off, it could mean new jobs and projects in critical minerals, energy and infrastructure. If it falls short, taxpayers are left funding an agency with little to show for it.

What actually changed at Invest in Canada

Carney announced the shake-up on August 31, naming Barton as the part-time board chair for a three-year term. At the same time, private equity investor Gurinder Grewal was named as full-time chief executive officer for a term of five years.

Barton and Grewal replace outgoing Chief Executive Officer Laurel Broten and Board Chair Karl Tabbakh — and just two weeks ahead of Carney’s inaugural Canada Investment Summit in Toronto on September 14 and 15.

Invest in Canada was created in 2018 to attract foreign direct investment. As of 2025, foreign investment in Canada hit $96.8 billion, its highest annual level since 2007. Plus, the stock of foreign investment reached $1.6 trillion, up 6.9% from 2024. Ottawa wants Barton and Grewal to build on these previous successes with a new, more ambitious mandate, working alongside the government’s Major Projects Office.

Why this matters to Canadians right now

Carney’s announcement — and plans — matter to all Canadians. Foreign investment isn’t just an abstract economic indicator; it’s tied to jobs, wages and the projects that get built in Canadian communities. Now, with the trade war disrupting exports and raising household costs, Ottawa is betting that redirecting global capital toward energy, critical minerals and infrastructure will help cushion current economic blows. For workers in those sectors, a successful push could mean new hiring — which means jobs, stability and a growing Canadian economy. Even for Canadians not directly involved in target sectors, this push to build investment alliances with non-US partners helps Canada’s economy stand on its own outside that single trading relationship south of the border.

A resume with baggage

But Barton’s appointment isn’t without controversy.

He was Canada’s ambassador to China from 2019 to 2021, a posting dominated by the ‘Two Michaels’ crisis, when China detained Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor for more than 1,000 days in what was widely seen as retaliation for Canada’s arrest of a Huawei executive.

After leaving the ambassador post, Barton became chair of mining giant Rio Tinto, a move that raised questions over the company’s extensive business ties in China. He was also called to testify before the House of Commons in 2023 over consulting fees earned under the Justin Trudeau government. During that time, the federal government paid more than $100 million in consulting fees to McKinsey.

As a result, critics, including Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, are highlighting Barton’s past possible transgressions. Poilievre took to social media last week to state: “Dominic Barton is the man who ran McKinsey while the firm profited from helping Purdue Pharma ‘supercharge’ the opioid crisis; who chaired Trudeau’s economic advisory council while McKinsey’s federal contracts exploded thirty-fold to over $200m, contracts the Auditor General later found broke the rules. Now he will help insiders get billions in handouts, bailouts, and carve-outs, paid for by you.”

There were also unanswered questions regarding the decision to replace Broten, who was in her fourth year of a five-year term. Money.ca’s requests for comment were left unanswered.

What to watch before you believe the headline number

While the headlines sound promising, Canadians already know that these big investment targets are easy to announce and hard to verify.

Before crediting any economic turnaround to Carney’s decision for leadership change, Canadians should watch three things:

1. How much of the promised $500 billion in private capital turns into signed, named projects?
2. Are job announcements tied to specific communities and sectors rather than national totals?
3. How will Invest in Canada report its results after the September summit, where Carney and top investors will pitch Canada as a stable alternative amid the trade war?

Bottom line for Barton and Grewal

The test for Barton and Grewal isn’t the size of the investment funds Ottawa attached to their mandate — it’s whether that number turns into shovels in the ground and sustained economic momentum in Canadian communities.

For Canadians watching their own job security and cost of living through the trade war, the more useful habit is the same one that applies to any big financial promise: track the follow-through, not the announcement.

It’s a made-for-headlines splurge, and most Canadians will never order it. But the price tag is a useful jumping-off point for a more everyday money question: How do you decide whether an indulgent, one-off treat is actually worth it, without wrecking your budget or reaching for a credit card you can’t pay off?

Here’s what’s actually in Toronto’s $1,000 cocktail, why hotels price experiences this way and a simple framework for deciding whether your own splurge makes financial sense.

What’s actually in the $1,000 cocktail?

The drink, called the Final Cut XO Sazerac, was created by dbar assistant manager Holly Forgrave using Rémy Martin XO Cognac and 16-year-old Lagavulin single malt Scotch whisky, finished tableside with absinthe, Peychaud’s bitters, lemon oil and sugar. On their own, those two bottles retail for roughly $425 combined — a fraction of the $1,000 price tag.

The rest of the cost comes from the experience built around the cocktail: A ride in the hotel’s Rolls-Royce, complete with a roof lined with tiny lights made to look like constellations, good for any destination within about two kilometres of the hotel.

Why does a hotel bar price a drink like this?

It’s tempting to assume the price is just markup for markup’s sake, but that undersells what’s being sold. Luxury hotels use limited-time, high-price experiences like this one to generate buzz during a high-traffic event — TIFF runs September 10 to 20 this year and fills Yorkville’s hotels and restaurants with visitors willing to pay a premium. The cocktail isn’t really competing with a $16 martini down the street; it’s competing with other splashy experiences guests could spend that money on instead, from a spa day to a private dining table.

That’s a useful distinction for any Canadian eyeing a big-ticket treat: The question usually isn’t whether the ingredients are worth the price; it’s whether the whole experience is worth it to you specifically.

What a $1,000 splurge costs you beyond the receipt

Any one-time splurge has an opportunity cost — what that money could have done instead. In this hypothetical example, $1,000 put into a TFSA today and left to grow at an assumed 6% average annual return would be worth roughly $3,200 in 20 years. That doesn’t mean a splurge is never worth it; it means the real cost of a treat like this is the future value of that money, not just the number on the receipt.

For most Canadians, the more relevant comparison isn’t a couple’s TIFF cocktail — it’s the small, recurring splurges that add up over a year: dinners out, concert tickets, weekend trips. The same math applies at a smaller scale.

How to decide if a splurge is worth it for you

Financial planners commonly suggest budgeting frameworks that split take-home income into needs, wants and savings, often in roughly a 50/30/20 split. A splurge like this one would come out of the “wants” category, and a few questions can help you decide if it fits:

• Can you pay for it in full, right away, without touching money set aside for rent, debt payments or an emergency fund? If a treat needs to go on a credit card carrying interest, the true cost climbs fast — carrying $1,000 in credit card debt at a typical double-digit interest rate can add hundreds of dollars before it’s paid off.
• Does it fit inside your normal discretionary spending for the month, or would it mean skipping other things you’d rather have? A one-off splurge that replaces a month of smaller wants is a very different decision than one that’s stacked on top.
• Will you actually remember it? Experiences tied to a specific, unrepeatable moment — a TIFF weekend, a milestone birthday — tend to hold their value better than an impulse buy that fades within days.

Bottom line

Most Canadians will never book a $1,000 cocktail, and that’s fine — the drink was never really the point. What it offers is a clear, oversized example of a decision people make on a smaller scale all the time: whether a treat is worth what it costs, both today and down the road. Running any splurge through that same filter — can I pay for it outright, does it fit my normal spending, will it actually matter to me later — works just as well for a $40 dinner as it does for a $1,000 night out in a Rolls-Royce.

Following news of Parton’s passing, an immediate wave of public generosity washed over local affiliates of her flagship book-gifting initiative, the Imagination Library. For organizers who have spent years quietly working to keep children supplied with free literature, the emotional groundswell has brought both tears and vital financial relief.

Honoring a legend through the pages of a book

Three local programs in Saskatchewan reported a sudden uptick in direct memorial donations as community members sought a tangible way to celebrate Parton’s decades of quiet, transformative philanthropy.

“She wanted to give every opportunity to anyone despite their social background,” Candace Odishaw, who leads the Nutana Rotary Club branch of the Imagination Library in Saskatoon, told CBC News.

The global initiative sends a free, high-quality, age-appropriate book directly to registered children every month from birth until their fifth birthday, no matter their family income. Parton founded the charity in 1995 as a personal tribute to her father, a smart and hardworking man who had never learned to read or write. What began as a small dream in East Tennessee grew into an international movement that has gifted hundreds of millions of books to young minds.

A quiet lifesaver for local communities

Across the province, more than 2,800 children are currently enrolled in the program, and local initiatives have distributed more than 22,000 books to date, according to figures provided by Odishaw to CBC News.

The Canadian branch of the Imagination Library celebrated 20 years of operations earlier this summer, according to The StarPhoenix.

For many families, receiving a book in the mail stamped with Parton’s vision brings pure magic into the living room, fostering bedtime reading routines that alter a child’s educational trajectory forever.

The ongoing struggle behind the magic

Yet even amidst an outpouring of love, local program directors face a bittersweet reality. While the international foundation selects the books and manages high-level distribution, local affiliates are entirely responsible for raising every dollar needed to cover printing and postage costs for children in their own backyards.

The financial demand frequently outstrips what local volunteers can raise. Earlier this year, when the Saskatoon Nutana Rotary Club reopened its enrollment drive, the response was overwhelming. Within just three days, 300 applications flooded in, forcing organizers to pause online registrations to avoid promising books they could not afford to mail out.

Keeping the dream alive for every child

The recent surge in memorial giving offers a vital lifeline, but organizers stress that the work is far from finished. Monthly subscriptions require predictable, ongoing support to ensure no child is dropped from the list before their fifth birthday.

As fans continue to mourn the loss of one of the world’s most beloved entertainers, local advocates hope the momentum generated by Parton’s memory will turn into a lasting commitment from donors. For volunteers like Odishaw, every dollar raised ensures that Parton’s legacy will not just live on in her music, but in the bedtime stories read to children across Saskatchewan for generations to come.

The findings, published in a joint study by McGill University Professor David Wachsmuth and University of Waterloo postdoctoral researcher Cloé St-Hilaire, provide concrete empirical proof linking short-term rental restrictions to reduced rental inflation.

“We found absolute, iron-clad evidence that short-term rental regulations put downward pressure on rent,” Wachsmuth, the study’s lead researcher, said in a statement. “Lots of things cause housing to be expensive, but this is low-hanging fruit to manage those costs.”

The City of Vancouver acted as a pioneer in 2018 when it limited short-term listings strictly to primary residences, preventing hosts from running secondary units like basement suites or laneway houses as full-time vacation rentals. British Columbia expanded similar restrictions provincewide in 2024.

A measurable drop in monthly rent prices

While housing experts and residents long assumed short-term platforms drove up prices by removing long-term housing supply, the researchers set out to verify whether restrictions actually cooled local markets.

By comparing cities with primary residence restrictions against municipalities that allowed unrestricted vacation listings, the study revealed a clear divergence in rental price trajectories.

Before the rules came in, rents in cities with lots of vacation rentals were rising about as fast as they were elsewhere in Canada. But once cities started limiting short-term rentals to people’s primary homes, rent increases began to slow compared with places that didn’t have those restrictions.

Key findings from the McGill University study include:

• First-year impact: Rents were 1.7% lower — or roughly $24 lower per month — one year after a municipality implemented strict short-term rental rules compared to what they would have been without regulation.
• Compound savings: The price-dampening effect accumulates over time as rules remain active for 3 to 4 years.
• Direct tenant savings: By 2023, strict short-term rental regulations saved Canadian tenants an average of $55 a month in regulated areas.
• National impact: Across all regulated markets, these restrictions saved Canadian renters a total of $192.4 million each month in 2023.

In short: Without Vancouver’s early adoption of short-term rental limits, local tenants would be paying significantly more in monthly rent today.

Regional spillover effects

The study highlights that housing markets operate regionally rather than in isolation. Consequently, the financial relief extended beyond the borders of strict municipalities and into adjacent, unregulated areas.

While tenants in regulated markets saved an average of $55 a month by 2023, renters in neighbouring municipalities that did not adopt restrictions still experienced savings of around $40 a month. The researchers pointed to Greater Montreal as a prime example of this spillover effect: Strict rules implemented within Montreal proper helped cool rent growth in nearby municipalities, like Laval and Longueuil, that did not implement short-term rental rules. For the researchers, this demonstrates how municipal regulations can stabilize housing costs across an entire metropolitan area even if regulations only apply in target areas.

The low-hanging fruit of urban housing policy

While the policy yields tangible savings, researchers emphasize that curbing vacation listings alone will not resolve Canada’s broader housing affordability crisis.

Wachsmuth emphasized that short-term rentals are not the only factor driving overall rental costs. Significantly expanding the supply of dedicated rental housing would have a far greater impact on bringing prices down, but adding new housing stock at scale remains difficult and time-consuming for cities.

Restricting vacation platforms, by comparison, represents the low-hanging fruit of municipal policy. It offers local governments a straightforward regulatory tool to deliver immediate, measurable relief to renters while broader supply initiatives slowly take shape.

According to research commissioned by Mydoh, 87% of Canadian parents say building money management skills is extremely or very important for their child, with half (50%) describing it as extremely important.

However, wanting children to be financially capable and actually handing over responsibility remain two different challenges. The same survey revealed that 87% of parents have at least one hesitation about granting their child greater financial autonomy. This disconnect highlights a common parenting trap: Assuming kids will pick up financial judgment once they reach adulthood, rather than learning through practical experience while the stakes remain low.

For families navigating this transition, the back-to-school season provides a natural opportunity to start small and gradually build financial independence.

Why Canadian parents hesitate to hand over control

Parental concerns tend to center around several common risks:

• 49% worry their children will spend money too quickly
• 42% fear poor spending choices
• 33% worry about online scams or unauthorized purchases
• 23% feel their children lack the maturity for financial responsibility

“Parents understand that money management is a skill their kids need for life — but knowing that and feeling comfortable handing over responsibility are two very different things,” Angelique de Montbrun, Chief Executive Officer of Mydoh, said in a statement.

“The intention isn’t to give kids unlimited freedom with money. It’s to give them the right amount of independence, with the right amount of guidance, so they can learn from real decisions while the stakes are still low.”

Where the practice gap shows up

The survey indicates that Canadian parents feel comfortable granting autonomy in lower-stakes scenarios:

• 67% expect their child to save up for a goal during the school year
• 61% expect them to manage their own pocket money
• 57% expect them to handle small, independent purchases

That comfort drops significantly when financial complexity increases. Only 22% of parents expect their child to manage part of the back-to-school shopping budget and just 13% expect them to make online purchases independently. Furthermore, nearly one in five parents (19%) admit finding it difficult to step back and allow a financial mistake to happen.

Building financial independence step-by-step

Vanessa Bowen, a Chartered Professional Accountant and founder of personal finance coaching platform Mint Worthy, said in a statement that financial independence is built incrementally rather than granted all at once.

“Parents can start with decisions that feel manageable and gradually give their kids more ownership as their confidence and judgment grow,” Bowen explained.

To implement this approach effectively, consider these practical steps:

• Start with low-stakes decisions: Allow children to practice comparing prices, evaluating wants versus needs, or managing a small weekly lunch budget before expanding their responsibilities.
• Allow small financial mistakes: If a child makes an impulse buy or overspends, resist the urge to immediately cover the shortfall. Use the moment to discuss what happened and how to adjust next time.
• Delegate a specific budget segment: Assign ownership of a defined expense — such as buying specific school supplies or extracurricular gear — rather than managing the entire shopping trip.
• Establish clear guardrails: Agree on spending limits, checking-in expectations, and rules for identifying suspicious websites or online offers before granting digital spending access.

Setting up the school year for success

The survey data shows that while most Canadian children are already saving and tracking pocket money, progress often stalls before reaching real budget management or online purchasing.

Parents do not need to grant complete financial freedom immediately. Assigning a defined dollar amount, setting clear boundaries, and allowing minor spending missteps now helps prevent costlier mistakes later in adulthood.

Essential skills — such as comparing unit prices, balancing a budget, and recovering from poor purchases — require repetition to take hold. Introducing one defined area of financial responsibility this school year provides a safe, structured way to build lifelong financial resilience.

The federal tax agency announced the change as part of a series of updates aimed at streamlining the application process and reducing processing delays. The deadline marks the end of a grace period for older versions of Form T2201, the official Disability Tax Credit application.

Here is what applicants, family members and healthcare providers need to know to ensure their submissions are not turned away.

Older versions of Form T2201 no longer accepted

Beginning Sept. 8, the CRA will automatically decline any paper application that uses a version of Form T2201 printed before 2023.

The agency updated the document to capture clearer medical information and streamline internal reviews. Applications submitted on older versions will be returned unprocessed, forcing applicants to obtain a new form, arrange another consultation with a medical professional and re-submit.

Canadians who prefer or need to submit a paper application must download the latest version directly from the Canada.ca website before bringing it to their doctor or nurse practitioner for certification. Completed paper forms must then be sent by mail to the applicant’s designated CRA tax centre.

Online portal restricted for new applications

The rule shift follows another major procedural change that took effect earlier this summer. As of July 14, the CRA removed the option for individuals to upload initial Disability Tax Credit applications through the general “submit documents” tool in their online CRA accounts.

The “submit documents” function is now reserved for cases where the CRA has explicitly requested additional supporting information for an existing application.

Applicants who attempt to upload new application packages through that channel will find the option unavailable. In cases where the CRA asks for follow-up documentation, it will issue a letter containing a specific reference number that must be used during the upload process.

Digital application process encouraged

To avoid missing sections or submitting outdated paperwork, the CRA is urging applicants to use its digital application portal.

The online application tool automatically updates to reflect current tax requirements, helping users skip irrelevant sections while ensuring required details are not left blank. The digital process allows both the applicant and their healthcare provider to complete their respective parts online, which significantly accelerates processing times compared to traditional mail.

The Disability Tax Credit is non-refundable and helps individuals with disabilities, or their supporting family members, reduce the amount of income tax they owe. Approval for the credit can also unlock access to other federal and provincial programs, including the Registered Disability Savings Plan and the Child Disability Benefit.

Applicants can verify they have the correct form version or access the digital application portal by visiting the Canada Revenue Agency website.

New booking data from Corporate Traveller Canada shows business air travel to the US rose 4.8% year over year between January and July 2026. This increase occurred even as the political relationship between the two countries grew more strained — Ottawa recently announced dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs against the US as a new trade war heats up.

For Canadian companies with customers, suppliers or operations south of the border, the reason is straightforward: a trade dispute doesn’t dissolve a business relationship the way it may cancel a vacation.

Why a boycott mindset doesn’t extend to business trips

Chris Lynes, managing director of Corporate Traveller Canada, told Money.ca that leisure travel and business travel respond to disparate pressures. “Business travel is different from leisure. You can change a vacation fairly easily, but if you have a customer, supplier or operation in the US, that relationship doesn’t just disappear,” he said.

That distinction shows up in the monthly numbers. After dipping 1.4% in February and 3.2% in March, US-bound business bookings climbed 9.6% in April, 10.3% in May and 10.6% in June, before easing to a 5.6% increase in July, compared with the same months a year earlier.

Which industries are still crossing the border

Not every sector is travelling to the US at the same pace. Lynes points to manufacturing, finance and banking, technology and mining as the industries showing the most consistent demand for US business trips. For small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in these fields, the US often remains an essential customer, supplier or operating market — something a political dispute is unlikely to change quickly.

Capacity is shifting even though demand isn’t

While bookings have held up, airlines have been more cautious. Capacity on US routes from Canada fell 10.1% year over year in the first quarter of 2026, even as capacity to Europe, Asia and within Canada increased over the same period. By the third quarter, US capacity was growing again, but at a slower pace than domestic, European and Asian routes.

For business travellers, that gap between steady demand and shrinking capacity can mean fewer flight options, less schedule flexibility and, in some cases, higher fares — even if a company’s underlying relationship with the US hasn’t changed.

Should Canadian SMEs change how they travel?

Lynes cautions against reading too much into a few months of data. “It’s too early to know, and we don’t want to call a trend before the data shows one.” He adds that Corporate Traveller Canada is watching for three signals that would point to a real shift: businesses travelling less overall, becoming more selective about which trips are worth taking or changing how far in advance they book.

What to do now if your business relies on US travel

For SMEs that have business ties to the US, the trade dispute doesn’t remove the need to manage those relationships in person. It can change how that travel gets planned. A few practical steps:

• Book further ahead where possible, since reduced capacity on some US routes can mean fewer seats and higher last-minute fares
• Prioritize trips tied to revenue-generating relationships, such as key customers or suppliers, over discretionary travel
• Build in flexibility, since fares and schedules may grow more volatile if capacity keeps shifting
• Track trends on the specific routes your business uses regularly, rather than relying on general headlines about the trade dispute

The data suggests Canadian businesses are compartmentalizing — pulling back on discretionary US spending while still showing up in person where the relationship demands it. As Lynes puts it, companies are “operating in a more uncertain environment, but they still need to get business done.” For now, the smartest move for most SMEs isn’t necessarily to cut US travel — it’s to plan it more deliberately.

The size and structure of the scam — a single, unregistered “investment firm” quietly collecting money for four years before collapsing — is a reminder of how hard it can be to spot these setups from the outside, and how much investors rely on a handful of basic checks to protect themselves.

Here’s what the police say took place, what regulators had already flagged about the man involved and the concrete steps Canadians can take to check whether an advisor or investment opportunity is legitimate.

How this scam allegedly played out

The RCMP’s Federal Policing Northwest Region Integrated Market Enforcement Team (IMET) arrested and charged Craig Michael Thompson, 49, of Calgary, on July 31. The unit alleged that between March 2020 and April 2024, Thompson misappropriated more than $164 million from over 1,000 investors through his company, Black Box Management Corp., while representing himself as a one-man investment firm.

Investors were told their money would be used for day trading and received weekly email updates showing consistent gains. However, investigators later determined that the content of those updates was plagiarized from online sources, and that of the $164 million that came in, more than $163 million was allegedly moved out to other accounts — including Thompson’s personal trading account and an investment in a US-based company. Thompson was also purportedly linked to three related businesses: Intelsense Investment Corp., Invader Management Ltd. and Attebyte Investment Corp. He faces two counts of fraud and one count of laundering the proceeds of crime, and is scheduled to appear in Alberta’s Court of Justice in Calgary on September 3, 2026.

Regulators had already flagged this case

This isn’t the first time Thompson’s business has drawn regulatory scrutiny. In August 2025, the Alberta Securities Commission sanctioned Thompson and two of his companies after finding they’d raised $150 million from investors on the promise of day-trading returns, ultimately lost close to US$15 million in unsuccessful trades and used most of the remaining money to pay the purported returns to other investors. The commission ordered the companies to disgorge millions of dollars and pay administrative penalties. Cynthia Campbell, the ASC’s director of enforcement, described it as “a classic Ponzi scheme, dressed up as a modern trading success story.”

The red flags that tend to show up in cases like this

Ponzi schemes rely on investors not looking too closely, but a few patterns show up again and again in schemes like this one:

• Returns that are unusually steady or high, even when markets are volatile
• One person controlling both the trading and the reporting, with no independent, third-party account statements
• Pressure to reinvest gains rather than withdraw them
• A firm or individual that isn’t registered with a provincial securities regulator

None of these proves fraud on its own, but together they’re a reasonable trigger to ask harder questions before investing more money.

How to check if an advisor or investment is legitimate

Before investing with any individual or firm, Canadians can use the Canadian Securities Administrators’ National Registration Search to confirm whether that person or entity is registered to sell securities or give investment advice in their province or territory. The same tool also shows whether a registrant has any disciplinary history. Anyone trading securities or offering investment advice in Canada is required to be registered unless a specific exemption applies, and registration means the person or business meets minimum qualification standards.

It’s also worth asking directly: who holds my money, and can I get a statement from that custodian independent of my advisor? A legitimate investment will have paperwork from a bank, brokerage or trust company — not just an email from the person managing it.

What happens next

Thompson’s case is now before the courts, and the allegations against him have not been proven. For Canadians who believe they may have been affected by this specific case, or who suspect they’ve encountered a similar scheme, the RCMP encourages contacting local police or the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre. For anyone about to hand money to a new advisor or firm, the more useful takeaway is upstream of any fraud case: a five-minute registration check, before money changes hands, is the simplest safeguard available.

The provincial government released its Data Centre Framework to guide investment, safeguard Canadian data sovereignty and protect the domestic power grid during a period of escalating trade friction with Washington.

The policy outlines six guiding principles for future projects: Canadian ownership, Canadian data sovereignty, Saskatchewan job creation, industry experience, centralized provincial intake and self-supplied power generation.

Provincial framework emphasizes Canadian data sovereignty

“The reality is that AI is here, and it will play a significant role in our lives and our economy,” said Jeremy Harrison, the minister responsible for Crown utilities, speaking at an AI data centre build site near Regina. “The real question is where the infrastructure that powers AI will be built and whose laws will govern it.”

Harrison stressed that if these facilities are not constructed domestically, the infrastructure and corresponding capital investment will move to the United States or other international jurisdictions.

“Our government chooses Canada,” Harrison said.

Under the new strategy, future proponents must be headquartered and owned in Canada, ensuring that sensitive artificial intelligence computing infrastructure remains governed by Canadian privacy and regulatory laws.

Grid constraints require projects to supply own power

To prevent added strain on the provincial electrical grid and safeguard utility rates for existing customers, the framework mandates that new developments must supply their own off-grid power generation. Proponents will also be responsible for funding their own infrastructure, completing environmental assessments and utilizing sustainable technologies such as closed-loop water cooling systems.

The province is currently reviewing more than 30 applications under the framework, following the initial anchor project announced earlier this year: a 300-megawatt, $1.7-billion AI data centre campus being built by Bell Canada in the Rural Municipality of Sherwood.

Developed in partnership with the George Gordon First Nation, the Bell project is projected to generate up to $12 billion in economic activity and create more than 1,600 jobs. Bell Canada’s development will be the last project permitted to connect directly to the SaskPower grid before the off-grid self-supply requirement takes effect.

Foreign tech giants push for access as province holds line on Canadian ownership

Commercial interest in Western Canadian data capacity is accelerating rapidly from both sides of the border. Public registry records reveal that major international firms such as Amazon Web Services Canada Inc. have actively lobbied provincial officials to secure contracts for cloud-based services and infrastructure support.

Despite intense interest from foreign tech giants, provincial officials maintain that keeping infrastructure under domestic ownership remains non-negotiable.

By enforcing strict Canadian ownership requirements while requiring proponents to bring their own power, Saskatchewan is positioning itself to capture massive AI investment on its own terms — ensuring local grid stability and domestic data security even as trade uncertainty across the southern border grows.

For Canadians trying to support local producers — especially with cross-border trade tensions pushing more shoppers to buy Canadian — a mismatch like this is more than an inconvenience. It’s a reminder that a front-of-package claim isn’t always the full story, and that reading past the sticker can be the difference between getting what you paid for and not.

Here’s what happened, why it can even occur at a store known for consistent supply chains and how Canadians can double-check origin claims before they hit the checkout line.

What happened, and why it’s not as simple as a sticker

When Thompson returned to the store to inquire about the conflicting labels, staff could not provide an immediate explanation. A follow-up visit by CTV News reporters to another regional Costco location showed identical short rib packages correctly labeled, with Canadian-origin and American-origin cuts displayed side-by-side in the meat counter.

Because large grocers frequently source meat from multiple domestic and international suppliers, side-by-side stocking is standard practice. However, this environment also means labelling errors — such as accidentally placing a Canadian sticker on an imported cut — can occur on the shop floor.

Why a ‘Canadian’ claim on the front doesn’t always mean national origin

Part of the confusion comes from Canada’s own labelling system. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) distinguishes between claims about where an animal was raised and grades that describe quality. “Canadian Beef” refers to origin, while a grade such as “Canada AAA” speaks to attributes like marbling and colour — not where the animal came from. A package can carry a Canada AAA grade stamp while the meat itself was raised and processed elsewhere, which is part of what made Thompson’s package so confusing at first glance.

The CFIA told CTV News that all label information, mandatory or voluntary, “must be accurate, truthful, and not misleading,” and it encourages Canadians to report suspected mislabelling through its food complaint web page.

How to check what you’re actually buying

Before adding a ‘Canadian’ beef, pork or produce item to your cart, a few extra seconds can save a surprise at home:

• Check both sides of the package — a front-facing origin claim should be confirmed by the wording on the back, not just a sticker
• Look for the specific phrase ‘Product of Canada’ or ‘Canadian Beef,’ rather than assuming a grade stamp like Canada AAA confirms origin
• Compare identical products on the shelf — if two packages of the same cut carry different origin claims, that’s worth taking a closer look before you buy
• Ask a staff member if a label looks inconsistent, and keep your receipt in case the answer changes once you get home

Sylvain Charlebois, a professor and food researcher at Dalhousie University, said retailers are under pressure to visibly promote Canadian products right now. “There is clearly an effort to showcase Canadian products, including at the meat counter,” he told CTV News. He added that with trade tensions running high, shoppers want clarity — not confusion — about where their groceries come from.

What to do if a label looks wrong

If a package’s claims don’t match, Canadians can bring it back to the store for a refund and report the concern to the CFIA directly through its food complaint web page. A photo of both sides of the package can help make the case — Thompson’s own experience showed that in-store staff may not have an immediate answer.

The bottom line

Buying Canadian is a values-based decision for a growing number of shoppers, and that decision only works if labels can be trusted. Until every retailer tightens quality control at the point of packaging, the safest move is to treat a front-of-package claim as a starting point, not a guarantee — check the back, compare shelf-mates and report what doesn’t add up.

Some of that bullion left a Canadian vault. But the Bank of Canada hasn’t held an ounce of monetary gold since 2016, making it the only country among the Group of Seven (G7) still holding none, according to The Globe and Mail.

That gap matters more than it looks. If central banks around the world are quietly repositioning gold for a crisis, and Canada’s own central bank isn’t part of that trend, the closest thing this country has to a gold reserve is what individual Canadians choose to hold themselves.

Here’s what the Dutch move signals, why Canada’s approach is different and three practical ways to add gold exposure to a TFSA or RRSP without overreacting to a single headline.

Why central banks are suddenly reshuffling their gold

DNB said the transfer, carried out between March and August, was designed to make its reserves easier to sell quickly in a crisis. Gold held in London can be traded faster than if it’s sitting in Ottawa or New York, according to CTV News. DNB president Olaf Sleijpen said the goal was to strengthen the bank’s “resilience and preparedness,” not to shrink the country’s overall gold stockpile.

The Netherlands isn’t alone. France made a similar move earlier this year, shifting gold held in the U.S. back to Paris, Mining.com.au reported. Analysts point to a mix of factors, including tension tied to the conflict between the U.S. and Iran, and a broader shift toward storage locations that are closer to home or in deep, liquid markets like London.

Why Canada’s empty vault is the outlier

The Bank of Canada began selling its gold in the 1970s and finished the job in 2016, arguing that gold was an illiquid, non-yielding asset better replaced with interest-bearing foreign bonds, The Globe and Mail reported. The sell-off predates the current wave of central bank gold buying and played out across multiple governments

The tradeoff is straightforward: Canada’s reserves are more liquid day to day, but the country has no bullion cushion if confidence in currency or bond markets is what comes under pressure in a crisis. That’s a policy choice for Ottawa. For individual Canadians, it means nobody is holding gold on their behalf.

How Canadians can add their own gold exposure

For most people, the simplest route is a gold exchange-traded fund (ETF) held inside a Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA), Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) or First Home Savings Account (FHSA). Physically backed funds such as the iShares Gold Bullion ETF (CGL) or Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS) track the price of bullion directly and are qualified investments in registered accounts, with management fees ranging from roughly 0.16% to 0.55%, depending on the fund.

Gold mining stocks, held individually or through an index fund, offer a different kind of exposure tied to company earnings rather than the metal itself.

Physical gold bars or coins can also go inside a self-directed RRSP, but only through a Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)-approved trustee and depository, and only if the metal is at least 99.5% pure. A Gold Maple Leaf coin qualifies; gold stored at home doesn’t.

What it costs to hedge and how much is reasonable

Gold pays no dividend or interest, and its price is volatile. Bullion is up close to 25% over the past year but has already swung several per cent in the past week alone. Held outside a registered account, any gain is taxed as a capital gain, with 50% of the profit added to that year’s taxable income.

Most advisors who recommend gold at all suggest keeping it to a modest slice of a portfolio, often in the 5% to 10% range, rather than treating it as a core holding.

The bottom line

One country moving its gold to London doesn’t change what belongs in a Canadian’s portfolio. But it’s a reasonable prompt to check whether a TFSA or RRSP has any inflation or crisis hedge at all. Before buying, set a cap — most Canadians shouldn’t go past 10% of total savings — pick a low-fee, physically backed fund over a mining-stock bet, and revisit the allocation annually rather than chasing a price that’s already climbed sharply this year.

It's a fair question.

Career paths aren't as predictable as they once were. Young Canadians are taking a wider range of routes into the workforce, and it can feel impossible to know what post-secondary education will look like by the time today's toddlers graduate.

That uncertainty may be one reason some families put off opening a Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP). In fact, only 53% of eligible Canadian families had opened an RESP account in 2019, according to Statistics Canada.

Many parents don't realize that RESPs are designed to support a wide range of post-secondary pathways. That means families don't need to have their child's education plans figured out before opening an account.

Beyond university: What RESPs actually fund

One of the biggest misconceptions about RESPs is that they're only meant for university students. They're not.

An RESP is a tax-advantaged savings account that helps families save for a child's post-secondary education. Eligible families may also receive government support through programs like the Canada Education Savings Grant (CESG) and Canada Learning Bond (CLB).

RESP funds can be used for many types of eligible post-secondary education and training. Depending on the program, that may include:

• Carpentry, plumbing and electrical apprenticeships, including some that can lead to Red Seal certification
• Nursing programs
• Culinary arts programs
• Heavy equipment operator training
• Some shorter certification and training programs

RESPs can also be used for eligible college, CEGEP and university programs. Generally, the student must be enrolled in a qualifying educational program at a designated post-secondary institution; program length and course-load requirements can vary depending on whether the student is studying full time or part time.

RESP funds are not limited to tuition, either. Depending on the type of education or training and the withdrawal rules that apply, they may help cover education-related expenses such as:

• Tuition and fees
• Books, tools and equipment
• Living expenses such as housing and food
• Transportation

If you're unsure whether a particular school or course qualifies, RESP providers such as Embark can help explain eligibility requirements, review whether a program may qualify and support the withdrawal process when the time comes.

Your child doesn't need to have their future mapped out today for an RESP to be useful. It's about creating opportunities for whatever path they choose later.

Why flexibility matters

If you're a new parent or raising a young family, you may find yourself wondering: What will my child's career look like when they're ready to enter the workforce? Will the path they take after high school look anything like the one previous generations followed?

New technologies, including AI, are changing the way we work. The skills employers need are evolving, and the path from education to a long-term career is becoming less linear.

At the same time, Canada's labour market needs are changing. The Canadian Occupational Projection System — which tracks projected job openings and labour market trends across hundreds of occupations — projects that more than 100 occupations could face shortages by 2033, including many in health, trades, transport and equipment operations.

An RESP isn't designed for one specific career path or education choice. It's designed to support different possibilities, whether your child wants to become an electrician, a lawyer, a hairstylist or a baker.

That flexibility applies to saving, too. Many families begin with small, regular contributions and adjust over time as their financial situation changes. Some parents start with as little as $5 to $10 a week or month, then increase their contributions when they can.

35 years to figure it out

Many parents assume they contribute to an RESP while their child is growing up, then have to use the funds when their child turns 18.

But an RESP can stay open for up to 35 years, and contributions can be made for up to 31 years. That gives families more time to save while leaving room for their child's plans to evolve.

A toddler who loves taking things apart might become an engineer — or an electrician. A teenager who isn't sure what they want to study may take time before choosing a program. Someone who completes one credential may decide later that they want to learn a new skill.

An RESP can adapt alongside those decisions:

• Taking a gap year? The RESP can stay open until your child is ready to continue their education.
• Changing direction? The funds can still be available if they choose a different eligible program later.
• Returning to school years down the road? An RESP may help support that next step.

As Andrew Lo, CEO of Embark, explains: "I've had many parents tell me their child finished their degree, then five years later decided they wanted a nursing diploma and used their leftover RESP money for that."

The value of an RESP is that it lets you support your child’s next step, even when you don’t know what that step will be today.

‘Free money’ regardless of their path

One reason some parents may hesitate to open an RESP is the assumption that government support is only useful for university-bound students.

That's not the case.

Government grants are available for eligible post-secondary education paths, including apprenticeships, skilled trades, colleges and universities. A student pursuing a trade can receive the same RESP grants as a student pursuing another eligible post-secondary program.

The Canada Education Savings Grant (CESG) can add 20 cents for every dollar contributed to an RESP, up to annual and lifetime limits:

• 20% match on RESP contributions
• Up to $500 per year in CESG (on up to $2,500 in annual contributions)
• Up to $7,200 per child over the lifetime of the RESP

Depending on household income, some families may also qualify for the Canada Learning Bond (CLB), which can provide up to $2,000 per child without requiring personal contributions. When you open an RESP account with Embark, the provider can apply for the CLB on your behalf if you are eligible.

Provincial programs may also provide additional support. For example, British Columbia offers an Education Savings Grant of $1,200 for eligible children between the ages of six and nine, and Quebec offers a similar program.

Opening an RESP earlier can give your savings more time to benefit from available government grants.

For example, a family that contributes $2,500 per year from birth until age 17 would contribute $36,250 of their own money and could receive up to $7,200 in CESG (assuming they qualify for the maximum amount), before any investment growth.

What if your child doesn't use the RESP?

Your RESP contributions always belong to you. If your child doesn't pursue an eligible program, you can withdraw your contributions, but government grants generally need to be returned.

Investment earnings may be withdrawn in some circumstances, subject to tax and applicable rules.

RESP providers such as Embark can help explain withdrawal options and answer questions when the time comes.

How to get started

You don't need to know exactly what your child's future will look like before opening an RESP. That's the point — an RESP is designed to give families options as those plans take shape.

You also don't need to start with a large contribution. Many families begin with what fits their budget, then adjust their savings over time as their circumstances change.

RESP providers like Embark can help families understand eligibility rules, available grants and withdrawal options.

Opening an RESP account with Embark takes less than eight minutes.

Dr. Bombay, the ice cream company Snoop Dogg co-founded with his son Cordell Broadus, announced the opening in late August through a partnership with Deel, a global payroll platform. The role is open to applicants anywhere in the world, Canadians included.

Here’s what the job actually involves, how to apply, and, since this is a money site, what a five-figure US-dollar paycheque actually means once it lands in a Canadian bank account.

What the job actually involves

The role is called International Ice Cream Taster. It’s a three-month contract paying $10,000 a month, and it’s fully remote with some travel expected. Duties include sampling Dr. Bombay products, spotting flavour trends, pitching ideas for future releases and joining regular check-ins with the brand’s team. No professional culinary background is required. Dr. Bombay says it’s prioritizing curiosity and strong communication skills over formal experience.

Who can apply, and how

Applicants need little more than a passport and an interest in food, according to the job posting. Applications opened August 27 and are expected to stay open for about three weeks, so anyone interested should check the listing directly at deel.com/snoop, since the window may already be closing by the time you read this.

What US$10,000 a month actually means for a Canadian applicant

Before picturing the payday, it’s worth understanding two things: currency and taxes.

The pay is set in U.S. dollars, so its value in Canadian dollars will shift with the exchange rate each month, not stay fixed at a round number.

More importantly, this is foreign-paid income, and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) requires Canadian residents to report their worldwide income, in Canadian dollars, regardless of where it’s earned or which currency it’s paid in. Depending on how Deel structures the contract, this could be reported as foreign employment income or as self-employment income, and the CRA has different lines and rules for each.

Unlike a typical Canadian paycheque, this kind of contract usually won’t have tax, CPP or EI automatically withheld, which means setting money aside for tax time is on the applicant, not the employer.

If any US tax is withheld along the way, a foreign tax credit can generally be claimed on the Canadian return so the same income isn’t taxed twice. Given the cross-border, short-term and unusual nature of this gig, anyone who lands the job would be smart to talk to an accountant early, rather than after the first deposit shows up.

The takeaway

It’s a fun, genuinely unusual opportunity, and $10,000 a month for three months is a meaningful amount of money. But it’s still a foreign, short-term contract, and Canadians who land it should treat it like any other freelance or cross-border gig: Track the exchange rate, set aside money for taxes before spending the first payment, and get clarity on how the income will be classified before assuming what the final take-home number will be.

For a country that’s been bracing for economic warfare, that may sound reassuring. But strong bank profits don’t automatically translate into cheaper mortgages, better savings rates or a calmer economy for everyday Canadians. Here’s what’s actually behind the numbers — and what it means for your money.

Why are the banks doing so well during a trade war?

The short answer is these institutions built up a buffer, and their most profitable divisions have nothing to do with tariffs. The banks have spent the past two years strengthening their balance sheets, building capital and setting aside larger reserves against potential loan losses, which has left them better positioned to absorb economic shocks. At the same time, they’ve leaned harder into fee-based businesses like wealth management and capital markets, which don’t depend on domestic lending volumes.

RBC’s capital markets net income rose 16% to $1.54 billion, and its wealth management profit jumped 32%. At CIBC, capital markets income climbed 34%. Additionally, TD’s wholesale banking division posted an 87% jump in net income and its US business grew 41% — strong enough that the bank says it plans to open 100 new American branches by 2028.

Does this mean the trade war isn’t hurting Canadians?

Not exactly — it means the banks are insulated for now, which is a different thing. CIBC said the businesses most exposed to tariffs make up less than 1% of its total loan portfolio, a sign that direct exposure is limited but real. And bank executives haven’t stopped hedging their bets: TD’s chief financial officer, Kelvin Tran, told Reuters that the situation “is still quite fluid” and that the bank is watching closely how long the tariffs will last and how Ottawa responds.

That caution matters for borrowers. Banks that are quietly worried about credit quality tend to tighten lending standards before they cut rates — even when headline profits look great. If you’re planning to renew a mortgage, apply for a HELOC or take out a business loan in the next year, don’t assume record bank earnings mean easier or cheaper credit is coming. If anything, it means banks have more room to be selective about who they lend to.

What about Canadians who own bank stocks?

This is where the numbers get trickier. Canadian bank stocks are trading at roughly 15 times forward earnings, which is the most expensive they’ve been since 2010, and they’ve already outperformed the broader Toronto Stock Exchange this year. For the many Canadians holding RBC, TD or CIBC shares inside an RRSP or TFSA — often for the dividend — that’s good news on paper.

But a stock trading at its most expensive valuation in 15 years leaves less room for error. If tariffs escalate further or the economy slows more than expected, banks with rich valuations typically have further to fall than cheaper ones. RBC’s chief executive, Dave McKay, credited the results to a “diversified business model, strong client activity, and a favorable market backdrop” in Reuters — three things that can change quickly if trade tensions worsen.

What should you actually do with this information?

For borrowers: Treat this quarter’s results as a sign of bank stability, not a signal that rates or lending standards are about to loosen. Keep shopping around at renewal time, and don’t delay building a cash buffer if your income is tied to trade-exposed sectors like manufacturing, steel or aluminum.

For investors: If you already hold Canadian bank stocks for dividend income, there’s no urgent reason to sell — the fundamentals remain solid. But this isn’t the moment to be adding new money at the top of a 15-year valuation high just because the headlines look good. New Canadian investors may be better served waiting for a more attractive entry point, or diversifying beyond the Big Six rather than chasing recent strength.

The takeaway isn’t that the trade war is over for Canadians — it’s that the banks have built enough of a cushion to look strong regardless. Your own financial decisions should be based on your exposure to tariffs and your own balance sheet, not the banks’.

The cargo flew on Air Canada flight AC881, departing Zurich and arriving at Pearson without incident. Shortly after landing, an unidentified individual gained access to the airline’s cargo warehouse, presented a fraudulent waybill and the airline’s staff handed over the shipment, which was never recovered. Peel Regional Police later charged 10 people, including a former and current Air Canada employee, in connection with the heist, and investigators believe some of the gold was melted down in a Toronto-area jewelry store basement.

As a result, Brink’s spent nearly two years pursuing legal action against Air Canada over financial liability for the loss. A Federal Court ruling determined that Air Canada’s legal liability was capped at just over C$18,000 — a tiny fraction of the missing assets. The two companies subsequently finalized a confidential settlement, ending the formal appeals process.

While the financial terms remain private, the underlying court ruling established a critical precedent for anyone checking a bag, sending a parcel or shipping valuables: airlines are not legally required to reimburse the full value of lost property. They are only required to pay up to statutory limits set by law.

Why a $20-million loss resulted in an $18,000 liability cap

Air Canada’s liability was capped under the Montreal Convention, an international treaty incorporated into Canadian law via the Carriage by Air Act. The treaty limits a carrier’s financial liability for lost or damaged cargo and checked baggage regardless of the items’ actual market value — unless the shipper or passenger explicitly declares a higher value prior to transit and pays an additional fee for expanded coverage.

In the Federal Court proceeding, the judge found that Brink’s did not file a special value declaration or pay Air Canada for enhanced supervisory handling. Consequently, the claim was restricted to 9,988 Special Drawing Rights (SDR) — an International Monetary Fund reserve asset unit — equating to approximately C$18,500 at the time of calculation.

How treaty caps apply to passenger baggage

The Montreal Convention governs commercial freight as well as consumer checked luggage on international flights arriving in, or departing from, Canada.

• Checked baggage limits: The treaty caps airline liability for lost or damaged baggage at 1,519 SDR per passenger (roughly C$2,858), no matter how many bags were checked or what items were inside.
• Cargo limits: For commercial freight, the liability cap is calculated by weight at 26 SDR per kilogram (approximately C$49 per kg).

High-density, high-value items like electronics, jewellery and precious metals far exceed this per-kilogram rate, creating a massive coverage deficit unless extra protection is purchased in advance.

Common consumer assumptions and coverage gaps

This discrepancy between consumer expectation and legal reality routinely impacts specific groups of travellers:

• Couples travelling with wedding attire, rings or gifts for destination ceremonies.
• Business travellers carrying expensive devices, trade samples or specialized equipment in checked luggage.
• Individuals relocating internationally with family heirlooms or valuables.

Many travellers assume that travel insurance attached to a credit card or a standard airline bag tag guarantees full reimbursement. However, airline liability limits remain separate from private insurance, and baseline travel policies frequently exclude or heavily cap coverage for currency, high-end jewellery and commercial goods.

Essential steps before checking valuables or shipping cargo

• Carry high-value items in cabin baggage: Keep jewellery, electronics, cash and essential documents in your carry-on to bypass checked luggage liability caps entirely.
• Declare excess value when shipping: If sending high-value cargo, formally declare the contents’ full monetary value with the carrier and pay the required surcharge upfront to raise the carrier’s liability limit.
• Secure specialized insurance riders: Purchase dedicated scheduled personal property riders through home, tenant or specialized travel insurance rather than relying on baseline carrier coverage.
• Maintain proof of value: Retain receipts, professional appraisals and photographs. Without documentation, claims are processed strictly according to statutory formulas rather than estimated item value.
• Observe strict reporting windows: File missing or damaged baggage reports immediately upon arrival. Formal written claims must generally be submitted within 21 days of a bag being declared lost.

The bottom line

As the litigation between Brink’s and Air Canada demonstrated, even major commercial shippers backed by legal teams cannot recover losses beyond statutory treaty caps if formal declarations were not made upfront.

Individual passengers have even less leverage after a loss occurs. The practical takeaway is to evaluate the contents of your luggage before departing: if your checked belongings exceed roughly C$2,858 in total value, carry them on board, secure separate insurance or formally declare their value with the airline before check-in.

Dalio, the founder of Bridgewater Associates, said the United States is spending far more than it collects, and warned that a US debt crisis could hit within three years, “give or take two.” His fix for investors: cut bond exposure, hold 10% to 15% of a portfolio in gold and add some bitcoin into a portfolio as well.

This isn’t only a US story. When the world’s largest bond market wobbles, it pulls on interest rates, currencies and portfolios everywhere, including Canada. Here’s what’s actually happening, and what it means for your money.

What did Ray Dalio actually say?

In the post, Dalio estimated the US government will collect about US$5.5 trillion in revenue this year against US$7.5 trillion in spending, a US$2-trillion shortfall, Bloomberg reported. He pointed to Japan — the largest foreign holder of US Treasuries — selling some of its holdings, along with rising long-term bond yields, as signs that demand for U.S. debt is thinning. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s plan to increase government buybacks of long-term bonds, Dalio said, is a symptom of that same strain.

Why does a US problem matter to Canadian bond holders?

Most balanced portfolios, including target-date funds inside RRSPs, hold government bonds specifically because they’re supposed to retain their value when stock markets get rocky. But bond prices fall when yields rise, and Canadian bond yields tend to move with US yields because the two economies and their rate expectations are so closely linked.

If US debt strain keeps pushing long-term yields higher, Canadian bond funds, including the ones inside a more conservative RRSP or RRIF, can lose value even without anything going wrong in Canada specifically.

That matters most for retirees and near-retirees who lean on the bond side of a portfolio for stability and income, and who don’t have decades to wait out a downturn.

Should Canadians follow Dalio and buy gold or bitcoin?

Not automatically, and not all at once. Gold is one of the few alternative assets that’s actually accessible inside a registered account: physical bullion that’s at least 99.5% pure, such as Royal Canadian Mint Gold Maple Leaf coins, qualifies for RRSPs and TFSAs, as do gold ETFs and mining stocks. However, physical bullion has to sit with an approved custodian rather than at home, according to the Royal Canadian Mint.

Bitcoin is more complicated. Canadians can’t hold actual bitcoin inside an RRSP or TFSA; only Canadian-listed bitcoin ETFs, such as those offered by Purpose Investments, qualify as registered-account investments. Crypto bought directly on an exchange doesn’t count, and every trade of it is a taxable event.

Money.ca has previously noted that gold’s main job in a portfolio is providing a hedge that moves independently of stocks, not necessarily beating them over the long run. On the other hand, bitcoin remains far more volatile than either stocks or gold. A small allocation may reduce overall portfolio risk for some investors. For others, especially those with limited time before they need to draw on their savings, adding a volatile asset can raise risk rather than lower it.

What should Canadian investors do now?

• Check what’s actually inside your bond funds and see how sensitive they are to rising yields
• Don’t treat “bonds equal safe” as an automatic rule — ask what role they’re meant to play in your specific plan
• If considering gold, confirm purity and custodian requirements before assuming it’s RRSP or TFSA eligible
• If considering bitcoin, stick to Canadian-listed ETFs inside a registered account rather than direct crypto
• Talk to a licensed advisor before making a large, one-time shift based on a single forecast

The bottom line

Dalio’s three-year timeline could be right, or it could be early — he’s acknowledged that past debt-crisis warnings he’s made arrived sooner than the crisis itself did, per Bloomberg. The more useful takeaway for Canadians isn’t the exact mix he’s recommending; it’s the reminder to check what’s actually backing the “safe” part of a portfolio, and to make sure it still fits an individual timeline, not just the latest headline risk.

While the CRA confirmed that the vast majority of payments arrive on time, local postal interruptions caused by evacuations and severe fire activity have slowed physical deliveries in affected regions. The agency advises recipients waiting on paper cheques to wait 5 to 10 business days past their scheduled payment date before reporting a missing cheque.

Canadians enrolled in direct deposit are unaffected by postal interruptions and will receive their funds as scheduled.

Benefit payment schedule for September

Several federal and provincial benefit disbursements are scheduled throughout September:

• Ontario Trillium Benefit: Sept. 10
• Canada Disability Benefit: Sept. 17
• Canada Child Benefit: Sept. 18
• Canada Pension Plan: Sept. 25
• Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement: Sept. 25
• Newfoundland and Labrador Disability Benefit: Sept. 25
• Veteran Disability Pension: Sept. 28

The new Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit, which replaced the quarterly GST/HST credit, does not have a payment scheduled for September. The next disbursement under that program is set for October 5.

What affected recipients can do

Residents living in fire-affected communities who cannot access their mailed benefit cheques and require immediate financial relief can contact the CRA helpline at 1-800-387-1193 for direct support.

To prevent future delays caused by mail disruptions or natural disasters, federal officials strongly recommend signing up for direct deposit. Switching to direct deposit transfers funds straight to a bank account on payment day, avoiding reliance on physical mail routes.

Recipients can monitor payment statuses, adjust banking details or opt in for automated payment reminders through their CRA My Account portal.

According to a report from the Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC), the industry association representing Canada’s private property and casualty insurers, wildfires and floods are now hitting regions that rarely dealt with them before. “We’re getting hit harder every single year,” said the IBC’s Liam McGuinty, pointing to wildfires spreading from Newfoundland to Nova Scotia and even encroaching on Metro Vancouver.

For homeowners, that shift creates two distinct problems: bigger premiums for almost everyone, and, for a percentage Canadians in high-risk zones, the real possibility of not having any coverage at all.

Why home insurance premiums keep climbing

Home insurance costs have outpaced inflation across Canada for several years running, and the increases are not spread evenly. In Alberta, premiums have jumped more than 390% over the past 20 years — the steepest rise of any province — according to a Statistics Canada report cited by BNN Bloomberg.

Flooding, meanwhile, has become the leading cause of insured losses nationally: It caused more than $4 billion in damage in 2024 and over $1 billion in 2025, according to IBC figures.

Why coverage isn’t available in some areas

For a certain percentage of the Canadian population, the problem isn’t the price of insurance — it’s getting any at all. Roughly 6% of the Canadian housing market, or about 850,000 homes, cannot obtain flood coverage because the risk is considered too high, Kathryn Bakos of the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation at the University of Waterloo, told BNN Bloomberg. She also sounded the alarm on how Canada needs to become “a more proactive society, rather than a reactive society,” further arguing that risk needs to be reduced before disasters happen, not managed after the fact.

The fallout is starting to reach mortgages, too. Some lenders, Bakos notes, including Desjardins Financial, have stopped issuing mortgages in specific high-risk flood zones in Quebec, where annual flood risk exceeds 5%. That means some homeowners and buyers may soon face fewer financing options, not just higher insurance bills.

What’s being done about it

Insurers say the country isn’t a lost cause. The IBC notes Canada remains broadly insurable, and it’s continuing to work with the federal government on a possible national flood insurance program aimed at households that can’t get coverage through the private market. That program is still in the technical design stage, with no confirmed launch date — so homeowners in high-risk areas should plan as though it isn’t arriving soon.

What Canadian homeowners can do now

A few practical steps can lower your risk and, in some cases, your premium:

• Check your flood and wildfire risk before you buy or renew — municipal flood maps and the free WeatherCan app can flag exposure you might not know about
• Ask your insurer about discounts for installing a backwater valve or sump pump, which reduce flood risk
• Clear debris from outdoor drains, which is a common, low-cost cause of preventable flood damage
• Compare quotes at every renewal, since premiums are rising unevenly by region
• Confirm financing early if you’re buying in a flood-prone area, since some lenders are pulling back in specific zones

Climate-driven weather isn’t going away, and neither is its effect on what Canadians pay to protect their homes. The real risk for homeowners isn’t a bigger bill — it’s assuming their address is exempt from either problem. Checking your hazard exposure, asking pointed questions at renewal and acting on the low-cost fixes now is cheaper than finding out at claim time, or at your next mortgage renewal, that your home has quietly become harder to insure.

The move connects two of the country’s biggest loyalty programs: Triangle Rewards, with more than 12 million members, and Tims Rewards, with almost 8 million. For anyone who already collects both, linking accounts is essentially free money on a purchase most Canadians are already making.

Here’s how the new earning tiers work, how to link your accounts, and where that Canadian Tire Money can actually be spent.

How much Canadian Tire Money can you actually earn?

Linked members can earn up to 5% in Canadian Tire Money on eligible Tim Hortons purchases, in addition to their regular Tims Rewards points. The rate depends on how a purchase is made:

• Scan for Tims Rewards: 2% on eligible purchases, calculated pre-tax
• Scan for Tims Rewards and pay with a Triangle credit card: An additional 2% on the total purchase, calculated post-tax
• Pay with a Triangle credit card through Scan & Pay in the Tims app: An additional 1% on eligible purchases, calculated pre-tax

Stack all three, and a linked member using a Triangle credit card in the Tims app can earn the full 5% back in Canadian Tire Money, on top of the Tims Rewards points earned the same way as before.

How to link your Triangle Rewards and Tims Rewards accounts

Linking accounts takes a few minutes. Members need an active Triangle Rewards account and an active Tims Rewards account, then can visit triangle.com/timsrewards, select “Link Accounts,” and log in to both programs to connect them. Once linked, the new earning rate applies automatically the next time a member scans or pays through the Tims app — no separate card or extra app is required beyond what most Tims regulars already carry.

Not every Tim Hortons location participates in the program, so it’s worth checking with a location or Tims Guest Care before assuming the higher earn rate applies everywhere.

Where you can spend your Canadian Tire Money

Redemption hasn’t changed for either program. Canadian Tire Money earned through Tims purchases can only be redeemed at Canadian Tire, SportChek, Mark’s, Party City and a handful of other Canadian Tire-owned banners, while Tims Rewards points remain redeemable only at participating Tim Hortons locations.

That’s a meaningful distinction for budgeting purposes: The coffee-shop stacking bonus effectively functions as a small, ongoing discount on future purchases at Canadian Tire-family stores, not as cash back or a discount at Tims itself.

Is stacking the two loyalty programs worth it?

For anyone who already holds both a Triangle Rewards account and a Tims Rewards account — and who already carries a Triangle credit card — there’s little downside to linking accounts. It costs nothing, takes a few minutes and adds a percentage of every eligible Tims purchase toward future purchases elsewhere.

The math is a bigger question for someone who doesn’t already carry a Triangle credit card. Opening a new credit product solely to capture an extra 1% to 2% on coffee and lunch purchases is unlikely to be worth a hard credit check and potential annual fee for light Tims spenders. For someone who visits Tim Hortons multiple times a week and already shops regularly at Canadian Tire, SportChek or Mark’s, the accumulated Canadian Tire Money can add up to a real discount over a year.

Before assuming maximum value, check that a home location participates and confirm the linked-account terms and conditions, since eligible purchases and exclusions can vary.

For Canadians whose mortgages come up for renewal this year, that hold means no relief from a payment shock that’s already landed. Homeowners who recently renewed are absorbing an average of $375 more a month, according to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) — and the central bank just signalled it isn’t in a hurry to bring rates down further.

Worse, the Bank flagged new risks that could push inflation higher, driven largely by tariffs and elevated oil prices tied to the conflict in the Middle East. A steady rate paired with rising inflation risk is exactly the kind of environment where mortgage and interest rate relief gets pushed further down the priority list.

What the Bank of Canada actually decided

The Bank left its overnight rate unchanged at 2.25%, with the Bank Rate at 2.5% and the deposit rate at 2.20%. BoC commentary pointed to a stronger-than-expected economy as reasons for a continued hold. The BoC’s decision came fresh off of the latest gross domestic product (GDP) numbers, which grew 3.3% in the second quarter of 2026, and unemployment edged down to 6.4% in July.

But the BoC also warned that new US tariffs and Canadian counter-tariffs, as well as elevated oil prices, are raising the risk that inflation moves higher rather than settling near the Bank’s 2% target. Canada’s Consumer Price Index has hovered around 3% recently, largely because of gasoline prices, though core inflation remains closer to 2%.

Why the hold doesn’t mean relief is coming

It’s tempting to read a rate hold as good news — at least rates aren’t rising. But the Bank’s language suggests the opposite risk is now more likely than a cut.

Governing Council said upside risks to inflation have increased, even as tariffs make growth prospects more uncertain — a signal it’s prepared to raise rates again if tariff-driven costs spread into everyday prices.

The next scheduled decision is October 28, 2026, alongside an updated Monetary Policy Report.

Until then, fixed and variable mortgage rates are more likely to hold or creep higher than fall. CMHC’s latest housing outlook points to rising bond yields keeping fixed rates elevated, and expects variable rates to rise as the Bank normalizes policy through mid-2026.

What this means if your mortgage is renewing

The pain already shows in the data. In CMHC’s 2026 Mortgage Consumer Survey, homeowners who renewed in the past 18 months reported an average payment increase of $375 a month, and 35% said the change created real financial pressure on their budget.

Despite more dollars being spent on housing, there’s one positive outcome, according to CMHC data: The share of homeowners worried about making payments fell to 39% this year, down from 53% in 2025, as the worst of the pandemic-era renewal wave passes.

Still, cracks are showing. The national 90-day-plus mortgage delinquency rate rose to 0.24% in the fourth quarter of 2025, up from 0.21% a year earlier, with delinquencies in the Toronto area jumping 45% year over year. Those numbers remain low historically, but they’re moving the wrong way.

What savers and variable-rate holders should watch

A steady policy rate is welcome news for savers. GIC and high-interest savings rates tend to track the Bank’s overnight rate, so a hold means those returns aren’t shrinking for now.

Variable-rate mortgage holders and lines of credit tied to prime should see no immediate change either.

But CMHC expects that calm to be temporary, flagging variable rates rising later this year as the Bank normalizes policy, even without a hike this week. Anyone counting on today’s variable rates through 2027 should build some cushion into their budget now.

What to do before October 28

Don’t wait for a rate cut that isn’t guaranteed. Get a rate hold from your lender now, since holds typically lock in a rate for 90 to 120 days even if rates move before renewal.

Compare at least one other lender before signing, since switching at maturity carries no penalty.

Stress-test your budget against a payment $300 to $400 higher than your current one, in line with what CMHC’s survey found renewers are already absorbing. If you’re on a variable rate, revisit your amortization and payment cushion before the Bank’s next decision.

The Bank of Canada didn’t make borrowing more expensive this week. But it didn’t make it cheaper, either. It told Canadians, in plain terms that the risks now tilt toward prices rising before rates come down — and this could even mean a rate hike in the not-so-distant future.

Speaking to reporters in Ottawa on Tuesday, Carney said talks can resume “when the Americans stop doing memes, stop throwing shade, stop trying to be tough and start being serious about having those discussions.” He called recent U.S. Cabinet-level mockery of Canada’s military “beneath their office” — pointing to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s comments belittling Canada’s economy, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth’s mocking social media post about Canadian cadets, and President Donald Trump’s move to rename Lake Ontario to “Lake America.”

Despite Carney’s fighting stance — and whatever happens next in Washington — Canadians end up feeling the consequences in their own shopping carts.

On September 8, 2026, Ottawa’s retaliatory tariffs on hundreds of American products take effect — a direct response to the 50% U.S. tariff that hit C$27.6 billion of Canadian exports on August 22, days after trade talks between the two countries collapsed. Finance Canada says its countermeasures are designed to match the U.S. rate “dollar for dollar,” with tariffs of 15%, 25% or 50% depending on the product.

The stakes extend well beyond one shopping list. Canada and the U.S. exchange more than $700 billion in goods every year, and the current standoff marks a sharp break from that decades-long trading relationship. Trade analysts warn the bigger risk for some workers may not be higher retail prices at all, but job losses at export-dependent Canadian businesses, such as furniture makers and steel producers, now facing 50% U.S. duties on what they sell south of the border.

What changes on September 8

The new list leans heavily toward industrial inputs — steel, aluminum, pulp and paper, agricultural equipment — but it also touches goods Canadians buy directly, including appliances, electronics, smartphones, cosmetics, clothing and footwear.

Ottawa revised the list after its initial announcement, dropping fish and seafood entirely, citing a risk of broader economic harm to that sector. These countermeasures are separate from Canada’s existing 25% tariffs on U.S. autos, steel and aluminum, in place since 2025 — though the steel and aluminum rate also doubles to 50% on September 8.

How much this could cost you

Economist Trevor Tombe wrote that he estimates the retaliatory tariffs will add about C$4 billion in costs across the economy, pushing average consumer prices up by roughly 0.25%. And the burden isn’t shared evenly: Households earning under $30,000 a year stand to lose more than 0.5% of their disposable income, and Tombe calculates a family with kids could pay roughly $250 more a year because of the tariffs.

Other economists expect a milder hit overall. McMaster University’s Colin Mang, speaking to BNN, points to what happened the last time Canada rolled out counter-tariffs: Tariffed items ran about 6% pricier than comparable goods, adding roughly 0.3 percentage points to inflation, with retailers absorbing much of the cost rather than passing it all on to shoppers.

What to do before the deadline

Goods already in transit to Canada on September 8 are exempt from the new tariffs, but anything purchased or shipped afterward is not. That means if there is a U.S.-made appliance, gadget or favourite cosmetics brand on your list, buying before the deadline avoids the surtax outright.

Carleton University’s Ian Lee suggested in a Bloomberg interview that some Canadians will simply look for a non-American alternative instead — a shift that can blunt the price impact, since retailers competing against untariffed imports have less room to raise prices.

For everyday grocery and household shopping, the honest answer from most economists is that the average Canadian won’t notice a dramatic shift at the checkout. But if money is tight, or a bigger American-made purchase was already on your radar this fall, checking the country of origin now — and deciding whether to buy before September 8 or shop the Canadian or non-U.S. alternative — is the one concrete step that puts the decision back in your hands before Ottawa’s tariffs, not just Washington’s, start showing up on the receipt.

By the numbers: Canada’s September 8 tariffs

• $27.6 billion — value of U.S. imports facing Canada’s new tariffs
• 15% to 50% — tariff rate range, matched to the equivalent U.S. rate
• 700+ — U.S. products affected
• $4 billion — estimated added cost to the Canadian economy (Tombe estimate)
• $250 — estimated extra yearly cost for a family with kids (Tombe estimate)
• 0.25% — estimated increase in average consumer prices

The decision by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) comes as the regulator investigates Bell Canada and its Virgin Plus brand over a much longer 60-day locking practice that officials say broke federal rules.

For Canadians shopping for a new phone this fall, the shift is small in scope but worth understanding, especially if you are switching carriers, reselling an old device or travelling with a new phone soon after purchase.

What did the CRTC actually change?

Wireless providers have had to sell cellphones unlocked and free to use on any compatible network since the Wireless Code was enacted almost a decade ago. That requirement is now temporarily paused industry-wide. Since August 14, any carrier can sell a phone locked to its network, as long as it unlocks the device automatically within two business days, according to the CRTC. Customers can also ask for an immediate, no-charge unlock instead of waiting.

Carriers that use this temporary window must clearly disclose that a phone is locked and for how long, and must report fraud and theft data to the CRTC by October 30, the notice states.

Why did Bell’s 60-day policy spark this fight?

The story dates back to April 2025, when Bell told CRTC staff it planned to start locking new devices for 60 days, arguing the move would cut down on fraud and crime at its retail stores, according to the commission. Bell began the practice the next day.

The commission found Bell’s approach didn’t comply with the Wireless Code and, in a letter, directed the company to stop selling locked phones immediately, iPhone in Canada reported. Bell kept selling locked devices anyway and made several procedural requests to have the finding reversed, prompting the CRTC to open a formal proceeding asking Bell to show cause as to why its practice shouldn’t be treated as a violation. If the commission rules against Bell, the company could face a penalty of up to $10 million.

Telus made a similar request of its own in May, telling the CRTC that easy unlocking had turned smartphones into “a highly liquid currency that drive violent robberies,” Daily Hive reported. That request for a 60-day lock hasn’t been approved.

What does this mean if you’re buying a phone right now?

For most Canadians, the practical impact is minor. Two business days is a short window, and providers still have to unlock automatically or on request, at no cost, per the CRTC’s notice. A few situations are worth planning around:

• Switching carriers quickly: If you’re porting your number to a new provider the same day you buy a phone, a locked device could complicate an otherwise seamless same-day switch
• Buying to resell or gift abroad: A phone bought for resale, gifting overseas or use with a different SIM won’t work until it’s unlocked
• Travelling soon after purchase: Anyone leaving the country within two business days of buying a new phone should confirm it’s unlocked, or ask for an immediate unlock, before departure

How can you protect yourself when buying a new phone?

• Ask before you buy: Confirm directly with the retailer whether the device is locked, and for how long
• Request an immediate unlock: Under the temporary rules, you can ask to have the phone unlocked right away instead of waiting the full two days
• Get it in writing: Carriers must disclose locking practices clearly, so ask for that information on your receipt or purchase confirmation
• Watch for updates: The CRTC is accepting public comments on Bell’s case until September 14, with replies due September 24 — the temporary rule could change again once the commission reaches a final decision

The bigger question, whether locking devices actually reduces fraud or just inconveniences honest customers, is still unresolved. The commission itself has pondered whether the practice is proportionate given how many customers it affects compared with the smaller number of people committing fraud.

The investigation centres on new device, shipping and SIM card charges the carriers introduced after the CRTC banned an $80 connection fee designed to discourage switching. Under Telecom Regulatory Policy 2026-43, the CRTC prohibited fees tied to activating, changing or cancelling a cellphone or internet plan, with the ban taking effect June 12, 2026.

For anyone debating whether to switch and save money, the case is a reminder that the fine print on ‘free’ switching hasn’t been thoroughly sorted out. Here’s what the CRTC decided, why some carriers may still be charging you to switch and what to check before you make a move.

What the CRTC actually rejected

Telus asked the CRTC on July 17 to split the case in two and remove specific commission staff from the file, arguing they were biased after sending early compliance letters and speaking to the media. Bell and Rogers formally backed the request. The CRTC dismissed the bias claim after applying standard legal tests for impartiality, finding that “commission staff members lack the statutory authority to make binding decisions” — only appointed commission members can rule on non-compliance or penalties.

The regulator also turned down a bid to split the case into separate guilt and penalty phases and rejected a request from two consumer advocacy groups for a two-day oral hearing, keeping the review on paper instead.

Why Canadians might still be paying to switch

The gap is in what counts as a switching fee. CRTC staff had already warned Bell, Rogers and Telus before the case began that charging for device handling and setup, or a SIM card, “does not appear to fall within the exemption for optional services and products” set out in the policy. Bell added a $40 device-handling fee for customers purchasing a phone on a plan; Telus added a $15 SIM or eSIM charge; and Rogers introduced a $40 device setup fee, a $25 shipping charge and a separate SIM fee.

In other words, the ban targets fees explicitly tied to activating, changing or cancelling a plan — not necessarily charges tied to receiving a physical SIM or a new device. That distinction is exactly what the CRTC is now testing.

What happens next, and could carriers face penalties?

Initial submissions in the case were due August 31, 2026, with final reply filings expected in September. If the CRTC finds Bell, Rogers or Telus violated the switching rules, the companies could face compliance orders and financial penalties. None of the disputed fees have been struck down yet — the case is still open, and the carriers can continue charging them in the meantime.

What should you do before switching providers?

Ask upfront, in writing, whether a device-handling, SIM or shipping fee applies to your switch, and get the total landed cost before you commit to a new plan.

Weigh that total against the savings you’re chasing. Having to pay $65 in stacked device and shipping charges, plus a separate SIM fee, can eat into months of a lower monthly plan rate before it pays off.

If a carrier can’t explain why a charge falls outside the switching-fee ban, get that answer in writing — it may help if you later want to file a complaint with the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-Television Services.

And keep an eye on the CRTC’s file for this proceeding through the fall. The outcome could determine whether these charges stay, shrink or disappear for good.

The bottom line

The switching-fee ban was meant to make it cheaper for Canadians to walk away from a bad deal. Until the CRTC rules on these specific charges, treat any quoted “switching” fee as a number to verify or negotiate — not a settled cost of getting a better plan.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) announced the funding in late August, with the projects planned on or run by local First Nations. For residents of Prince George, Hanceville and the Skeena region of BC, the spending has a direct economic impact. Local tradespeople will be required to build the projects, while local businesses will get contracts related to the build of all three salmon hatcheries. Then there’s the long-term boost to recreational and commercial fishing — additional dollars will now flow through these communities and help rebuild this integral economic sector.

For taxpayers, here’s what the funding covers, what it could mean for the people living near the projects and what is means for Canada’s overall economic survival.

Where is the money going?

The largest segment of the funds — $38 million — is going toward the Upper Fraser River Salmon Conservation Hatchery in Prince George, BC. The new hatchery will be located on the north bank of the Nechako River near its confluence with the Fraser. DFO will own and operate the site, working alongside the Lheidli T’enneh First Nation.

Two smaller contracts, worth about $7.5 million each, are funding a hatchery near Hanceville, BC in the central interior, which the Tsilhqot’in First Nation will operate once complete, and the next phase of the Wilp’Ho Dix Hatchery in the Skeena River system, co-managed with the Gitanyow First Nation.

Why is Ottawa spending on hatcheries now?

BC’s salmon fishery has been shrinking for decades. Its share of the province’s capture-fishery gross domestic product (GDP) fell from close to a third in 1991 to under 8% by 2022, according to a provincial fisheries and aquaculture sector report. Chinook and sockeye stocks in particular have struggled with climate change, habitat loss and fishing pressure.

That decline has a dollar figure attached. Recreational salmon fishing alone contributes roughly $250 million to BC’s GDP annually, and supports more than 2,500 jobs and $168 million in household income, according to DFO’s most recent economic profile.

Add to this the province’s commercial salmon harvest, which adds about $21 million in GDP and about 1,200 jobs once spinoff processing and wholesaling are counted.

Combined, the three new facilities are expected to raise more than one million juvenile Chinook and sockeye salmon each year. To be clear, this injection of one million juveniles is small — roughly 0.3% against the existing national salmon enhancement program (SEP) that produces an average of 328 million juvenile salmon each year and supports roughly $19 million a year in commercial marine fishing and processing activity, along with Indigenous and First Nations community involvement. Any addition to Canada’s SEP could help the country’s GDP — with Chinook and sockeye tending to carry higher per-fish commercial value than pinks or chum salmon.

These economic benefits should have a long-term impact — as well as a cultural one. According to the most recent State of Salmon report released by the Vancouver-based Pacific Salmon Foundation, the majority of salmon populations in B.C. and Yukon remain below their long-term averages, despite some promising signs of recovery in certain areas. For local First Nations, the investment in helping salmon populations is an investment in culture and heritage.

As Lheidli T’enneh Chief Dolleen Logan explained during the announcement in August: “Salmon are not simply a resource. Salmon are relatives. They are a part of our culture, our identity, our laws, our responsibilities.”

Who stands to benefit?

In the near term, these projects will have a positive impact on local communities through the creation of construction work; once the facilities are up and running, additional jobs will be created in order to maintain ongoing operational work. The Prince George facility alone includes new lab space, egg incubation rooms and both indoor and outdoor rearing tanks — the kind of build that keeps local trades, suppliers and services busy for months, not weeks.

Longer term, two of the three hatcheries will be run directly by the Tsilhqot’in and Gitanyow First Nations, which means ongoing staffing, training and operational spending stays within those communities instead of flowing to an outside operator. DFO has also flagged training and development opportunities tied to the Prince George project specifically, alongside its conservation goals.

For the wider regional economy, the payoff is less immediate but still real. More juvenile salmon released today can mean more adult fish returning in future years, which supports the guides, lodges, tackle shops and processors whose revenue depends on healthy runs. Given that revenue from recreational fishing businesses in southern BC averages about $82 million per year — in addition to the $19 million generated by the north and central coast recreational fishing business — the federal investment into hatcheries means building a thriving coastal sector for the near- and long-term.

What should residents watch for next?

In Prince George (PG), BC, construction is already underway, with local PG-based firm, IDL Projects Inc., awarded the general contract. Job postings and ongoing notices will be made by IDL Projects, as well as DFO’s Pacific Region website and through the Tsilhqot’in and Gitanyow First Nations.

While this injection of cash won’t reverse a decades-long decline, it will put real construction dollars — and real jobs — into three B.C. communities, while helping protect the salmon runs that have sustained local First Nations and their cultures for generations.

A recent TD Bank Group survey found 89% of Canadians feel confident in their ability to identify fraud, even as 46% say they encounter scam attempts weekly or daily. Nearly one in four say they or a family member has been a victim of financial fraud or a scam in the past year. Meanwhile, the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre says Canadians have reported losing more than $2.4 billion to fraud since 2022, including over $704 million in 2025 alone — and that’s likely only a fraction of the real toll, since just 5% to 10% of frauds are ever reported.

The takeaway isn’t that Canadians are careless. It’s that feeling prepared and being prepared aren’t the same thing, and scammers are counting on the difference.

Why doesn’t knowing the warning signs stop the losses?

Fraud awareness campaigns have made most Canadians familiar with the classic red flags: urgency, threats, offers that seem too good to be true. But knowing the warning signs doesn’t guarantee anyone catches a scam in the moment, especially one built around real, stolen personal details.

“Confidence can be a double-edged sword when it comes to fraud prevention,” Tarundeep Dhot, TD’s vice-president of fraud management, said in a statement. Overconfidence, he noted, can lead to quick decisions and overlooked red flags scammers rely on.

The same survey found more than half of Canadians (52%) admit to risky habits, including using public Wi-Fi to access financial accounts, clicking links before verifying the sender or opening attachments from unknown senders. Gen Z respondents, despite being the most confident generation, were also the most likely to take these risks.

What should Canadians do instead of trusting their gut?

If judgment alone isn’t reliable, the fix is a habit that doesn’t depend on catching a scam mid-call. Financial institutions increasingly recommend a two-step rule: pause before acting on any unexpected request for money or information, then verify independently. One can do this by hanging up and calling the bank or institution back using a trusted number, not one the caller provides.

Two practical layers can back up that habit. TransUnion’s latest Consumer Pulse Study found that when Canadians are notified of a data breach, most take basic steps like changing a password, but far fewer sign up for credit monitoring (20%) or place a credit freeze (19%). A freeze restricts who can access your credit file, making it harder for someone to open new credit in your name.

Where can Canadians freeze their credit right now?

Quebec residents have had free access to credit freezes with Equifax and TransUnion since 2023. Ontario residents gained the same right on July 1, 2026. British Columbia has passed legislation, but it isn’t expected to take effect until August 2027.

Multi-factor authentication is another low-cost layer. TransUnion found only 24% of Canadians recently added it or switched to passwordless login, even though it’s one of the more effective ways to block account takeovers once a password is exposed.

None of the aforementioned steps and precautions require spotting a scam in real time. That’s the point. Fraud prevention that depends on catching every attempt will eventually fail — and even one lapse can be costly. Over the past several years, those lapses have cost Canadians $2.4 billion and counting.

Now, a quarter century after the 9/11 terrorist attacks forced 38 commercial airliners to land at Gander International Airport, the municipality has evolved far beyond its traditional identity as a transient refueling stop.

Driven by steady population growth, a booming tourism sector, real estate expansion and a growing role as central Newfoundland’s primary economic hub, Gander has systematically rebuilt itself into a modern, self-sustaining community.

From wilderness runway to jet-age decline

Gander’s origins were strictly functional. Construction on what was then called the Newfoundland Airport began in 1936, chosen for its strategic location along transatlantic flight paths. During the Second World War, it served as a vital base for the Royal Air Force Ferry Command, housing thousands of Allied military personnel beside the runways.

In the 1950s, the community physically moved away from the airstrips to establish a formal municipality, incorporated in 1958. During this golden age of aviation, virtually every transatlantic flight required a technical stop, earning Gander the moniker “Crossroads of the World.” World leaders, celebrities and international travelers routinely passed through its iconic modern terminal.

That economic engine slowed dramatically with the advent of long-range commercial jetliners. As documented in aviation history archives, aircraft gained the ability to fly non-stop between European and North American cities, causing Gander’s role as an essential pit stop to evaporate.

For decades, the town adjusted by focusing on air traffic control, corporate jet servicing, military logistics and regional government services.

The catalyst of 2001

When US airspace closed on September 11, 2001, under Operation Yellow Ribbon, Gander’s oversized aviation infrastructure suddenly proved vital once more. The town of roughly 10,000 residents absorbed nearly 7,000 diverted passengers overnight.

The immediate, region-wide humanitarian response by Gander and surrounding communities such as Appleton, Gambo and Lewisporte gained global attention. When the planes were grounded, schools, churches and community centers were converted into temporary housing, while local businesses donated food, clothing and medical supplies.

That moment of crisis laid the groundwork for a major cultural engine: the Canadian musical Come From Away. Created by Irene Sankoff and David Hein, the production went on to become a runaway international phenomenon. After opening on Broadway in 2017, it ran for over 1,500 performances, earned seven Tony nominations and spawned acclaimed productions in London’s West End, Melbourne, Tokyo and on national tours worldwide, introducing millions of viewers to the small Newfoundland community.

Premiering on Broadway before eventually being staged directly in Gander at the Joseph R. Smallwood Arts and Culture Centre, the show transformed global goodwill into a steady stream of cultural tourism.

Provincial data from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador shows that local runs of Come From Away have drawn over 50,000 theatregoers to Gander across recent seasons, with tens of thousands of travelers visiting specifically to experience the town where the history took place.

Local hotels, restaurants, museums and tour operators have seen a permanent boost in traffic as travellers from around the world flock to central Newfoundland to see the airport, meet residents and explore the town behind the stage production.

While Come From Away established Gander as an international destination and a key driver for Newfoundland’s visitor economy, the theatrical phenomenon also served as a springboard for broader, permanent community development.

Building a modern regional hub

In the 25 years since 9/11, Gander has experienced a sustained demographic and structural expansion.

According to municipal demographic data, Gander’s population grew by 23% between 2001 and 2021, reaching nearly 12,000 residents, a growth rate that far outpaced provincial averages over the same period.

Today, the town functions as the commercial, medical and educational centre for more than 80,000 people living across 130 neighbouring communities in central Newfoundland. Its economy has diversified beyond traditional aviation to encompass healthcare, public administration, retail, construction and support services for regional mining and forestry operations.

This sustained growth has created new municipal challenges, particularly in housing. Through its Build Up Gander initiative, supported by $4.35 million from the federal Housing Accelerator Fund, the town is currently fast-tracking multi-unit developments and affordable housing projects to accommodate an ongoing influx of new residents. Municipal projections anticipate hundreds of new housing units will be added over the coming decade.

Gander International Airport has also adapted to modern aviation markets. While mass commercial refuelling stops are a relic of the past, the airport remains a crucial hub for transatlantic business jets, serving approximately 20% of corporate aircraft crossing the North Atlantic, alongside regional passenger routes and military diversions.

As municipal officials prepare for formal 25th anniversary commemorations at the Steele Community Centre on September 11, 2026, the event marks more than a historical moment of hospitality. Combined with extended local runs of Come From Away that continue to fill local hotels and drive the regional tourism economy, the anniversary highlights a community that successfully leveraged its spirit of generosity into a vibrant, modern regional centre for Atlantic Canada.

While the pipeline remains operational today, the decision marks a significant turn in a multi-year legal battle over a line responsible for moving roughly half the crude oil refined into gasoline, diesel and home heating fuel across Ontario and Quebec.

A Michigan regulatory battle will almost certainly hit Canadian drivers at the pumps. Line 5 has faced ongoing legal challenges and shutdown attempts since 2019, adding uncertainty to a critical supply chain with limited immediate substitutes.

Here’s a look at what the ruling entails, how it affects energy costs in Eastern Canada and how consumers can prepare financially as legal proceedings continue.

What the Michigan Supreme Court ruled

The court did not issue a shutdown order for Line 5. Instead, it vacated a 2023 permit granted by the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) — the state’s energy regulator — for Enbridge’s proposed four-mile tunnel segment beneath the Straits of Mackinac. The high court ruled that the commission failed to properly evaluate the project’s broader environmental impact under state environmental law.

As a result, the MPSC must conduct a new review. The replacement tunnel also requires remaining state and federal authorizations before construction can proceed. In the interim, the existing dual pipeline crossing the lakebed continues to operate and transport product to Sarnia, Ontario.

Why a US court decision impacts Canadian consumers

Line 5 transports approximately 540,000 barrels per day of crude oil and natural gas liquids from Superior, Wisconsin, to Sarnia, Ontario. This supply feeds refineries supplying close to half of Ontario and Quebec’s transportation fuel and heating oil needs.

Beyond the tunnel permitting case, separate litigation remains active. Michigan’s attorney general continues to pursue a lawsuit seeking a full operational shutdown of the existing line. Earlier in 2026, the US Supreme Court remanded that case back to state courts, keeping the broader question of the pipeline’s long-term operating status active within the legal system.

Historical precedent for supply constraints

Physical interruptions demonstrate how sensitive the regional market is to supply shifts. In 2020, a temporary operational pause on Line 5 following a vessel anchor strike prompted market analysts to warn of potential fuel price spikes across Ontario and Quebec due to limited short-term transport alternatives.

While that event involved an operational pause rather than a court ruling, it illustrated a structural reality: Regional refineries depend heavily on a single primary corridor with minimal immediate redundancy.

Regional responses and alternative proposals

In response to ongoing legal friction in Michigan, political leaders — including Ontario Premier Doug Ford — have reiterated calls for alternative infrastructure, such as proposed domestic pipeline corridors connecting Western Canadian crude directly to Eastern refineries without crossing international borders.

However, any proposed major pipeline project remains years away from potential regulatory approval and construction. For the near term, Eastern Canada’s fuel supply chain remains tied to Line 5 and its ongoing court proceedings.

Practical financial planning steps for households

Regulatory reviews move slowly, meaning immediate panic-buying or drastic budget overhauls are unnecessary. However, incorporating basic financial buffers helps manage potential energy price volatility:

• Monitor regional fuel trends: Track local pump prices before planning major road trips or large fuel purchases, utilizing resources like Natural Resources Canada’s daily fuel price reporting.
• Review heating arrangements: If you rely on home heating oil or propane in Ontario or Quebec, contact your fuel provider to evaluate fixed-rate or capped pricing contracts prior to winter demand surges.
• Incorporate a modest fuel buffer: Allocate a small contingency buffer — such as $20 to $30 monthly — within your household budget to absorb potential short-term fuel or utility fluctuations.
• Follow regulatory milestones: Track updates from the Michigan Public Service Commission’s renewed review and state court proceedings to stay informed on potential long-term supply shifts.

While the pipeline continues to operate normally today, the court’s ruling serves as a reminder of the complex supply chain supporting regional energy needs. Taking proactive steps to build flexibility into your household budget ensures you remain prepared regardless of how legal proceedings unfold.

Now, six years after this CRA data hack, there’s a price tag attached to the collective frustration and anger experienced by Canadian taxpayers. Eligible Canadians have until Feb. 3, 2027, to apply for a piece of the $8.7-million class-action settlement.

What triggered the class-action lawsuit against the CRA?

During 2020, hackers used stolen or guessed login credentials to break into Government of Canada online accounts, including the CRA My Account and My Service Canada Account portals; it was a process known as a credential stuffing attack.

Once inside, some attackers changed direct deposit information and applied for pandemic benefits — CERB or the Canada Emergency Student Benefit — using victims’ own identities.

Tens of thousands of Canadians had personal information exposed, from social insurance numbers to banking details. As a result, a class action lawsuit, Sweet v. His Majesty the King, was certified in 2022; a settlement was reached last December, and the class action won Federal Court approval in May 2026.

Who actually qualifies for the CRA data hack payout?

Not everyone whose account was touched will see a cheque.

Technically, anyone whose personal or financial information in a CRA, My Service Canada or other GCKey-linked account was disclosed without authorization between March 1 and Dec. 31, 2020, qualifies as a member of the class action lawsuit. But payment is limited to accounts breached within a specific period of time. According to court records, the breach period is between June 26 and Aug. 18, 2020. However, claims administrator KPMG lists a different period of time for eligibility — between June 15 and August 30, 2020.

There is another breach period: Anyone whose information was accessed through a Represent a Client account between Oct. 8 and Nov. 25, 2020, also qualifies for a portion of the settlement.

Money.ca reached out to KPMG for a comment; at the time of publication, no response was received.

Any Canadian who was impacted by the CRA data breach can check their eligibility through KPMG’s website. Just enter your last name and first three digits of your social insurance number.

How much money is on the table

Compensation falls into three categories, and claimants can apply to more than one category.

• Category 1: Access claims — up to $80 for time spent dealing with unauthorized access, at $20 an hour for up to four hours
• Category 2: Fraud claims — up to $200 for time spent addressing fraudulent use of personal information, at $20 an hour for up to 10 hours
• Category 3: Special compensation — up to $5,000 to reimburse out-of-pocket costs tied to the breach, including unreimbursed fraud losses, identity-theft fees or credit-freeze charges

Payouts could shrink if approved claims add up to more than the $8.7-million fund can cover. Any money left over will go to the Privacy and Access Council of Canada to fund privacy research.

What to do now

• Check eligibility at breachsettlementcanada.kpmg.ca using your last name and the last three digits of your SIN
• Gather documentation of related costs — credit monitoring fees, fraud-related charges, professional fees — before applying
• File a claim online or by mail no later than Feb. 3, 2027
• Remember the settlement is a compromise, not an admission — the Government of Canada has denied wrongdoing

For Canadians who spent months arguing with banks and the CRA to prove someone else had used their identity, this settlement won’t undo the hassle. But with a five-month runway left before the claim deadline, there’s time to build a documented claim instead of guessing at eligibility.

The survey, which polled 1,002 Canadian employees and 200 HR decision-makers, points to a pattern many working Canadians will recognize: pressure builds on several fronts at once, then shows up at work as burnout, lost productivity or, eventually, a bigger bill.

Here’s the part that should worry Canadians who assume their workplace benefits already have them covered — 67% of employees with health benefits used them in the past year, but only 20% said they were very satisfied with the experience. For a lot of Canadians, the coverage exists. Using it well is the harder part.

What’s actually declining, and how fast

Compared with 2025, more Canadians say things are getting worse, not better:

• 35% say their mental health has worsened, up from 30%
• 30% say their physical health has worsened, up from 21%
• 38% say their sleep quality has worsened, up from 26%
• 35% say their financial health has worsened, up from 29%

Only 21% of employees feel energized and motivated most days, and 1 in 2 report some level of burnout. Nearly three-quarters (74%) say they’ve worked at reduced capacity because of health or stress challenges in the past year.

That’s not just a workplace problem. Reduced capacity at work can mean fewer hours, missed overtime or a harder case for a raise or promotion — all of which feed back into the same financial health numbers that are already declining.

Why having a benefits plan doesn’t mean you’re covered

The gap between having a plan and getting value from it is what researchers call access friction — long wait times, cost and confusing navigation push Canadians to delay or avoid care altogether, which then shows up as absenteeism or presenteeism instead.

“Employees are facing pressures on multiple fronts, and it’s showing up in how they function at work,” Dr. Robin, Medical Director at Dialogue said in a statement. “The problem is that by the time a health issue becomes a missed workday or a disability claim, it’s often been building for months.”

In practice, that means a Canadian dealing with a stressful few months at work may be sitting on a benefit that could help — a counselling session, a paramedical visit, a financial coaching call — but never gets around to using it because booking, cost-sharing or simply finding the right program feels like one more task.

The financial-wellness gap in your benefits package

Employers know engagement and retention are tied to how well their people are doing, yet the report found the programs that address everyday pressures — financial stress, weight management and caregiving — are among the least commonly offered. And only 31% of HR leaders say they get regular, useful data from their benefits providers, making it hard to know what’s working.

“What really stands out is how complex it can be to translate employee needs into the right mix of support,” Taline Karagopian, Human Resources Advisor at Léger, said in a statement. “Needs can vary considerably from one employee to another and evolve over time.”

For Canadians, that translates into a practical risk: a benefits plan built for a general employee, not for the specific pressure you’re actually under this year, whether that’s caregiving costs, debt stress or a health issue that’s draining your savings.

What Canadians can do now

Since most benefit dollars go unused rather than overspent, treating a workplace plan like an active account — not a set-and-forget perk — is the more useful mindset:

• Log into your benefits portal and check for categories you’ve never used, such as an employee and family assistance program (EFAP), financial counselling or mental health sessions
• Ask HR directly whether a financial wellness or coaching benefit exists — many employees don’t realize one does until they ask
• Use virtual or triage-based care options where available to cut wait times, since delayed care is often what turns a manageable issue into missed work or a bigger expense
• Track what resets each January, since unused counselling sessions, paramedical dollars and similar allowances are typically lost, not carried forward
• If money stress is the main driver, start with the EFAP’s financial counselling line before paying for outside advice — it’s often free and already included

Canadians don’t need a bigger benefits plan to get more value out of one. They need to know what’s already in it, and use it before pressure on one front — money, health or sleep — starts pulling down the others. That’s the real cost of a benefit nobody gets around to using.

It’s the second high-profile jab from a US official in a matter of days. Texas congressman Brandon Gill wrote on social media that “your entire nation has a lower annual GDP than Texas,” a claim Money.ca previously reported on.

For Canadians watching the headlines, both comments make for good political theatre. However, neither one changes what’s actually about to hit household budgets.

Why the taunts miss the real risk

Comparing the size of two economies treats this like a quarrel over who can afford to lose more. That’s not where Canada is actually exposed. The real vulnerability is actually dependence — Canada sent 71.7% of its goods exports to the US in 2025, according to Statistics Canada, leaving Canadian producers with far less room to redirect sales elsewhere on short notice than American exporters have. Energy is a partial exception. Canadian oil and gas remain exempt from the new tariffs, and the US still buys more Canadian crude than from any other country, largely because American refineries are built for the heavy crude that Canadian wells produce.

What’s actually changing before September 8

The number worth tracking isn’t GDP or the number of navy vessels ready for combat — it’s the tariff schedule. A 50% US tariff took effect August 22, 2026 on a list of Canadian goods that includes hockey equipment, cement, liquor and dairy. Canada’s Department of Finance has said it will match those tariffs “dollar for dollar, rate for rate,” applying 15%, 25% or 50% rates to $27.6 billion worth of American imports starting September 8, 2026. Ottawa has also pledged $7.5 billion to support affected workers and businesses, on top of the nearly $25 billion that has already been committed.

Carney has been blunt about why Canada is retaliating at all. As he told reporters, according to NPR: “You’re at war when you get attacked. We got attacked.”

Where this shows up in your budget

For most Canadians, the tariffs won’t arrive as a salacious headline or sensational soundbite. They’ll show up as a renovation quote that’s suddenly higher, a job in an exposed industry that gets quieter or a favourite import that costs more once Canada’s countermeasures take effect. Here is the full list of items that will receive the combative surcharge, which will give Canadians a better understanding of how budgets may inflate post-September 8.

What to do before September 8

• Ask whether the price on a locked-in quote for a big purchase or renovation holds, and for how long
• If you work in dairy, cement, spirits or sporting goods manufacturing, ask your employer directly about exposure
• Expect some import prices to shift once countermeasures apply, especially on American-made goods
• Keep a small cash buffer for near-term price movement instead of rushing a big purchase

The bottom line

Bessent’s submarine put-down and Gill’s GDP jab will fade from the news cycle within days. The tariff schedule won’t. The political noise coming out of Washington isn’t the number that matters for your budget — September 8 is.

The corporate defiance delivered a sudden windfall for parent company System1 Inc., sending its stock soaring in a single trading day.

The viral surge began after Google Maps updated its software to comply with a U.S. executive order that sought to unilaterally relabel the shared Great Lake as “Lake America.” While Google cited alignment with the U.S. Geographic Names Information System, the change provoked immediate backlash across Canada.

MapQuest took a different route.

“We’re not changing it,” the company deadpanned on social media alongside a map clearly displaying Lake Ontario.

That single statement sparked hundreds of thousands of new mobile downloads within 48 hours. Both Canadian and American users flooded the Apple App Store, quickly making MapQuest the No. 1 free app in both countries and unseating more prominent tech giants as of September 1.

Technical fallout on Canadian websites

Google’s policy shift created immediate headaches across Ontario. Dozens of Canadian government agencies and private utilities embed Google Maps software on their websites, which led several official portals to briefly display “Lake America.”

Websites belonging to Hydro One, the LCBO, Metrolinx and Elections Canada temporarily reflected the U.S. label until local IT teams manually adjusted geographic localization settings to force the Canadian designation.

The incident underscored how deeply Canadian digital infrastructure relies on American technology platforms.

A retro brand returns to the top of the charts

MapQuest, launched in 1996, was once the dominant online mapping platform before being eclipsed by mobile-native applications like Google Maps and Apple Maps.

According to analytics data from Sensor Tower, MapQuest logged over 184,000 global downloads in a few days, representing a tenfold jump over its typical baseline. App usage spiked to roughly 50 times its standard daily rate.

To capitalize on the momentum, MapQuest launched an interactive generator allowing users to visually rename the lake to whatever they choose, with the company using “Lake Are We Doing This Again?” as its own example.

System1 sees major surge

Investors responded rapidly to the unexpected surge in consumer interest. System1 Inc. (NYSE: SST), the digital media holding firm that acquired MapQuest, saw heavy trading volume.

Shares of SST jumped 18.52% during regular trading, closing at US$2.24 per share as market watchers reacted to MapQuest securing top app store positions across North America.

While tech giant Apple has not officially indicated whether it will alter its own default naming conventions, MapQuest’s stance has proven that doing nothing can sometimes yield the largest payoff.

The acceleration from June’s 2.8% rate brings headline inflation to the very top of the central bank’s target range of 1% to 3%.

Despite the uptick in overall consumer prices, economists widely expect the Bank of Canada to keep its benchmark overnight rate steady at 2.25% in its Sept. 2 announcement.

Gasoline and travel drive the headline increase

Higher gasoline prices served as the primary driver behind the July inflation increase. Pump prices jumped 25.7% year over year in July following a 20.5% gain in June, fueled by ongoing global energy market volatility and the conflict in the Middle East.

Special event demand also put upward pressure on the service sector. High airfares and accommodation rates linked to summer travel and international events boosted travel prices by 15.2% compared with the same period last year.

Offsetting some of those increases, food price growth at grocery stores slowed to 3.1% in July from 3.9% in June, while shelter inflation continued to ease, rising just 1.3% year over year.

Core inflation holds near 2% target

Central bank officials closely monitor core inflation metrics, which strip out volatile components like gasoline, to gauge underlying price pressures in the economy.

The central bank’s preferred measures of core inflation, CPI-median and CPI-trim, averaged 2.0% in July. Excluding gasoline, broader inflation stood at 2.2%.

Because core inflation remains anchored at the 2% midpoint target, policymakers have little immediate pressure to raise interest rates, while trade uncertainty acts as a buffer against further rate cuts.

Economic slack and trade tensions limit policy options

The central bank finds itself weighing persistent energy inflation against economic headwinds and trade uncertainty with the United States.

Economic growth stalled over the past year as businesses adjusted to shifting trade policies, slower population growth and soft labour market conditions. Canada’s unemployment rate held at 6.5% in June, reflecting continued slack across the economy.

With underlying price pressures contained and economic activity recovering gradually, policymakers are expected to hold rates unchanged on Wednesday while keeping a close watch on international energy markets and trade developments heading into the fall.

According to TransUnion Canada, consumer insolvencies jumped 17% in the second quarter of 2026, reaching their highest level in two years. That includes Canadians filing for bankruptcy or entering consumer proposals to restructure their debts.

For landlords and REIT investors, the concern is what happens next. As more households struggle to keep up with debt payments and everyday expenses, there’s less room in their budgets for housing costs. That financial pressure can eventually show up as late or missed rent payments, putting pressure on the income that rental-property owners and investors rely on.

What’s actually driving the 2-year high in consumer insolvencies?

According to TransUnion, Canada’s consumer insolvency rate climbed to 1.10% in the second quarter of 2026, up from 0.94% two years earlier. The increase is concentrated almost entirely among Canadians without mortgages, suggesting renters and others who don’t own property are facing mounting financial pressure.

But financial distress doesn’t immediately translate into outright default. Consumer proposals — structured plans that allow borrowers to repay a portion of their debt — now account for nearly 80% of insolvency filings, compared with about 60% before the pandemic. Eventually, however, about 1 in 5 financially distressed consumers will ultimately file for bankruptcy.

TransUnion Canada’s Matt Fabian noted in a statement that stable delinquency rates alongside rising insolvencies highlight growing consumer pressure. Non-homeowners are particularly vulnerable because they lack a property's financial buffer, he added.

At this point in time, most are restructuring their debts rather than simply walking away from them. But that could change if things get worse.

Why are retirees impacted by the current rise in consumer insolvencies?

For retirees who rely on rental income, their own finances are only one part of the equation. Their tenant’s finances matter, too.

That makes the distinction between a consumer proposal and bankruptcy important. A tenant who enters a consumer proposal isn’t necessarily walking away from their financial obligations. They’re restructuring their debts so they can continue making payments. But it’s also a sign that there is considerably less room in their household budget when another expense rises or an unexpected bill arrives.

For a landlord counting on rent to fund retirement, that creates a vulnerability — part of your monthly income depends on the financial health of another household.

And the latest TransUnion report clearly shows that household finances are becoming more stretched. Total Canadian consumer debt reached a record $2.64 trillion in the second quarter of 2026, up 4.6% year over year. Among Canadians carrying non-mortgage debt, the average balance climbed 7.6% to $28,118.

That doesn’t mean tenants will suddenly stop paying rent. But it does mean landlords — and investors whose portfolios depend heavily on residential rental income — should account for the possibility of late payments, missed rent or vacancies when building their retirement plans.

Why ‘my tenants are always fine’ may not hold up

The TransUnion report also offers insight into the Canadian communities feeling the most stress about finances — and it isn’t evenly distributed across the country.

According to TransUnion, serious delinquency — accounts 90 days or more past due — rose fastest in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario. Those provinces also drove much of the national increase in consumer proposals.

That geographic divide matters to small landlords and investors holding rental properties or residential REITs in those provinces. A rental property or REIT concentrated in a market where consumers are under greater financial pressure may carry a different level of income risk than one operating in a more financially resilient market.

But the takeaway isn’t that landlords should panic or assume financially stressed tenants won’t pay. It’s that retirement planning should account for tenant risk in much the same way investors already account for market risk, inflation and unexpected expenses.

The retirement math landlords often skip

The truth is, real estate already plays an outsized role in Canadians’ retirement plans. A 2025 Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP) survey found 62% of Canadians view homeownership as an important part of their retirement strategy, either as an investment or a source of financial stability.

But relying on rental income introduces a risk that rising property values and retirement calculators can easily obscure: Your retirement income depends on someone else being able to pay you.

Consider a retiree who expects $2,000 a month in rent to provide 40% of their retirement income. In effect, a substantial part of that person’s retirement paycheque depends on the financial stability of their tenant.

If that tenant misses two months of rent, the retiree is suddenly short $4,000. If the tenant leaves and the unit sits vacant, there may also be cleaning, repairs, advertising or other turnover costs before rental income resumes.

Those interruptions matter more in retirement because the reduction or elimination of employment income isn’t available to make up the difference. Instead, a retiree could be forced to withdraw more from savings or investments — potentially at a bad time for the markets.

The same principle applies to REIT investors. Owning units in a REIT removes the responsibility of dealing directly with tenants, but it doesn’t eliminate the underlying economic risk. If tenants struggle to pay, rental revenue can come under pressure, which can ultimately affect the income investors receive.

What retirees relying on rent can do now

None of this means rental income should be abandoned as a retirement strategy. It means it should be treated as variable income rather than a guaranteed paycheque.

Retirees and those approaching retirement can stress-test their plans by asking what would happen if rental income temporarily fell.

For instance:

• Run your retirement budget assuming one or two months of missed rent each year.
• Keep a separate cash reserve capable of covering several months of the rental property’s mortgage, property taxes, insurance and maintenance costs.
• Consider how dependent your retirement is on a single tenant, property or geographic market.
• Calculate whether your retirement plan would still work if rental income fell substantially for six months or a year.
• Maintain several sources of retirement income so rent isn’t responsible for carrying the entire plan.

What to takeaway from the latest insolvency snapshot

The latest insolvency numbers don’t suggest Canada’s rental market is about to collapse. Most consumers continue to meet their obligations, and entering a consumer proposal can actually be an attempt to regain control of debt rather than abandon it.

But the TransUnion data does expose a weakness that can be easy to overlook when planning for retirement.

If rental income is part of your retirement paycheque, your financial security doesn’t depend solely on the value of the property you own. It also depends on the financial resilience of the people paying to live in it. To reduce the risk, be sure to stress test each aspect of your retirement plan — and set up emergency savings to help you weather economic storms.

The class action settlement, approved by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on June 12, 2026, resolves allegations that Scotiabank unfairly charged repeat $48 NSF fees on re-presented pre-authorized debits.

According to law firm Koskie Minsky LLP, which represented the plaintiffs, approximately 148,000 eligible customers will receive a direct deposit of about $42.82 credited to their personal deposit accounts.

Here is what you need to know about the settlement and whether you qualify.

What was the lawsuit about?

The legal action focused on Scotiabank’s practice of charging multiple NSF fees on automated payment attempts between June 21, 2020 and April 30, 2024.

When a pre-authorized debit failed due to insufficient funds, the bank charged a $48 fee. If the same merchant attempted to re-process the exact same transaction within two to 30 days and it failed again, Scotiabank charged a second $48 fee.

The lawsuit argued that account holders had no control over when a third party merchant re-submitted a payment request, resulting in customers being penalized twice for a single failed bill.

Scotiabank did not admit any liability and denied the allegations, agreeing to the $10.45 million settlement to resolve the litigation without court findings of wrongdoing.

Who is eligible for the payout?

To qualify as an eligible class member, customers must meet all of the following criteria:

• Be a resident of Canada who holds or held a personal deposit account with Scotiabank
• Have been charged a $48 NSF fee between June 21, 2020 and April 30, 2024 on a re-presented pre-authorized debit within two to 30 days of a previous NSF fee from the same merchant, for the same amount and transaction details
• Have a living personal deposit account that remains open and able to accept deposits at the time of distribution
• Have not already received a reimbursement from Scotiabank for the duplicate fee

How do customers receive the money?

Eligible class members do not need to apply, fill out claim forms or register online.

Scotiabank is identifying qualifying customers automatically using its internal transaction records. Payments of roughly $42.82 are being deposited directly into eligible active bank accounts.

Notices to eligible account holders were distributed in July 2026 via Scotia Online Message Centre and mobile application updates. Class members who have questions or whose accounts have been closed can contact class counsel at scotiabankclassaction@kmlaw.ca for more information.

For most Canadians, tariff headlines can feel like background noise — some bureaucratic nonsense that probably won’t show up on a receipt. But that assumption is getting harder to hold. The US tariffs that took effect August 22 apply to more than 500 categories of Canadian goods, and Canada’s countermeasures, set to begin September 8, target more than 700 American products in return.

This isn’t an all-encompassing price hike across the economy. But for specific households — particularly those buying big-ticket items, working in an exposed industry or holding investments tied to affected sectors — the trade war is starting to translate into real numbers.

What actually changed, and why now

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s negotiators walked away from talks in late August after the terms the US proposed were deemed “uneconomic, unfair,” including limits on Canada’s ability to sign trade deals with other countries. Trump responded with a 50% tariff on roughly $20 billion of Canadian exports — about 5.5% of the total — covering everything from Canadian whisky and beer to hockey equipment, lumber and holiday goods.

Ottawa’s retaliation, arriving September 8, targets US steel, dairy, appliances, farm equipment, pulp and paper, as well as electronics. Notably, tariffs on both sides apply even to goods previously protected under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement — neither side has attached an expiry date.

Who feels it first

The average household shock may be smaller than the headlines suggest. Steven Okun, CEO of trade advisory firm APAC Advisors, points out that the affected goods represent about 5% of Canada’s $382-billion export market, calling the overall economic hit “not huge.”

However, that framing understates the exposure for some. Andreas Schotter, a professor of international business at Western University’s Ivey Business School, says the sharper household effect will show up less in sticker prices and more in “cancelled shifts, delayed hiring, weaker local spending and businesses postponing investment.”

Workers and small businesses tied to alcohol, dairy, furniture, lumber and manufacturing exports are the most likely to feel a squeeze on hours or hiring.

Where prices are likely to move

The tariff lists on both sides span building materials, electronics, vehicles and appliances, among many other categories, the industry group Canadian Federation of Independent Business notes.

On groceries and everyday goods, the near-term picture looks more contained. Analysts note that the volume of goods currently targeted is a small slice of overall trade, so early price effects on both sides of the border are likely to be modest and uneven rather than expansive and seismic. A prolonged standoff, however, could widen the list of tariffed goods and deepen the strain on household budgets.

What to do now

You don’t need to overhaul your finances over a dispute that could still be resolved at the negotiating table. But a few practical moves can reduce your exposure while it plays out:

• Delay large, discretionary purchases in exposed categories, such as vehicles, major appliances or building materials, rather than buying at the peak of the uncertainty
• Build or top up an emergency fund if your job touches an exposed sector, including manufacturing, forestry, steel, dairy or alcohol production and export
• Review investment exposure to industries named on either country’s tariff list, and speak with an advisor if the disruption is materially impactful to your portfolio
• Watch for actual retail price changes rather than assuming import costs stay absorbed by retailers, since that rarely holds over time

The trade war Rogoff calls a “bar fight” may end in weeks, or it may not. Either way, the practical response for most Canadians isn’t panic — it’s paying attention to where you’re exposed, in your job, your purchases and your portfolio and making a few deliberate decisions instead of reactive ones.

The discrepancy stems from an executive order signed last week by U.S. President Donald Trump, which directed the U.S. Geographic Names Information System to officially rename the body of water. Following the administrative change, Google Maps updated its system, defaulting to the “Lake America” label for users inside the United States while retaining “Lake Ontario” for Canadian users.

However, because many Canadian organizations embed third-party mapping software such as Google Maps using default application settings, the updated label inadvertently appeared across several domestic sites.

Crown agencies and public utilities, including Hydro One, Metrolinx and the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO), reported that their interactive locators showed the altered name over the weekend. Federal housing and infrastructure tools were similarly affected.

Agencies respond to geographic discrepancy

Infrastructure Ontario released a public notice acknowledging the issue on its website Sunday.

“Infrastructure Ontario is experiencing the same mapping issue as other government organizations that pull data directly from Google Maps,” the agency said. “We are actively reviewing our website to ensure that Lake Ontario is always identified by its correct name: Lake Ontario.”

Metrolinx temporarily disabled the interactive map function on its GO Transit station finder page while resolving the default setting. Hydro One confirmed that the issue originated from an external mapping provider, noting that teams worked with vendors to correct the geographic references.

By Monday morning, most public agency websites had updated their configuration settings to display “Lake Ontario.”

Online reaction and official pushback

The digital glitch quickly sparked reaction across social media platforms. Users on Threads reported that map features on Royal Bank of Canada digital platforms were briefly displaying “Lake America” over the weekend, though those reports could not be independently verified.

Ontario Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement Stephen Crawford addressed the glitch directly on social media.

“Some Ontario government agency websites pull map data directly from Google Maps. Following recent changes by Google, we’re actively reviewing our websites to make sure they all identify Lake Ontario by its correct name: Lake Ontario,” Crawford wrote on X. “As Ontarians, we will always stand up for our province, our identity and the places that define it.”

Premier Doug Ford echoed the sentiment, stating on social media that “Lake Ontario is and always will be Lake Ontario.”

In a statement, Google clarified that developers using its map application programming interfaces can customize location settings. When developers set their application region code to Canada, the platform defaults to displaying “Lake Ontario.”

Political leaders across Canada have rejected the U.S. name change, emphasizing that Canada retains equal sovereignty over the shared body of water and that the historical name, derived from the Huron-Wendat word for “great lake,” will remain the official designation in Canadian law and cartography.

The Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA), the umbrella organization representing Canada’s provincial and territorial securities regulators, has issued an investor alert warning that fraudsters are impersonating Union Bancaire Privée (UBP) — a legitimate Swiss private bank and asset manager. The scammers are specifically targeting Canadians who previously lost money on unregistered crypto platforms, including Plusinvesting, Spotrade, CenexPro and Altercoin.

For anyone attempting to recover crypto losses, understanding how these follow-up recovery schemes work is essential to avoid compounding financial losses.

How the recovery scam works

Regulators report that fraudsters contact victims claiming that a legitimate institution, such as UBP, holds their crypto assets in a temporary escrow or holding account. The scammer asserts that an upfront “release,” “tax” or “processing” fee must be paid before the funds can be transferred back to the investor.

To make the scheme appear authentic:

• Fraudsters generate forged documents carrying UBP’s official logos, including account statements, transfer confirmations, and payment demands
• Impostors pose as bank representatives using both real and fictitious employee titles

UBP has confirmed to regulators that it has no connection to these schemes, does not hold investor funds from these platforms and never requests upfront fees to release assets.

Why the trap works

Recovery scams succeed by leveraging the brand reputation of an established financial institution. Because UBP is a legitimate private bank, investors who have already experienced a loss are often primed to believe the recovery offer is genuine, particularly when presented with formal paperwork.

The psychological trap relies on exploiting a victim’s desire to recoup losses, making them more receptive to believable documentation.

The fraud pattern breakdown

As outlined by Canadian securities regulators, recovery scams typically follow a four-step progression:

1. An investor incurs losses on an unregistered or fraudulent trading platform
2. An individual claiming to represent a recognized institution makes unsolicited contact, asserting that lost funds have been located or held
3. The investor is instructed to pay an advance fee to facilitate the release of the funds
4. Once paid, the fraudster disappears or demands additional “administrative” payments while no funds are ever returned

Protective steps for targeted investors

The CSA advises investors to treat any unsolicited offer to recover lost funds with extreme caution. Key protective measures include:

• Never pay upfront fees to release funds: Legitimate financial institutions and regulatory bodies do not require advance cash payments or wire transfers to return client funds.
• Independently verify contact details: Don’t rely on phone numbers, email addresses or website links provided in unsolicited messages. Contact the institution directly using verified information from its official public website.
• Check registration status: Before dealing with any financial platform or advisor, verify their registration using the CSA’s National Registration Search.
• Report suspicious contact: Report recovery solicitations to your provincial securities commission and the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre.

Experiencing an initial loss on an unverified trading platform is distressing, but secondary messages offering guaranteed recovery are engineered to exploit that vulnerability. The safest response to anyone demanding an advance fee to release “held” funds is to break off contact, independently verify the entity, and report the interaction to authorities.

The Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) reports that the median solvency ratio for the province’s defined benefit (DB) pension plans climbed to a record 127% as of June 30, 2026, up five percentage points from the previous quarter. In plain terms, for every $1 promised to plan members in future benefits, these pension funds currently hold roughly $1.27 in assets.

While this represents a strong signal of pension health, a record-high solvency number does not automatically mean a larger monthly payout — and it serves as a reminder of how closely all retirement income tracks broader market currents.

What the regulator reported

FSRA released two separate funding updates:

• Q2 2026 Solvency Report: Shows that 93% of Ontario’s DB pension plans are projected to be fully funded on a solvency basis, up from 90% three months earlier.
• 2025 Report on DB Pension Funding: Highlights longer-term stability. On a going-concern basis — measuring a plan’s ability to pay benefits over the long run — the median funded ratio rose to 114% in 2025 (up from 112% in 2024), with 87% of plans fully funded. On a solvency basis (estimating plan health if wound up immediately), the median ratio hit 117%, with 87% of plans fully funded compared to 80% a year prior.

Why pension funds are performing well

According to FSRA, strong investment returns served as the primary growth engine. Ontario pension plans generated an average net return of 5.8% during the second quarter of 2026 alone.

This performance comes despite broader challenges. The regulator highlighted market volatility, global trade shifts, inflationary pressures and geopolitical uncertainty as ongoing risk factors. Consequently, FSRA is urging plan administrators to continue stress-testing their portfolios against economic shifts.

Does a well-funded pension mean higher payouts?

Not necessarily. A DB pension plan calculates payouts using a set formula based on your earnings history and years of service — not quarterly market swings. A 127% solvency ratio primarily indicates that the fund possesses a healthy reserve buffer to absorb potential market corrections without falling short of its long-term obligations.

What if you don’t have a DB pension?

The majority of working Canadians rely on Defined Contribution (DC) plans, RRSPs or TFSAs, where the individual carries the investment risk. The same economic factors noted by FSRA, such as interest rate changes, inflation and market movements, impact individual accounts directly — without the institutional cushion that backs pension funds.

Practical takeaways for your retirement plan

• If you have a DB pension: Review your annual pension statement to confirm its solvency standing, but remember that high funding levels maintain plan security rather than increasing your fixed benefit amount.
• If you manage your own savings: Check your asset allocation across your RRSP and TFSA to ensure your mix of equities and fixed income remains appropriate for your retirement timeline.
• For all savers: Treat positive macro news as an opportunity to review your overall retirement strategy rather than a signal to step back from active planning.

Strong solvency levels reflect prudent management across Ontario’s pension sector. Whether your retirement relies on a workplace pension or personal investments, staying informed about how your retirement income is structured.

On June 29, 2026, BC’s energy minister told Treaty 8 First Nations leaders that a new royalty system would deliver a royalty fee windfall over the next five years — compared to the framework it was replacing. By August 27, the government confirmed the forecast behind that promise contained a nearly $1.5-billion error.

For a province already carrying a record deficit, this shortfall isn’t a rounding error. At this point, the BC provincial government is forecasting a $13.3-billion shortfall for the 2026-27 fiscal year — and residents are already absorbing tax increases meant to help close that gap. This hole in forecasted revenues for the natural gas project — one of the government’s own revenue projections — raises a harder question: How much can taxpayers trust the numbers behind future tax and spending decisions?

Here’s what the error actually involves, why independent experts still aren’t satisfied with the government’s explanation, and what stakeholders should watch for as the new royalty system rolls out.

What is the BC government’s $1.5-billion error?

Under BC’s current transitional royalty system, the government calculates what it’s owed each month using the “plant inlet price” — the market price of gas minus the cost of transporting and processing it before it reaches a plant. Nancy Olewiler, an economist at Simon Fraser University (SFU) who reviewed the province’s numbers, found the government’s latest budget forecasts failed to subtract those transportation and processing costs — inflating BC’s expected share of industry profits by an estimated $500 million a year.

Confronted with Olewiler’s facts, the Office of the Premier acknowledged an “administrative error,” though it attributed the mistake to “unit and currency conversions” rather than a missed cost deduction. As a result, the average annual hit is about $292 million over five years — about 40% below the figure calculated by outside experts.

Why the explanation still doesn’t add up

Olewiler called the government’s account “incomplete and confusing,” noting officials cited “safety costs” — a term she said doesn’t exist in royalty calculations — and that its $292-million estimate sits at the low end of the range independent analysts have calculated.

As a result of Business in Vancouver (BIV) investigations, a second industry expert spoke out about the situation but asked and was granted anonymity by the BC publication. Speaking candidly to BIV reporters, this anonymous source confirmed that most of the province’s gas price forecasts are already in Canadian dollars so that a currency-conversion error couldn’t be the real source of the shortfall.

By the numbers:

• $1.5 billion — Error the BC government admits to in its natural gas royalty forecasts over five years
• $500 million per year — Independent estimate of the annual overestimation (credit to SFU economist Nancy Olewiler)
• $292 million per year — The government’s own, disputed estimate of the annual error
• 50% — The share of net industry profits BC’s new royalty system was designed to capture
• 11% to 14% — The share Treaty 8 First Nations say the new system will likely capture instead
• $13.3 billion — BC’s forecast deficit for the 2026-27 fiscal year

What’s riding on the new royalty system

And it gets worse, as the stakes go beyond one bad forecast.

BC’s new royalty framework, set to take effect January 1, 2027, was designed to capture 50% of net industry profits from Crown land. But according to a July 14 letter from four Treaty 8 First Nations chiefs, most price scenarios show the new system capturing only 11% to 14% of producer profits.

Treaty 8 First Nations could see additional losses in revenue due to a drilling and completion allowance that’s built into the new system. This allowance will end up reviving deductions that are similar to the old regime’s deep-well credit program and may result in a loss of up to $1 billion more in revenue.

While all BC taxpayers will feel the impact of this mathematical error, Treaty 8 First Nations, whose traditional territory overlaps the Montney gas fields, have their own financial stake, which is part of why their lawyers were among the first to flag the shortfall to the premier’s office.

Why this matters for your wallet

None of this money disappears without consequence. Given current economic conditions and ongoing trade difficulties, the BC government has already taken steps to manage the province’s growing deficit. BC has already raised its lowest personal income tax bracket rate to 5.6% from 5.06% and expanded taxes on luxury homes and foreign-owned property.

If natural gas royalties keep falling short of projections, the province is limited in their options: Borrow more, cut spending, or raise revenue elsewhere — and taxpayers typically absorb some combination of all three.

What to watch next

The government says it will correct the error in a September 2026 financial update. Beyond that, treat any government projection of a future “windfall” the way you’d treat an unverified investment tip: Useful context, not a guarantee.

When a promised gain depends on assumptions you can’t see, the safest move is to plan your own finances around the government’s current tax and service commitments — not the rosier numbers still being negotiated behind closed doors.

It didn’t work.

On August 25, 2026, Thi Nhan Nguyen, also known as Lynn Nguyen, was sentenced in B.C. provincial court to a nine-month conditional sentence and fined $103,785 — the same amount she evaded in income tax by falsely claiming a rental property as her principal residence.

In Canada, the principal residence exemption — where homeowners shelter capital gains from taxes when selling their home — is considered one of the most valuable tax breaks available to Canadian homeowners. It’s also one of the main triggers for a CRA tax audit.

For any Canadian who owns more than one property, the Nguyen case shows exactly what kind of paper trail is used to catch these types of falsified principal residence exemption (PRE) claims. Furthermore, it's a good reminder to find out whether your property still qualifies for the exemption.

Why the CRA just fined a B.C. landlord nearly $104K for lying about her "principal residence"

Nguyen became the registered owner of a Vancouver residential property in April 2012, which she would then sell in 2017. During the entire five years of ownership, a tenant lived in the home; at the same time, Nguyen fabricated documents and took steps to make it look like her primary residence — including using the address for correspondence and arranging to pick up mail at the property on a regular basis.

When Nguyen disposed of the property, she sold a 50% interest to a buyer and transferred the remaining 50% to a related party; however, she did not claim the sale when she filed her 2017 return.

CRA auditors began to ask Nguyen questions about the property and transaction in 2017. At that time, Nguyen, through a representative, continued to claim that the rental property had been her principal residence. She backed up this assertion by providing misleading information.

After almost a decade in the court system, Nguyen eventually pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion under the Income Tax Act. She was handed the hefty fine while also receiving a nine-month conditional sentence for evading taxes.

Why the exemption is not a paperwork trick

A PRE lets Canadians sell their primary home without paying capital gains tax on any increase in value. But the exemption only applies to a property you or your family actually lived in — what the CRA describes as “ordinarily inhabit” — not one you own on paper while a tenant lives there.

Since Nguyen did not ordinarily inhabit her rental dwelling, the property cannot be considered a principal residence, for tax purposes.

How a CRA rule change affected her case

About a year before Nguyen sold her rental property, the CRA amended its disclosure requirements. That meant any property sold had to be reported, starting with the 2016 tax year. As a result, all Canadians must now complete Form T2091(IND), even when the entire capital gain on the property is exempt.

Skipping that step — or designating a rental property that was never actually your home — doesn’t just trigger tax, it adds fines, interest and, in some cases, turns into a criminal matter.

While the penalty was severe, the courts could have fined her up to 200% of the tax evaded and imposed a prison sentence of up to five years (in addition to repaying tax owed plus interest).

Ultimately, Nguyen wasn’t caught and convicted because of one red flag. Her case involved several inconsistencies that CRA auditors pieced together over a multi-year audit — a tenant on record for years, an undisclosed sale and years of correspondence sent to an address the owner did not live at.

What Canadian landlords should do instead

If you have ever converted a home into a rental, or a rental into a home, the CRA has legitimate ways to manage the tax hit without misrepresenting the property.

To keep on the right side of the tax authority, consider the following:

• The PRE exemption applies only to a home you or your family actually lived in — ownership length doesn't matter; frequency and type of use do.
• Every residential property sale, including the sale of your principal home, must be reported on Schedule 3 and Form T2091(IND).
• Tax evasion fines can reach 200% of the amount owed, plus up to five years in prison.
• A CRA audit can look back for years, and inconsistencies compound over time.
• Section 45(2) and 45(3) elections can protect the exemption during a genuine change of use, without hiding anything.

The takeaway from Nguyen's case is that fabricating a trail of documents to defraud the tax authority is far riskier than disclosing and paying the taxes owed.

The decision comes as the corporation continues working to rebuild consumer trust in the wake of a major $500-million bread price-fixing settlement. Against that backdrop, clear shelf labelling carries heightened significance for shoppers navigating both corporate accountability and rising grocery costs.

What is changing on store shelves

According to Loblaw, the decision to reintroduce these labels is a direct response to customer demand for transparent product origin details amid trade tensions and tariff shifts between Canada and the U.S. The change follows online feedback from shoppers who noticed missing country-of-origin tags on produce displays or reported instances of mislabelled items.

Government officials have also emphasized the push, with Industry Minister Mélanie Joly publicly encouraging consumers to support domestic producers as a way to protect local jobs and strengthen Canada’s economic position.

Why consumer pressure worked

Industry analysts note that “Buy Canadian” sentiment remains a powerful driver for shoppers, making clear labelling essential for customer retention.

As University of Guelph food economist Mike von Massow observed, “Canadians have spoken.” At the same time, experts point out that tracking country of origin is increasingly complex in an integrated North American supply chain, where raw agricultural ingredients often cross borders multiple times during processing before reaching grocery shelves.

“Product of Canada” vs. “Made in Canada”

Understanding label terminology helps shoppers prioritize local options:

• Product of Canada: Indicates that virtually all major ingredients, processing and labour are domestic. For fresh produce, this guarantees the item was entirely grown and harvested in Canada.
• Made in Canada / Prepared in Canada: Means the product underwent substantial processing or manufacturing in Canada, even if some raw ingredients were imported (such as imported fruit concentrate blended and bottled at a Canadian facility).

Both labels serve distinct regulatory functions, but “Product of Canada” remains the most direct indicator of entirely domestic sourcing.

Spotting the “T” tariff symbol

The “T” symbol was originally introduced when Canadian counter-tariffs were enacted on select U.S. imports. The tag flags products directly impacted by border duties, helping consumers understand that price adjustments reflect tariffs, not standard retail markups. Shoppers will see the “T” icon applied to affected U.S. imports — including select seafood, honey and packaged goods — as updated inventory rolls out.

Practical tips for the checkout counter

• Prioritize “Product of Canada”: Look for this specific phrasing if avoiding foreign-sourced agricultural content is your primary goal.
• Recognize local processing: “Made in Canada” designations still support domestic manufacturing and processing jobs.
• Identify tariff tags: When an item marked with a “T” shows a higher price point, the increase reflects the border tariff.
• Verify unclear signage: If a label seems inconsistent or missing, ask store personnel for clarification before purchasing.

The fallout is already visible on shelves. H&M has quietly discontinued its 3XL and 4XL sizes. Mango cut its size 16 to 20 dress offerings from 6.6% of new inventory to just 0.5% in one year. And Torrid, a chain built entirely around plus-size fashion, closed 151 stores — a third of its brick and mortar locations — last year, with 30 more closures planned for the first half of 2026.

For the roughly three million Canadians now using GLP-1 medications — alongside the millions more who wear plus sizes and aren’t on the drugs — this isn’t just a fashion story. It’s a preview of where prices, selection and deals could be headed.

Why are brands stuck with billions in unsold stock?

For decades, apparel companies planned inventory around a population that kept getting larger every year. That trend has reversed for the first time in 50 years, which points to GLP-1 adoption as the leading driver.

If current trends hold, the firm estimates more than 400 million apparel units a year could be misaligned with real demand by 2027 — representing close to US$5 billion in retail capital and lost margin. That mismatch cuts both ways: demand for extra-small and small sizes is climbing, while orders placed a year or two ago for larger sizes are landing on shelves at a rate that fewer shoppers are buying.

What it means for your closet and your budget

For Canadians who wear plus-sized clothing, the most visible effect is shrinking selection, but it isn’t spread evenly across the market. Trend-led retailers are cutting fastest. Anthropologie’s plus-size dress offerings fell from 10.5% to 9% year-over-year, while budget-focused Walmart added inventory for larger sizes this season, bucking the trend.

The upside, at least in the near term: brands rarely destroy stock they can still sell, so keep an eye out for clearance racks and outlet channels over the next several months for the sizes and styles that missed their moment.

In the longer-term, plus-size shoppers are already voting with their wallets on the resale market. On the platform ThredUp, purchase volume for large, extra-large and plus-size women’s apparel grew 17.4% this year — more than double the 6.8% growth rate for small and medium sizes.

Finally, if you use a GLP-1 medication and expect your size to keep changing, budget for wardrobe turnover the same way you budget for the prescription itself.

The bottom line

None of this means plus-size shoppers are out of options. It means the easy years — when major retailers were expanding size ranges by default — are behind them, at least for now. The brands still investing in extended sizing, and the resale market picking up where retail leaves off, are the places to look for the better deals and the better selection next.

That instinct is exactly what got a Gabriola Island, BC couple in trouble. Travis Wade Seward and Joanna Samantha Harris each pleaded guilty to fisheries offences after a tip led fishery officers to catch them harvesting clams after dark in Degnen Bay, an area closed to shellfish harvesting since 1993. They had 150 pounds of clams in bags and buckets and admitted they were harvesting commercially. A provincial court judge fined each of them $750 and placed them on one year of probation.

Their story highlights a false assumption a lot of Canadians share right now: That wild food is automatically free food. In reality, ignoring a closure can cost far more than the groceries it was meant to replace.

Why a ‘closed’ bay isn’t a technicality

Degnen Bay has been off-limits for more than three decades because it’s a busy anchorage, and federal Crown prosecutor Marilou Bourdeleau told the court that the roughly 150 boats that moor and anchor there raise the risk of fecal contamination.

Eating shellfish from a contaminated area isn’t a minor food-safety slip — it can be fatal, and a single unidentified source can trigger wider coastal closures that affect other harvesters. Signage at Degnen Bay marks the closure clearly, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) publishes a full list of closures on its website, along with a phone line for questions.

What illegal harvesting actually costs Canadians

Degnen Bay isn’t an isolated case. DFO enforcement records from this year alone show how quickly fines add up: Four harvesters were fined a combined $18,000 for illegal shellfish harvesting near Deep Bay, BC, while two harvesters caught in a closed reserve near Nanoose Bay were fined a combined $10,500 and banned from fishing for two years. None of those penalties include the seized catch, court time or, in some cases, the health costs of eating tainted shellfish.

In other words, a bucket of “free” clams that saves a household maybe $40 to $60 at the fish counter can turn into a fine in the thousands — a poor trade by any household budget.

How to forage for food legally in Canada — and still save money

For Canadians genuinely trying to stretch a grocery budget, legal harvesting is still an option; it just takes a few minutes of homework first.

Before you head to the shore

• Check DFO’s shellfish closure maps for your specific beach before harvesting, not just the general area
• Call DFO Pacific Region’s toll-free line if a closure sign is missing or unclear
• Get a tidal-water recreational fishing licence where one is required, and know the daily catch limits for each species
• Avoid harvesting near marinas, anchorages, storm outfalls or river mouths, where contamination risk is highest even in open areas
• When in doubt, don’t harvest — a delayed dinner costs nothing; a fine and a hospital visit cost plenty

The bottom line

Rising grocery prices are pushing more Canadians to look for free or low-cost food sources, and that’s a reasonable response to a real squeeze on household budgets. But “free” only holds up if the food is actually safe and legally available. A quick check of DFO’s closure listings before digging in the sand is the cheapest insurance a forager can buy — far cheaper than a $750 fine, a probation order or a trip to the emergency room.

In an Aug. 24 consent order with the B.C. Financial Services Authority (BCFSA), Jason Alexander Leslie acknowledged he committed professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a licensee when he purchased a one-bedroom unit in a subsidized housing development and immediately rented it out.

Subsidized units meant for primary residents

Leslie purchased the unit in February 2018 at Vivid at the Yates, a 20-storey building on Johnson Street in Victoria. The project was built under a BC Housing pilot program designed to help lower- and middle-income buyers enter the market, offering units priced an average of 12% below market rate thanks to a $53-million provincial government loan to the developer.

To qualify for the program, buyers were required to earn a gross annual income under $150,000 and agree to live in the home as their primary residence for at least the first two years.

According to the regulatory consent order, Leslie took possession of the apartment on May 17, 2021, and immediately placed it on the rental market. He later admitted he never had any intention of living in the unit.

Leslie, who represented himself as the buyer’s agent during the purchase while working with Camosun Properties Ltd./Re/Max Camosun, also collected a real estate commission on the deal. He is no longer listed as an agent with Re/Max.

Penalties include returning property and income

The BCFSA launched an investigation after receiving two complaints in March 2024, including one from a strata council member at the building and another from a member of the public.

As part of the settlement, Leslie agreed to surrender the unit back to BC Housing and return the net real estate commission he earned on the transaction. He was also ordered to pay back the net rental income generated from the property, reimburse BC Housing for its legal expenses and property transfer tax costs, pay a $200,000 administrative penalty and pay $5,000 in enforcement expenses.

Upon returning to the profession following his six-month licence suspension, Leslie will be subject to one year of enhanced brokerage supervision by a managing broker.

Regulator warns against exploiting programs

Jon Vandall, senior vice-president of financial professionals at the BCFSA, said the penalty delivers a strong warning to the industry.

“The $200,000 penalty and six-month licence suspension sends a clear message: exploiting an affordable home ownership program for personal gain is serious misconduct that erodes public confidence in real estate professionals and will result in significant consequences,” Vandall said in a statement.

Leslie is not the only individual facing scrutiny over purchases in the development. The B.C. government has launched 13 separate lawsuits against other buyers accused of violating covenants at Vivid at the Yates, including income thresholds and occupancy requirements.

How to report real estate misconduct in B.C.

The BCFSA investigation into Leslie was prompted by tips submitted directly from the public and local residents.

Members of the public who suspect a real estate licensee of deceptive dealing or suspect a violation of affordable housing covenants can file an official complaint through the BCFSA online portal at bcfsa.ca or contact BC Housing directly to report suspected occupancy violations.

The victim, who prefers to remain anonymous, hadn’t taken out a loan recently, so the discovery was as perplexing as it was disheartening. Police believe the debt traces back to a passport stolen from the resident’s vehicle in the Lower Mainland three years earlier.

It’s a costly reminder that identity fraud doesn’t always show up right away, and when it does, it can take years to unwind. Moreover, this isn’t a particularly singular occurrence, as Canadians lost more than $704 million to fraud in 2025, with identity fraud being the most commonly reported type.

Here’s how a years-old stolen document turned into a five-figure debt, and what Canadians can do now to catch fraud before it costs them.

How a stolen passport became a $13,000 loan

Sgt. Shane Worth of the Oceanside RCMP said investigators believe someone used the stolen passport to open an account with a moneylender, or gained access to the victim’s identity through some other means and took out a loan of about $13,000.

The victim only learned about the debt when a credit card application flagged it. The collection agency chasing the loan had never been able to reach them, because the contact information on file belonged to the fraudster, not the victim.

Why “it’s just a lost ID” can be the wrong assumption

Many Canadians treat a stolen wallet or passport as a paperwork problem: cancel the cards, replace the document and move on. But a name, date of birth and a few other personal details are often enough that a fraudster needs to open credit in someone else’s name.

“If they have your name and birthdate and a couple other little things about you, it’s quite easy to open up an account in your name and assume your identity and rack up a whole bunch of debt,” Worth said.

One thing worked in this victim’s favour: they had filed a police report when the passport was first stolen. That record gives investigators a starting point and will likely help the victim get the fraudulent debt removed from their credit history.

How to check whether someone has borrowed in your name

Canadians don’t need to wait for a credit card application to find out if they’ve been targeted. Most banks let customers check for unfamiliar accounts through their apps, and Equifax and TransUnion, Canada’s two major credit bureaus, can be contacted directly to review a credit file.

Both bureaus will add a free fraud alert to a credit report, which stays in place for up to six years and tells lenders to verify a person’s identity before approving any new credit in their name.

Since a fraud alert placed with one bureau isn’t automatically shared with the other, Canadians need to contact Equifax and TransUnion separately.

What to do if you’re a victim of identity fraud

Here a few immediate steps that can help cushion the blow if you’ve fallen victim to a form of identity fraud:

• Report the loss or theft of ID to local police right away, even if nothing seems wrong yet — it creates a paper trail
• Contact both Equifax and TransUnion to request a free credit report and place a fraud alert
• Report the fraud to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre
• Check bank and credit card accounts regularly for unfamiliar activity or hard inquiries

The takeaway for Canadians

A stolen ID doesn’t have to turn into years of hidden debt. The gap in this case wasn’t the theft itself, it was the years between the theft and its discovery. Canadians who lose a passport, driver’s licence or other ID need to act promptly or risk having a fraudster potentially take advantage of the sensitive information they now have access to.

Eventually, CTV News picked up on her frustrating tale — highlighting the dangers of booking a vacation through a third-party site.

A cancelled flight and a stalled refund

Initially, Vivian, a Mississauga resident, and her husband had booked round-trip tickets to the Maldives through Expedia. At the time of booking, she paid $9,934 for two seats. The first part of her trip went smoothly enough. She flew to Poland in March to meet her husband, with a plan for the two of them to continue on together to the Maldives with a layover in Abu Dhabi. But after boarding the plane in Poland, they were told that all flights were grounded as a result of regional conflict in Abu Dhabi that prompted airspace closures.

“Unfortunately, the war broke out, and we got stuck on the plane, and the flight got cancelled,” Vivian shared. Etihad Airways confirmed the couple was entitled to a complete reimbursement. However, because the reservation was processed via Expedia, the airline was required to return the funds to the booking platform rather than directly to the passenger.

Why the funds got trapped

Etihad Airways transferred the $9,934 refund to Expedia, and Vivian was advised to expect the credit within four to eight weeks.

Despite repeated status and update checks, months passed without payment.

The situation shifted only after CTV News Toronto intervened on her behalf. A company spokesperson explained that Vivian’s initial request had been incorrectly submitted to the airline. Expedia apologized for the oversight, resubmitted the claim and confirmed a full refund was finalized alongside a $400 travel voucher for the disruption.

What Canadian travellers are entitled to

Under Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR), airlines must process eligible refunds within 30 days. However, these regulatory rules bind the operating air carrier — they do not automatically govern independent online travel agencies sitting between the traveller and the airline.

This gap represents the core financial risk of third-party bookings: Your statutory rights apply to the airline, but your transaction sits with an intermediary.

How to protect your money before booking

• Book directly when possible: Purchasing tickets straight from the airline or hotel ensures a direct customer relationship, simplifying cancellations, schedule changes and refund requests.
• Keep detailed paper trails: Save confirmation emails, ticket numbers, cancellation notices, and written communications from both the airline and the booking agent.
• Confirm processing workflows: Before confirming a third-party reservation, review whether refunds are issued directly to your credit card or funnelled through the agency first.
• Escalate in writing: If a promised refund exceeds the stated timeline, submit formal written follow-ups to both the third-party agency and the operating carrier.
• Reference statutory timelines: Use the 30-day benchmark established under the APPR to establish clear expectations when tracking stalled claims.

While Vivian ultimately recovered the nearly $10,000 she’d spent on this trip, doing so required months of persistence and media intervention. The lesson for all Canadian travellers is to keep records, use trusted brands and become familiar with the process for recovering fees or funds, should plans fall through.

At issue is the decision by the federal government to award an $11.3-billion contract to Chantier Davie Canada to build six Polar Class 3 icebreakers at its Lévis, Québec shipyard.

Chantier Davie Canada is a privately held firm, so there's no publicly traded stock tied to the deal — that means investors, including Canada’s pension fund, are locked out of this type of domestic investment deal.

At the heart of the issue are Canadian opportunities. Decision-makers at the helm of Canada’s pension funds — including the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) that nearly every working Canadian pays into — say there simply aren't enough big domestic projects worth their money. Critics say that excuse is wearing thin — and some want Ottawa to force the issue by law.

How that argument gets resolved could have serious implications for the funds — and the pension cheque — used to secure retirement income in Canada.

What Ottawa is actually building with this latest investment

The recent Davie's Lévis order is one of the largest single industrial contracts awarded this year. The Prime Minister's Office says the icebreaker program will create close to 5,000 construction jobs and add nearly $650 million per year to Canada's GDP. Plus, the commissioned vessels will be built from nationally produced steel under the federal government’s ‘Buy Canadian’ policy.

Construction on the first ship starts next year, with deliveries running into the 2030s.

To be clear, the contract is considered a smart investment — it helps a Canadian firm, creates Canadian jobs and aids Canadian resource-reliant sectors. But Ottawa funded it directly, even though Canadian pension funds sit on $2.5 trillion asking for more deals like this.

As a result, critics are now asking why the government is footing an $11.3 billion bill — taxpayer dollars — when pension funds are explicitly asking for more big domestic infrastructure to invest in? The argument is that by bringing in pension capital as a co-investor or lender, taxpayers wouldn't carry the full load — and pension funds would help fuel domestic economic growth while matching their mandate to secure future retirement funds.

Allocation breakdown: Domestic vs. foreign

To be clear, the gap is bigger than just one deal or just one investment fund.

Research from Policy Options found the Maple 8 — Canada's largest public pension funds that pioneered the ‘Maple Model’ — invest less than half the global industry average domestically. If fixed income were excluded, Canadian exposure falls to roughly 12 cents of every dollar managed.

What is the Maple Model?

The ‘Maple Model’ — pioneered by major players like Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), and Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan (OTPP) — shifted focus from domestic stocks toward global diversification. As a result, Canadian public pension equity allocations to Canadian companies dropped from nearly 28% in 2000 to single digits. In recent years, more than 90 top Canadian CEOs signed an open letter calling on governments to incentivize or mandate higher domestic allocations from the Maple 8 to domestic opportunities — a dynamic that pits fiduciary duty against national economic growth.

Ottawa isn’t overtly blocking pension fund investments

In recent years, Ottawa has taken steps to remove some of the barriers Canadian pension funds face when trying to invest in private-public infrastructure investments within Canada.

In December 2024, Ottawa announced it would remove the cap preventing Canadian pension funds from owning more than 30% of the voting shares of a Canadian entity.

In August 2025, Ottawa also created the Major Projects Office to speed up approvals. Headquartered in Calgary, AB and housed under the Privy Council Office, this office helps to coordinate and streamline financing and federal regulatory approval for "national interest projects.”

Some criticism over this direction

Not everyone agrees that this emphasis on domestic investment is good for pensioners.

The Fraser Institute argued in a March paper that mandating domestic investment would effectively act as a tax on Canadian pensioners' returns, since it would override fund managers' ability to chase the best risk-adjusted returns globally.

What this means for your money

Anyone who’s worked in Canada, this issue will impact you. You can't opt out of CPP, and if you belong to a workplace pension like Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) or a provincial plan, you likely have limited say over its investment mix. So, Ottawa’s decisions will impact your household budget, particularly when you start to rely on CPP.

For those not yet close to retirement, the overarching issue — how much “home bias” is smart versus costly — applies just as much to your own RRSP or TFSA.

Loading up on Canadian stocks and funds can feel patriotic and familiar, but Canada represents a small slice of global markets. The same trade-off pension funds are wrestling with publicly — diversification versus domestic loyalty — is one every Canadian investor makes, knowingly or not, every time they build a portfolio.

For now, no domestic investment mandate is law. If Ottawa does legislate one, it's worth watching whether it applies to funds like CPP, since that could shift how your CPP contributions perform over time. In the meantime, check your own asset mix for how much of it sits in Canada versus abroad, and treat ‘buy Canadian’ pension politics as a reminder to diversify your own retirement savings deliberately rather than by default.

Super prime borrowers, who are the top-rated credit tier, increased their total balances by 6.5% year-over-year to $1.74 trillion, outpacing the 5.9% growth seen among subprime borrowers. In short, Canada's most creditworthy consumers are expanding their borrowing faster than those typically identified as financially vulnerable.

Here’s what households across all risk tiers should consider.

Who is driving Canada's debt growth?

Debt growth was uneven across credit tiers. Prime plus balances — borrowers with interest rates that are based on the prime rate plus added basis points — rose by 1.2%, while prime balances remained flat; at the same time, super prime and subprime borrowers — borrowers with the lowest loan interest rates — drove the largest growth in new debt balances.

Part of the issue is that credit limits for these super- and subprime borrowers grew in step with total balances — an indication that lenders expanded available credit lines rather than consumers maxing out existing limits.

Non-mortgage debt reflects a similar pattern.

The average Canadian carrying non-mortgage debt now owes $28,118 — a 7.6% year-over-year increase. The major causes for debt accumulation growth were auto loans (up 7.9%), lines of credit (up 7.4%), personal loans (up 7.1%) and credit cards (up 5.1%).

The market segment that drove the growth of non-mortgage debt was concentrated primarily among prime plus and super prime consumers (growing at roughly 5%), while subprime debt balances edged down by 0.2%.

High-credit borrowing vs. household stress

While the TransUnion report does not use the term, the pattern mirrors what market analysts call "doomspending" — a new term for spending frivolously with no concern for future financial consequences. Doomspending often occurs when a person (or household) wants to maintain lifestyle spending and, as a result, takes on debt during uncertain economic conditions rather than tightening budgets.

Matt Fabian, senior director of financial services research and consulting at TransUnion Canada, described the shift as "a widening divide across risk tiers," with super prime, prime plus and prime consumers continuing to add non-mortgage debt while subprime consumers grew more cautious.

For higher-income households, increased borrowing may represent planned investments, such as home renovations or vehicle purchases made possible by available credit capacity. The danger is that carrying higher debt loads can increase the household’s vulnerability if economic conditions shift.

Quiet pressure on mortgage holders

New mortgage originations grew by 7.8% year over year — slower than the double-digit growth seen in prior quarters — as affordability constraints kept prospective buyers on the sidelines.

Nevertheless, existing homeowners are carrying larger balances: The average outstanding mortgage balance rose 4.2% to $293,270, even as total active mortgage accounts dipped slightly. Newer buyers took on smaller loans on average, with initial mortgage balances dropping 2.4% to $354,683, reflecting larger down payments on property purchased or the decision to purchase lower-priced homes.

Where financial vulnerability is concentrated

One other area of concern highlighted by the TransUnion report is that mortgage delinquencies of 60 days or more rose modestly at the national level, concentrated primarily in Ontario and British Columbia, where average mortgage balances are highest.

Overall, however, early-stage mortgage loan delinquency did show improvement, with the proportion of Canadians 30-plus days behind on payments falling to 4.27%, marking a two-year low. The real pinch point can be seen in the later-stage delinquencies (60-plus and 90-plus days past due), which are trending upward.

Another area that the TransUnion report highlighted as a cause for concern was insolvency rates. For consumers, insolvency rates rose to 1.10%, up from 0.94% two years ago, driven mainly by non-homeowners. Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario accounted for the majority of severe delinquency increases. Most insolvencies were filed as consumer proposals — structured repayment agreements — rather than bankruptcies, indicating that distressed borrowers are seeking formal restructuring to manage their debt loads.

Practical steps for managing personal debt

Regardless of your current credit rating, virtually every Canadian household can insulate themselves from the negative consequences of debt through a few simple steps.

• Evaluate debt against income, not credit scores: A strong credit score reflects payment history, not available room in a monthly budget.
• Distinguish planned debt from cash-flow gaps: Differentiate between intentional financing for capital assets and borrowing used to cover recurring operational shortfalls.
• Prepare for mortgage renewals: Homeowners with mortgages renewing over the next 12 to 24 months should model potential rate adjustments early to adjust household budgets accordingly.
• Address debt stress early: If non-mortgage debt payments become difficult to manage, exploring credit counselling or formal restructuring early preserves more financial options than waiting until payments are missed.

New data from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) show the national mortgage delinquency rate fell to 0.22% in the second quarter of 2025 — the first quarterly drop in three years. In Ontario, that mortgage delinquency rate climbed to 0.23%, pushing it above the national average for the first time since at least 2012.

The gap is starkest in Toronto, where the delinquency rate jumped 60% year-over-year from 0.15% to 0.24%. It’s the first time in more than a decade that Toronto’s mortgage default rate has been higher than the national average.

At the same time, data from this CMHC report shows that a decline in national mortgage loan defaults was led by lower delinquency rates in Atlantic Canada, Quebec and the Prairie provinces.

Despite household budgetary pressures and ongoing economic insecurity, this CMHC report clearly shows that Canada isn’t in a mortgage crisis — it’s a distinctly Ontario problem.

Here’s what’s behind the shift, who it affects most and what to do if your mortgage renews soon.

Why Ontario is the outlier

While British Columbia homeowners are moving in the same direction as Ontario, BC’s delinquency rate didn’t rise as sharply — increasing from 0.16% to 0.19% year-over-year.

In Ontario, the housing sector leading the delinquency rate rise is the Toronto condominium market. CMHC’s own housing research notes that Toronto-area condo sales have declined, inventories have risen, and a growing number of investors are under financial strain as prices fall.

The report authors point out that today’s market differs from the downturn of the 1990s — when lending rules were not as strict. Tougher loan regulations combined with a structural housing shortage mean the city isn’t overbuilt the way it was three decades ago.

The inherent problem is that buyers who locked in at near-record low rates after buying in the early-2020s are now feeling the pinch as those mortgages come up for renewal at today’s higher cost of borrowing. Some absorb those extra costs; others sell, while others end up defaulting on their mortgage.

Renewals are making the timing worse

About 60% of all outstanding mortgages in Canada will renew in 2025 or 2026, and roughly 60% of those are expected to see a payment increase, according to the Bank of Canada’s 2025 Financial Stability Report. The Bank notes most affected borrowers already have income growth, savings or home equity to absorb the increase, since these mortgages were stress-tested when originated.

Still, homeowners in higher-priced markets like Toronto, where mortgage balances run larger, even a moderate rate increase can mean a payment jump of several hundred dollars a month — and homeowners whose home equity has shrunk at the same time as costs have increased have less room to refinance their way out of the problem.

What to do before you fall behind

If you’re worried about keeping up with a renewal, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) recommends contacting your lender before you miss a payment, not after. Federally regulated banks are expected to offer relief measures to homeowners showing early signs of financial stress, including waiving prepayment penalties, not charging interest on interest, or extending amortization for the shortest period possible.

Those approaching a renewal should start comparing mortgage rates as soon as possible — ideally two or three months before the renewal deadline date. If you find a good rate, go through pre-approval and get the rate in writing. Most lenders will lock in a pre-approved rate for 30 to 180 days.

For those facing the uncertainty of higher mortgage payments and negative cash-flow property, consider your options for selling. Remember, a sale you initiate will always be more favourable than a forced sale by a lender or court-ordered sale.

Bottom line for Ontario homeowners

Ontario is no longer the mortgage market’s steady middle ground. With delinquencies above the national average for the first time in more than a decade, homeowners renewing in the next year — particularly in Toronto — should treat their renewal date as a deadline for action, not a formality. Reaching out to a lender early remains the most effective way to keep a temporary cash squeeze from turning into a missed payment.

At least two major developments have landed in the province over the past six months, headlined by Bell Canada’s massive 300-megawatt AI campus under construction south of Regina in the Rural Municipality of Sherwood. Nearby, Aztec AI Health has approached the City of Moose Jaw with plans for a 150-megawatt facility, while Saskatoon city council recently voted to study the impacts of potential builds proposed for the surrounding Rural Municipality of Corman Park.

Yet despite the sheer scale of these projects, critics say Saskatchewan lacks a clear regulatory framework, leaving local councils to handle multi-billion-dollar approvals with little provincial guidance.

Local councils bear burden of complex approvals

Deciding whether a data centre gets built currently falls on municipal councils. That means local leadership teams accustomed to handling routine farm zoning or light industrial parks are suddenly tasked with evaluating complex technical plans, massive power draws and heavy cooling systems.

The lack of provincial oversight came into sharp focus after the province confirmed its Ministry of Environment did not conduct an environmental impact assessment for the Bell Canada project near Regina. Federal regulators also declined to step in, noting construction had already started in late April before review requests arrived.

Instead, Bell Canada conducted its own self-assessment on flagged issues like noise and drainage, leaving community members frustrated. The project has already drawn two public protests and an opposing petition from residents worried about water consumption and industrial noise.

Speaking at a community event in Moose Jaw, Opposition NDP Leader Carla Beck called the current confusion unacceptable, stating it remains unclear what criteria the province is applying to these massive builds.

“Some of the issues that people are raising, I mean, they’re very reasonable questions that the government should have answers to,” Beck said.

Massive energy needs and self-generated power raise questions

The biggest flashpoint in the data centre rush comes down to basic utility demands. AI servers require enormous amounts of electricity to run around the clock, prompting tech developers to bring their own power solutions to the table.

In documents submitted to the Rural Municipality of Sherwood, Bell Canada revealed plans to build an on-site natural gas plant and solar farm to supplement its power needs. While adding dedicated power generation helps offset demand on the main power grid, residents and environmental advocates worry about the broader impact of operating fossil-fuel generation alongside high-density tech hubs.

Under Saskatchewan law, projects using substantial resources, creating unregulated waste or introducing new resource-related tech are supposed to trigger an environmental assessment. Yet the Ministry of Environment did not explain why Bell’s project failed to trigger a formal review under those rules, stating only that not all developments require one and that companies must follow standard laws.

Calls grow for clear provincial standards

Tech proponents maintain that data centres bring vital technology infrastructure, construction jobs and long-term tax revenue to the province. Companies also point out that modern facilities use closed-loop cooling systems engineered to minimize overall water use.

However, local leaders argue that relying on corporate self-assessments is not enough when dealing with facilities of this size. As cities like Saskatoon order independent studies to weigh the pros and cons of incoming proposals, municipal groups continue pushing the province for clear, enforceable rules on power sourcing, water rights and environmental reviews before more ground is broken.

Even Canadians whose children aren’t already begging for an e-scooter or e-bike, avoiding these e-powered commuters has become a common experience. Despite their rising popularity as a cheap and green way to travel, these motorized personal devices are proving increasingly dangerous — and sometimes deadly.

Across the country, health professionals and law enforcement are sounding the alarm over a surge in catastrophic injuries and fatalities associated with electric micromobility devices — a category that includes all small, lightweight, personal vehicles powered by electric motors that can typically travel at speeds under 32 kilometres per hour. The warnings from doctors, nurses, paramedics and the police highlight the dangerous gap between rapid adoption, inconsistent regulations and road safety enforcement.

A growing trail of severe injuries and fatalities

The physical toll of these devices is mounting fast in emergency rooms across Canada.

Earlier this month, a 60-year-old man died after his e-scooter struck the open driver-side door of a parked vehicle on Driftwood Avenue near Jane Street in Toronto. He was rushed to hospital with life-threatening injuries only to succumb just a few days later. A week later, a Kelowna, BC youth died after an e-scooter collision.

Sadly, these deaths are part of a growing list of fatal micromobility incidents in the city — and across the country. In Toronto alone, police have already recorded more than 500 reported micromobility-related collisions this year. New data from BC Children’s Hospital tracked e-scooter-related visits among youth ages 13 to 17. From April 1, 2025 to March 31, 2026, this one emergency room department saw 81 visits, more than double the 37 visits recorded the year before. While, data released by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) reveals a 22% increase in hospitalizations from e-scooter injuries across Canada. In general, hospital staff are seeing an alarming wave of limb fractures, facial trauma, and severe brain injuries due to electric mobility device use.

Speaking on CIHI’s Canadian Health Information Podcast, Dr. Brian Rowe, a professor of emergency medicine at the University of Alberta, highlighted the severe risks involved: “About 17% of our cases involved head injury. And if you have a significant head injury, you could be disabled for life.”

The crisis is particularly dire among young Canadians:

• 10 youth deaths: Data highlighted by the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) revealed that 10 Canadian youths died from injuries involving e-scooters and similar devices in 2025 alone.
• Youngest riders at risk: The average age for reported incidents involving youth is between 10 and 12 years old, with children aged 10 to 15 accounting for 42% of pediatric cases, and children aged 5 to 9 making up another 18%.
• Rising ER numbers: At Toronto’s Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), pediatric emergency specialist Dr. Daniel Rosenfield tracked a sharp rise in youth emergency department visits. Speaking on the Canadian Institute for Health Information’s Canadian Health Information Podcast, Dr. Rosenfield noted that while SickKids saw just a single e-scooter injury in 2020, that number rose to 46 in 2024. In May 2025 alone, the hospital treated 16 injured children — more than all preceding month-of-May totals combined.

Speed, balance, and a latchkey regulatory patchwork

Why are these devices proving so hazardous?

Stand-up e-scooters feature a high centre of gravity and small wheels that are extremely susceptible to road hazards like potholes. Private, non-rental e-scooters are capable of reaching speeds well above 40 to 50 km/h — speeds that mimic mopeds or motorcycles — and motivated e-scooter owners can easily bypass speed limiters with quick online tutorials. Furthermore, physician surveys indicate that an overwhelming majority of riders — up to 80% or more — do not wear helmets.

E-bikes, on the other hand, are similar to their traditional non-electric counterparts with the added benefit of increased speeds with minimal physical effort. However, “higher e-bike speeds reduce reaction time for riders to avoid potential collisions,” explains Dr. John Maa in a paper he published with his colleagues in July 2024. He continues by saying: “Attractive styling, naming, and bicycle-like appearance may not convey these risks to younger riders or parents. Special caution should be exercised in traffic and when travelling downhill, as the heavier battery can lead to faster acceleration and loss of control.”

Laws for e-bikes and e-scooters haven’t kept up to speed

Complicating matters is a confusing patchwork of provincial and municipal laws.

In provinces like Ontario, British Columbia and Prince Edward Island, the minimum operating age for standard e-bikes and e-scooters is legally set at 16.

In other jurisdictions, like Quebec and Nova Scotia, the age limit drops to 14, while some provinces leave age restrictions entirely up to individual municipalities.

In some cities like Toronto, private e-scooters remain illegal on public roads and sidewalks, yet sales continue unrestricted and enforcement is virtually non-existent, leaving riders exposed to mixed motor traffic without adequate protection or safety standards.

In other cities, like Vancouver, there are pilot programs that allow for e-scooters on municipal roads but only if the driver meets the minimum age requirements and the device can’t go above 25 km/hr.

In virtually no Canadian jurisdiction is a driver’s license, insurance or protective gear required.

Calls for standardized rules and redesigns

Tragic stories — like that of 25-year-old Austin Walker, who was killed by an impaired hit-and-run driver while riding a rental e-scooter home in Saskatoon, SK — have led grieving families and health experts to call for immediate action.

Doctors and advocates are pushing for:

• Unified national standards: Establishing consistent age limits, speed caps, and helmet mandates across all provinces.
• Stricter vehicle engineering: Redesigning devices at the manufacturing level to prevent dangerous speed modifications and improve vehicle stability.
• Enhanced local enforcement: Public safety campaigns and active police enforcement focusing on speed limits, helmet compliance, and sidewalk bans.

Provinces are beginning to react. Nova Scotia recently announced plans to ban children under 14 from operating e-bikes, while Transport Canada and provincial leaders are participating in national working groups to address maximum speeds and vehicle standards.

Until comprehensive regulations and safer infrastructure keep pace with technology, pediatricians and emergency doctors warn that preventable injuries — and deaths — will only continue to rise on Canadian roads.

Have you had a close call or a negative encounter with an e-scooter or e-bike on Canadian streets? We want to hear your story. Reach out directly to Leslie Kennedy at leslie.kennedy@wisepublishing.com.

This growth is happening as total Canadian consumer debt hit a record $2.64 trillion. But the increase in what Canadians owe isn’t spread evenly. Some borrowers are taking on more debt from a position of strength. Others — particularly younger drivers and those purchasing used vehicles — are leaning on financing just to keep up with the rising cost of getting around.

For anyone financing a vehicle right now, or struggling to keep up with an existing car payment, understanding why auto debt is climbing matters more than the headline number.

Why are car loan balances climbing so fast?

Higher vehicle prices are only part of the story. Loans are also being stretched over longer terms to keep monthly payments manageable, which pushes up the total amount owed even when rates hold steady. Used car loan delinquencies — especially loans originated between 2021 and 2023, when vehicle prices and interest rates were both elevated — are a significant contributor to rising missed payments, according to an Equifax Canada report on consumer credit trends. In response, lenders have tightened approval criteria for new auto loans, even as overall originations continue to rise modestly.

Who’s feeling the most pressure?

TransUnion’s data point to a widening gap between borrowers. Subprime consumers actually pulled back slightly on non-mortgage borrowing over the past year, a sign of caution among higher-risk households, while super prime, prime plus and prime consumers kept increasing their balances. “Credit growth in the second quarter reflected a widening divide across risk tiers,” said Matt Fabian, senior director of financial services research and consulting at TransUnion Canada.

Nick Cherry, divisional chief executive officer of Ardent Credit Services and Phillips & Cohen Associates, said consumer credit stress remains a real issue for auto dealers and lenders even as some indicators stabilize. He points to higher borrowing costs, squeezed household budgets and extended repayment periods as the underlying pressure.

What would Dave Ramsey say about all this?

Personal finance personality Dave Ramsey has been blunt about car debt specifically, telling a caller that stretching for a vehicle they couldn’t pay cash for would keep them financially stuck. “Love yourself enough not to go into car debt,” he asserted. He has pointed to his own firm’s research on more than 10,000 millionaires, most of whom credited ditching car payments as a key step toward building wealth, and argues the fix isn’t a better loan — it’s skipping financing altogether and buying only what you can pay for outright.

What to check before you finance a car

• Compare the total cost of the loan, not just the monthly payment — a longer term can make a payment look affordable while adding thousands in interest over time
• Ask what happens if you need to sell or trade in early, since drawn-out financing raises the odds of owing more than the car is worth
• Get pre-approved financing before visiting a dealership, so you know your real rate ahead of any payment terms negotiated at the lot
• Budget for insurance, maintenance and fuel separately from the loan payment, since these costs have also been rising

What to do if you’re already behind

Falling behind on a car payment doesn’t mean the only options are defaulting or handing back the keys. Contact the lender before missing a payment, since many offer short-term hardship arrangements. A licensed insolvency trustee can also explain whether a consumer proposal, which restructures debt without full bankruptcy, might apply. Consumer proposals continued to account for close to 80% of insolvency filings nationally in Q2 2026, according to TransUnion, suggesting more Canadians are choosing structured repayment over walking away from debt altogether.

The fastest-growing debt isn’t always the riskiest, but auto loans deserve extra scrutiny right now since so much of the growth is tied to longer loan terms rather than incomes catching up. Before signing a new financing agreement — or refinancing one that’s become unmanageable — run the total cost first, not just the payment that fits this month’s budget.

The good news: none of it has to be a surprise. With a bit of planning, you can budget for your new family member and avoid the financial scramble that catches so many first-time pet owners off guard. Here's a full breakdown of what to expect in that critical first year, using the most current Canadian data available.

Canadians love their pets

Pet ownership in Canada remains high, with more than half of all households sharing their homes with a dog or a cat. According to the Canadian Animal Health Institute (CAHI)'s 2024 Canadian Pet Population Survey, published in 2025, Canada was home to an estimated 7.2 million dogs and 8.2 million cats.

While these companions bring immeasurable joy to our lives, it's important to recognize — and plan for — the financial responsibilities that come with pet parenthood. The commitment extends far beyond the initial adoption or purchase cost. Pet parents need to provide quality nutrition, regular grooming, veterinary care and various other necessities, and vet costs in particular have continued to climb faster than general inflation.

Fortunately, by being proactive, you can manage and reduce pet care costs. By understanding and anticipating both immediate and long-term expenses, you can develop a practical budget that ensures your companion receives the best care while keeping your finances on track.

If this is the year you've decided to bring home a pet, we've broken down the costs you can expect in the first year for a new dog or cat. We've focused on dogs and cats as they are the most popular — and typically most expensive — pets in Canada, but many of these budgeting principles apply to other animals, too.

Bringing a new dog home: First-year costs

When you bring a new dog into your home, there are several initial expenses to consider. These one-time costs include both the price of acquiring your pet and the essential supplies needed to provide proper care.

While these are typically considered one-time purchases, it's important to budget for eventual replacements. Items may need to be replaced due to normal wear and tear, and puppies will outgrow their initial supplies as they mature. Investing in quality products upfront can actually save money over time — a well-made harness will cost more initially, but replacing a cheaper model every few months adds up fast.

According to the OVMA's 2025 Cost of Care report, the core expenses of owning a puppy — veterinary care, food, supplies, insurance and licensing — add up to $5,493 to $5,595 in the first year, before you've paid anything to bring the puppy home. Add a breeder fee or adoption cost on top of that, and a purebred puppy realistically runs $6,500 to $10,000-plus in year one, depending on the breed. Adopting an adult dog is less expensive — closer to $6,000 all-in — and most adoptable dogs come already spayed or neutered, which helps reduce those early vet costs.

Here are some of the common first-year costs for a puppy or dog (approximate, in Canadian dollars):

• Breeder costs: $1,000 to $4,500
• Adoption fees: $200 to $800
• Veterinary exams with vaccines: $642
• Neuter/spay: $1,016 to $1,118
• Microchip: $137
• Deworming medication: $91
• Pet insurance: roughly $1,200 to $1,900 per year on average, though premiums range from about $400 to $1,600-plus depending on breed, age and coverage
• Pet food: $866
• Grooming: $60 to $150
• Collar and leash: $55
• Bed: $78
• Crate: $100 to $300
• Obedience classes: $555 for a typical group-class course; private training runs higher
• Licence: fees vary by municipality — Toronto, for example, charges $25 for a spayed or neutered dog; other cities may charge more or less

Additional costs to consider include pet care services like dog walkers or doggy daycare, especially if you work full-time outside the home. These services ensure your pet gets proper exercise and attention during the day. When planning vacations, you'll also need to factor in boarding facilities or pet-sitting services.

Property damage is another financial consideration. Dogs may occasionally have accidents indoors, and puppies or anxious dogs can exhibit destructive behaviour like chewing furniture or damaging flooring. It's smart to budget for potential repairs or replacements of damaged items — because it happens to almost everyone.

Bringing a new cat home: First-year costs

The financial commitment of cat ownership is generally less than that of dogs, but first-year costs are still significant. The OVMA's 2025 Cost of Care report puts the first year of kitten care at $3,928 to $4,114 in core costs. This higher first-year expense — compared to subsequent years — is due to one-time purchases and essential medical procedures that set your kitten up for a healthy life.

Here are some of the common first-year costs for a kitten or cat (approximate, in Canadian dollars):

• Total veterinarian bills: around $1,900 to $2,100
• Vaccinations and exams: $642
• Spay/neuter: $786 to $972
• Microchip: $137
• Deworming medication: $91
• Pet insurance: roughly $25 to $60 per month, or about $300 to $700-plus per year, depending on age, breed and coverage level
• Pet food: $674
• Collar: $22
• Bed: $55
• Scratching post: $44
• Carrier: $89
• Litter and litter box: $308
• Licence: varies by municipality — Toronto, for example, charges $15 for a spayed or neutered cat

Tips to keep first-year pet costs manageable

Whether you're bringing home a dog or a cat, a few strategies can help stretch your budget without shortchanging your new pet:

• Consider pet insurance early. The best time to enroll is when your pet is young and healthy — premiums are lower and pre-existing conditions won't be an issue
• Buy in bulk where it makes sense. Litter, dry food and certain supplies are often cheaper per unit when purchased in larger quantities
• Ask your vet about payment plans. Many Canadian veterinary clinics now offer financing options or payment plans for larger procedures
• Shop second-hand for supplies. Items like crates, beds and toys can often be found in good condition at consignment stores or through online marketplaces

Don't forget to consider all pet-care costs

If you have a pet, you know the costs can add up fast: food, grooming, toys, and especially vet visits.

According to the OVMA, the total annual cost of owning an adult dog — vet care, food, supplies and insurance combined — comes to about $5,118 per year. And that doesn't account for expensive emergencies.

That's why paying for pet insurance often ends up being more affordable than paying out of pocket for surprise vet bills.

Final word

A new pet's first-year costs have climbed since the last time these numbers were published, and dogs in particular now come with a bigger price tag than many first-time owners plan for. But the costs are almost entirely predictable — vaccines, spay or neuter surgery, food and supplies happen on a known schedule. Build a budget around the ranges above, get pet insurance in place while your dog or cat is still young and healthy, and the surprises left will be the good kind.

On paper, Gill’s assertion has some legs. As of 2025, the Lone Star State’s GDP was about US$2.9 trillion. In comparison, during the same calendar year, Canada’s GDP was around US$2.3 trillion, according to Statista. This figure represented a 1.7% annual increase — the slowest year since 2020, when the nation was grappling with the stymying effects of a pandemic.

What this ultimately amounts to is an offensive remark meant to downplay Canada’s efforts to uphold its economic sovereignty. It’s also a distraction from what Canadians should be squarely focused on: when this trade war stops being a war of words but an actual catalyst for higher prices that will shape budgets and spreadsheets for the foreseeable future.

What actually changed

Just after midnight on August 22, a 50% U.S. tariff took effect on a list of Canadian goods that includes hockey equipment, cement, liquor and dairy. Canada's Department of Finance confirmed it will match those tariffs “dollar for dollar, rate for rate,” applying 15%, 25% or 50% rates to C$27.6 billion worth of American imports starting September 8. Ottawa also pledged C$7.5 billion for affected workers and businesses, on top of nearly C$25 billion already committed.

Carney was blunt about why: “You're at war when you get attacked. We got attacked.”

Why GDP size isn't the risk that matters

Gill's comparison treats this like a contest of who can afford to lose more. But the real exposure is about dependence, not size.

Canada sends 71.7% of its goods exports to the U.S. as of 2025, which means domestic producers have far less room to redirect sales elsewhere on short notice than American exporters do. However, energy is largely shielded; the US still exempts Canadian oil and gas from the new tariff, and takes in more Canadian crude than from any other country. The reason for this is twofold: American petroleum refineries tend to prefer heavy crude oils that originate from Canadian wells, while existing pipeline infrastructure seamlessly connects the two markets.

Where this shows up in your budget

For most Canadians, the impact won't arrive as a headline. It arrives as a renovation quote that's suddenly higher, a job in an exposed industry that gets quieter or a favourite import that costs more once Canada's own counter-tariffs kick in. Ottawa hasn't yet published the full product-by-product list for its September 8 countermeasures, so the specific items are still worth watching for, not assuming.

If you’re concerned with preparing for this latest batch of inflationary provisions, here are some things to be mindful of before September 8:

• If you're mid-quote on a big purchase or renovation, ask whether the price is locked in, and for how long
• If you work in dairy, cement, spirits or sporting goods manufacturing, ask your employer directly about exposure rather than guessing from headlines
• Watch for Canada's finalized retaliation list before September 8, especially if you regularly buy American-made goods
• If you run a business that exports to the US, build a contingency plan now rather than after a rate hits your invoices
• Keep a small cash buffer for near-term price movement instead of making large purchases in a rush

None of this means panic. It means treating September 8 as a real deadline rather than a talking point. The GDP fight between Ottawa and a Texas congressman will fade from the news cycle. The tariff schedule won't — and it's the one number in this story that actually lands on a Canadian household budget.

But the head of one of Canada’s biggest banks says he’s finding reasons for optimism. “While business confidence and investment are difficult in the current context, I am encouraged by the way governments and business leaders are mobilizing around Canada’s economic priorities,” National Bank of Canada chief executive officer Laurent Ferreira told analysts on the bank’s third-quarter earnings call.

Here’s what Ferreira is pointing to, and what that mobilization could actually mean for Canadians’ jobs, borrowing and finances.

What the CEO is seeing

Ferreira didn’t downplay the risk. “The unresolved and escalating trade conflict with the U.S. continues to create economic uncertainty and challenges for businesses across the country,” he said, adding that it’s “difficult to forecast” how the conflict plays out. But he also credited a federal support package announced the day before the call as “welcome” relief for affected businesses and workers, part of a $7.5 billion tariff-relief package Ottawa unveiled alongside its retaliatory tariffs.

More broadly, Ferreira said discussions with clients and partners point to one conclusion: “Canada is taking the right steps to strengthen the foundations of its economy, and it has fiscal room to continue doing so.” He singled out government and business investment flowing into reindustrialization, infrastructure, defence and energy as evidence the country is retooling rather than just absorbing the hit.

The number behind the optimism

Some of that room to manoeuvre comes from Canada’s bank regulator. In June, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) lowered the Domestic Stability Buffer — the extra capital cushion the country’s six largest banks must hold against system-wide risk — to 3% of risk-weighted assets from 3.5%. OSFI said the move frees up roughly $74 billion in capital across the big six banks, translating into as much as $673 billion in additional lending capacity.

The regulator was explicit about where it expects that capital to go: opportunities in “defence and security, critical infrastructure, resources and artificial intelligence” as the economy adapts to shifting trade dynamics. Ferreira called the change a source of “additional flexibility to support Canadian businesses” as they navigate the tariff environment.

What this could mean for Canadians’ money

Ferreira and OSFI both flagged the infrastructure, energy, defence and resources sectors as the ones most likely to see new hiring and contract activity if banks and governments follow through on deploying capital there. For business owners, it may mean more room from lenders for expansion or project financing than there was a year ago.

For everyday borrowers, the picture is more mixed. National Bank’s own results show mortgage lending growing briskly — up 14% year over year — but executives say that growth is coming from market share gains and competition, not from banks passing along the new capital flexibility as materially cheaper rates. In other words: more lending capacity doesn’t automatically mean a better deal on your next mortgage or loan, but it does suggest banks have less reason to pull back on credit if the economy weakens further.

How to read the optimism

It’s worth taking Ferreira’s comments for what they are: a bank CEO’s read on a fast-moving situation, not a guarantee. He said himself the conflict is “unresolved and escalating” and that the outcome is hard to forecast. National Bank’s own chief risk officer has flagged that unemployment, tariff pressure and geopolitical risk will keep weighing on some borrowers even as overall credit performance holds up.

While it may be hard to try to stay afloat of a mercurial news cycle and tariff landscape, here is some overarching advice to help stay grounded, both professionally and financially:

• Watch where the money actually moves, not just the rhetoric. Job postings and project announcements in infrastructure, energy, defence and resources are a more useful signal than a CEO’s tone on a conference call
• If you run a business, ask your lender directly whether the new capital flexibility changes what’s available to you — it won’t show up automatically
• Keep budgeting as though tariff uncertainty continues. Optimism about the broader mobilization isn’t the same as certainty your own household costs won’t rise

The bottom line

Ferreira’s optimism isn’t about tariffs disappearing — it’s about Canada having room to respond to them. Regulators freed up tens of billions in bank capital, and Ottawa backed its retaliatory tariffs with a relief package for the businesses caught in the crosshairs. For Canadians, the practical takeaway isn’t to relax. It’s to watch whether that mobilization turns into real jobs, real project financing and real credit availability in the months ahead — and to keep your own finances resilient either way.

The investment firm that employed the advisor didn’t initially catch it. Only after a client complaint did the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) — the national self-regulator for investment dealers, mutual fund dealers and securities marketplaces — uncover what had happened. The paper trail was hard to deny: a signature-verification system that missed an obvious mismatch, a compliance team that never asked why a longtime, elderly client was liquidating everything, and $800,000 that landed in a new account belonging to the advisor and his spouse two weeks later.

A CIRO hearing panel fined the firm, PFSL Investments Canada Ltd., $250,000 plus $15,000 in costs. The case serves as a stark reminder that a long-standing relationship with an advisor doesn’t guarantee protection, and that Canadians managing their own investments, or a parent’s accounts, need to know what safeguards a firm is required to run.

What went wrong with the paperwork?

Since 2018, PFSL has allowed advisors to collect client signatures electronically through DocuSign, letting clients type or draw a signature online rather than sign a paper form. CIRO’s hearing panel found the setup was easy to exploit: an advisor only had to enter an email address, and whoever controlled that inbox could complete the form.

The nine redemption forms in this case used an email address that didn’t match the one on file with PFSL, and in one instance, the IP location tied to the electronic signature didn’t match the client’s home. PFSL’s supervisory system failed to flag either mismatch.

Why didn’t anyone ask questions?

Seven of the nine redemptions were large enough to trigger PFSL’s own internal review thresholds. Each form instructed the firm to redeem all funds and close the account — an instruction that should automatically prompt a double-check for an elderly client of 12 years. PFSL requested one signature guarantee and queried a single redemption over its investment mix, but never called the client directly to confirm any of the nine instructions.

About two weeks later, the advisor and his spouse — who was also registered with the firm — opened new accounts and deposited $800,000, claiming the money was personal savings. Neither had ever kept more than a few thousand dollars invested with PFSL, and the advisor’s annual income from the firm hadn’t topped $50,000 in five years. PFSL also knew the advisor had filed a consumer proposal in 2018. None of these red flags triggered a deeper investigation.

How the client was made whole

PFSL investigated only after receiving a complaint. It terminated both advisors, reversed the redemptions where possible, and recovered roughly $885,869 from the pair. To fully restore the client’s accounts, PFSL covered the remaining shortfall out of its own funds, paying an additional $245,022.

CIRO credited that cooperation as a mitigating factor when accepting the settlement, while emphasizing that the underlying compliance failures constituted serious misconduct.

Until a policy rewrite in 2025, PFSL’s rules also permitted advisors to accept appointments as power of attorney or executor for clients without disclosing them until the appointment became active, contrary to CIRO regulations. The same client had named the advisor’s spouse to both roles years earlier.

How to protect an aging parent’s accounts

Seniors 65 and older make up more than a fifth of households served by mutual fund dealers, and CIRO guidance highlights this demographic as the most vulnerable to financial exploitation. A few proactive habits can drastically reduce the risk:

• Require verbal confirmation: Ask the firm (not just the advisor) to confirm any large redemption or account closure by phone with the account holder before processing.
• Add a Trusted Contact Person (TCP): Request that statements, trade confirmations and unusual transaction alerts also go to a designated second contact, such as an adult child.
• Check Power of Attorney status: Inquire whether an advisor holds power of attorney or executor status for any client accounts. This is heavily restricted under regulatory rules, and any exceptions must be formally disclosed.
• Escalate suspicious requests: Treat any sudden push to liquidate a portfolio as a reason to call the firm’s head office directly rather than dealing solely with the assigned advisor.

A 12-year working relationship with an advisor is not, on its own, a guarantee of safety. As this ruling demonstrates, even regulated firms can miss glaring red flags until the money is gone. Building in a second layer of verification is the best way to safeguard family wealth.

In April 2025, McLuckie’s Pickering, Ontario company, JPSM Golf, imported 330 electric trolleys from China and paid the standard 6.1% import tariff, which amounted to just over $19,000 according to CBC. However, this past May, CBSA reclassified the shipment under the China Surtax Order — a 100% tariff introduced in October 2024 to target Chinese-made electric vehicles. The new bill: $182,883.95, which includes both interest and GST.

The surtax McLuckie is fighting doesn’t even exist anymore — Ottawa repealed it earlier this year after reaching a trade deal with China. But his bill remains, and it’s a reminder that small businesses that import goods carry a financial risk many Canadians don’t think about until it lands on their desk.

Here’s what happened, and what any Canadian importer can do to avoid a similar surprise.

How a golf caddy became ‘an EV’

Even though the vehicles were designed to travel alongside a golfer and not actually transport a human being, CBSA’s letter to McLuckie concluded the trolleys can “undoubtedly” be classified as a motor vehicle because they use an electric motor to move and carry goods. The reclassification landed nearly a year after the shipment cleared customs — well within the four-year window CBSA is allotted to review and re-determine tariff classifications on past imports.

For a six-employee company, the gap between a $19,000 tariff bill and a $183,000 one isn’t an accounting footnote — it’s an existential threat.

Why this matters beyond golf trolleys

The China Surtax Order was designed to protect Canada’s auto industry, but its wording covered broad vehicle and parts categories. That’s a pattern worth watching: trade actions aimed at one industry can extend to products that only loosely resemble the intended target, especially any commodity with a battery, a motor or wheels.

Any Canadian business that imports goods — electronics, appliances, tools, even toys — can be reassessed years after the fact if CBSA concludes a shipment was misclassified. The surtax climate around Chinese-made goods also keeps shifting: Chinese EVs have since moved to Canada’s import control list, requiring a federal permit instead of a surtax.

What to do if your shipment is reassessed

Importers who disagree with a CBSA reclassification have 90 days to file a dispute using Form B2, the Canada Customs Adjustment Request. Crucially, the disputed amount generally has to be paid in full before interest stops accruing and before a formal review proceeds, so cash flow — not just the legal argument — becomes part of the fight. If CBSA’s internal review doesn’t resolve the dispute, importers can appeal to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal within 90 days of that decision.

A customs broker or trade lawyer can help build the case, but for a small operation, that’s another cost layered on top of an already-volatile cash position.

How to protect your business before the next shipment

For Canadians running — or starting — an import-dependent business, a few habits can reduce the odds of a shock reassessment:

• Request an advance ruling from CBSA on tariff classification before importing a new product line, not after
• Set aside a contingency reserve — even 5% to 10% of the import value — for potential reassessments that’s kept separate from operating cash
• Track surtax and trade-remedy orders relevant to your product category, since these can change with little warning
• Work with a licensed customs broker who checks HS codes against current surtax schedules, not just standard duty rates
• Keep detailed product documentation — specs, intended use, marketing materials — that supports your classification if it’s ever challenged

McLuckie’s case is still working its way through the appeals process, and there’s no guarantee he’ll get the bill reversed. For other Canadian business owners, the lesson is import classification risk doesn’t disappear just because a shipment already cleared customs — be prepared, be diligent and be vigilant of bureaucratic minutiae.

Shannon Desjardins says she's been comfortable working on engines most of her life, and did her own oil changes on her leased 2024 Subaru Outback for about two years. In January, with the vehicle at roughly 71,000 kilometres, an oil warning light came on, went off, then came back on for good. She had the car towed to the dealership.

The dealership found sludge and other serious engine problems — and denied her warranty claim. “They're telling me the only reason they are denying it is because I did my own oil changes,” Desjardins told CTV News. She's still making both lease and insurance payments on a vehicle she can't drive while the case is under review.

For anyone who does their own maintenance, this case shows where the savings can stop making sense financially — and what to do instead to keep a warranty intact.

What actually voids a warranty — and what doesn't

Doing your own oil changes does not automatically void a manufacturer's warranty. Automakers, including Subaru, generally allow owners to service their own vehicles, provided the work follows the manufacturer's schedule and the owner can prove it with receipts for the correct oil and filter and records of when the work was done. What can sink a claim isn't the DIY part; it's not being able to show, after the fact, what was used and when.

That's the gap Desjardins may now be caught in. She says she kept track of her own oil changes, but it isn't clear whether she retained the dated, itemized receipts a dealership would produce automatically. Once a dealer finds engine sludge, the question becomes whether the owner's records can rule out a lubrication problem — and a personal log without receipts is a harder case to make than an accredited service department's paper trail.

Why the math on DIY maintenance can flip fast

“When you do oil changes yourself, the risk is too high. I wouldn't do it,” Mohamed Bouchama of Car Help Canada told CTV News. He said going to a dealer builds a documented service history, and ensures the correct oil and filter are used every time.

As repairs get more expensive, the calculation changes: “You might think you are saving $100 or $150, but it could end up costing you thousands of dollars afterwards,” Bouchama noted.

For leased vehicles, the stakes are higher

The financial exposure is worse for lessees than owners. Desjardins is still on the hook for monthly lease payments and insurance on a vehicle sitting at the dealership, with no timeline for a resolution. Lease agreements typically require the vehicle be maintained to the manufacturer's standard — so an individual facing a denied claim can end up paying twice: Once for a car they can't use, and again if the repair bill falls to them.

New immigrants, young drivers and first-time lessees are often the least familiar with these terms, since contracts spell out maintenance obligations in detail that may be easy to skim past at signing.

How to protect your warranty if you do your own maintenance

For Canadians who still want to do their own oil changes, a few habits close the documentation gap:

• Follow the manufacturer's exact service interval and oil spec, not a generic rule of thumb
• Keep dated, itemized receipts for oil and filters — not just a personal log
• Photograph the odometer at each service alongside the receipt
• Note warning lights immediately, and get the vehicle inspected before driving further
• Ask the automaker in writing what documentation it requires for self-performed maintenance

For a repair that could run into the thousands, a few extra few minutes of paperwork at every oil change is a small price for keeping a claim defensible.

The bottom line

DIY maintenance isn't the problem — unverifiable maintenance is. Before servicing a leased or financed vehicle yourself, weigh the modest savings on each oil change against what you'd owe if a major repair is denied, which includes the cost of the fix, plus payments on a car sitting idle. If you can't produce dealer-grade records, the safer move on a vehicle still under warranty may be having at least the major services done, and documented, by a licensed shop.

Writing on the r/PersonalFinanceCanada forum, a 45-year-old Reddit user shared their distress after realizing that money they assumed could be tapped to buy a first home had actually been transferred into a Locked-in Retirement Account (LIRA).

The user explained that after switching jobs a few years ago, a financial advisor recommended moving their workplace retirement savings into a LIRA. At the time, the poster assumed the account functioned just like a standard Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP).

Although the investment performed well, yielding returns up to 18% on a balance under $50,000, the realization that the money could not be withdrawn to purchase a dwelling of their own hit hard.

“Stupid me!!” the user wrote, adding they felt lost because their liquid bank savings were minimal and they still do not own a home. “What stresses me is now I’ve come to know that my money is stuck till I retire and even then it’s controlled withdrawals. Not full liberty.”

The Redditor is hardly the first Canadian to end up locked into a LIRA without realizing its strict restrictions on withdrawing before retirement. The recommendation to move the savings into a LIRA was financially sound — but had this Redditor known the restriction rules upfront, the decision might have gone differently.

Why a LIRA transfer is recommended

When an employee departs a company, transferring workplace retirement funds into a self-directed LIRA is frequently recommended to keep the money growing without triggering an immediate tax bill.

Choosing a LIRA transfer provides several key benefits:

• Tax deferral: The full transfer value moves tax-deferred into the LIRA, avoiding an immediate withholding tax penalty at the time of departure.
• Investment control: Moving the money allows the saver to choose higher-growth assets like equities — which drove the poster’s 18% return — rather than keeping funds tied to a former employer’s pre-selected plan options.
• Protection from employer risk: Severing financial ties with the former workplace insulates the savings if the company ever faces insolvency or corporate restructuring.

What other options did they have?

Because plan rules vary depending on whether workplace funds originate from a pension or a group savings plan, alternative options may have existed at the time — even if the poster wasn’t aware of them. They include:

Taking a cash payout

Depending on the specific plan terms, liquidating part or all of the account might have been an option upon leaving the company. While cashing out triggers immediate withholding taxes and adds the full lump sum to that year’s taxable income, it would have provided immediate liquid cash for a down payment.

Transferring to a flexible RRSP

If the workplace funds were held in a regular group RRSP rather than a locked-in pension, the balance could have been rolled directly into a personal RRSP. This path preserves the tax shelter while keeping access open for federal programs like the Home Buyers’ Plan.

Leaving funds in the former plan

If permitted by the former employer, keeping the money in the plan would have bought more time. Delaying the decision allows a saver to carefully evaluate homebuying goals before committing capital to a locked-in vehicle.

Why LIRA money is locked away

A Locked-in Retirement Account is specifically designed to hold transferred pension or retirement assets. Unlike a standard RRSP, which permits tax-sheltered withdrawals at any time or penalty-free borrowing through the Home Buyers’ Plan, a LIRA is strictly locked until early retirement, usually around age 55.

Users who responded in the Reddit post noted that while the poster’s 18% return was strong, that growth was driven by the underlying investments selected inside the portfolio, not the LIRA account itself. Identical investments held inside a regular RRSP or Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA) would have yielded the same returns with far more flexibility.

Strategic options moving forward

For Canadians finding themselves in a similar situation, here are several actionable strategies:

Leave the investment to grow

At age 45, the poster has roughly 10 to 20 years before reaching retirement age. Allowing the balance, which at the time was under $50,000, to remain invested in the LIRA lets compound interest work over time. Because LIRA withdrawals are strictly capped in retirement to protect pension longevity, the account serves as a secure base for late-life financial security.

Explore statutory unlocking rules

In Canada, unlocking a LIRA before retirement is restricted to specific statutory conditions, which vary depending on provincial or federal jurisdiction.

Exceptions typically include:

• Financial hardship: Severe financial stress, such as potential eviction, low income or significant medical expenses.
• Small balance rules: If the account balance falls below a specific threshold relative to the Year’s Maximum Pensionable Earnings (YMPE).
• Non-residency: Permanently moving away from Canada.

Unless the Reddit poster meets official hardship criteria, moving the funds into a flexible cash account is generally not permitted.

Pivot homebuying strategies to new accounts

While the LIRA cannot be tapped for a down payment, saving through dedicated, tax-advantaged homebuying accounts is recommended for future progress.

• First Home Savings Account (FHSA): First-time buyers can contribute up to $8,000 per year, to a lifetime limit of $40,000. Contributions are tax-deductible, and withdrawals used for a home purchase are entirely tax-free.
• Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA): A flexible vehicle where growth and withdrawals are completely tax-free, allowing full access to funds no matter how they are used.

For Canadians planning major milestones like homeownership, reviewing account rules and withdrawal restrictions before transferring workplace funds can prevent costly misunderstandings.

A hard lesson, but not a total loss

While the Reddit poster may feel stuck today, their predicament is far from a financial failure. The under-$50,000 balance locked inside the LIRA remains fully tax-sheltered and actively compounding, providing a solid foundation for retirement that cannot be accidentally depleted.

The road to owning a property will require building a new down payment through flexible accounts like an FHSA or TFSA rather than tapping past pension savings. It may not be the shortcut the user hoped for, but understanding the rules now prevents an unintended tax mistake, keeping both their future home and their forthcoming retirement on track.

The union announced the preliminary deal following intensive negotiations that began earlier this month. The agreement comes at a precarious time for Canada’s auto sector, as cross-border supply chains face pressure from ongoing trade friction and proposed tariffs.

Agreement delivers gains despite trade friction

Unifor National President Lana Payne praised the bargaining committee’s efforts, noting the agreement delivers significant gains despite broader economic instability.

“Our bargaining committee worked diligently to reach these agreements, which deliver strong income and benefit gains, amid some of the most challenging times in our history,” Payne said in a statement.

Trevor Longpre, Unifor’s GM master bargaining chairperson, highlighted the economic backdrop that shaped the high-stakes talks.

“We entered this round of talks in the midst of tariff uncertainty and relentless US trade aggression,” Longpre said in a statement, adding that the negotiating team succeeded in securing the pattern set earlier this year in union talks with Ford Motor Co.

Negotiations unfold amid rising cross-border trade friction

The talks between GM and Unifor played out against a volatile trade backdrop marked by recent threats of new duties on Canadian-made vehicles, auto components and raw materials.

Cross-border auto supply chains have faced intense scrutiny as bilateral trade discussions stall over tariff exemptions for vehicles assembled in Canada. The prospect of tariffs threatens to increase production costs for automakers operating integrated networks across Ontario and the US Midwest.

Despite these macro-economic pressures, securing a labour agreement stabilizes operations at key facilities, shielding GM from potential labour disruptions as the industry navigates broader regulatory and trade uncertainty.

Deal impacts key Ontario manufacturing plants

The tentative deal covers unionized employees at GM operations across Ontario, including the Oshawa Assembly Plant, the St. Catharines Propulsion Plant, the Woodstock Parts Distribution Centre and the idled CAMI Assembly Plant in Ingersoll.

A central priority for the union leading into bargaining was the future of the CAMI facility, where roughly 1,000 workers have faced uncertainty following production pauses.

Union members to vote on ratification this week

The Unifor General Motors Master Bargaining Committee has unanimously endorsed the tentative agreements.

Union members are scheduled to review full details of the proposed contracts during ratification meetings set for August 29 and August 30. If approved by membership, Unifor will shift its focus to negotiations with Stellantis to complete pattern bargaining across the Detroit Three automakers.

According to a new national survey from Pet Valu and Caddle, dog and cat parents say they'd rather cut dining out, clothing, self-care, coffee and even streaming services than pull back on their pet's care. It's a pattern playing out across the country as living costs climb — and it says a lot about where pets now rank in the Canadian household budget.

What would Canadians cut before their pet's care?

Nearly 9 in 10 Canadian pet owners (87%) say their pet is a full member of the family — as much a part of the household as a child — according to the Pet Valu and Caddle survey of more than 2,700 Canadian dog and cat owners conducted in May 2026. That emotional bond shows up directly in spending decisions.

When household budgets get tight, pet parents say they'd trim dining out (51%) first, followed by clothing (38%), self-care (30%), coffee (22%) and streaming services (19%) — all before they'd touch their pet's food, health care or supplies.

It's not a short-term squeeze, either. Eight in 10 pet parents expect to maintain or increase what they spend on their pets over the next year, and 71% say they still spend on non-essential pet experiences, like grooming, birthdays and travel gear.

What's driving pet costs higher?

Those trade-offs reflect real financial pressure. The Ontario Veterinary Medical Association's 2025 cost-of-care estimates put total annual ownership costs — food, supplies, insurance and veterinary care combined — at $5,118 for a dog and $3,726 for a cat, increases of roughly 24% to 31% over 2023 figures. Of that, routine veterinary care alone runs about $2,137 a year for dogs and $1,905 for cats, with professional dental cleaning as the single biggest line item.

Part of the increase comes down to inflation: The Canadian Veterinary Medical Association has pointed to annual vet-cost growth of 6% to 8%, well above Canada's broader services inflation rate of 3.1% in 2025. Consolidation is playing a role too. A handful of corporate chains now control more than 20% of Canada's roughly 4,400 general veterinary practices, and pricing across the industry has followed suit.

Thinking about pet insurance?

If you have a pet, you know the costs can add up fast: food, grooming, toys and especially vet visits. According to the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association, routine veterinary care for a dog can cost between $4,100 and $5,200 per year. And this doesn’t account for expensive emergencies. That’s why paying for pet insurance often ends up being more affordable than paying out of pocket for surprise vet bills.

Instead of absorbing big, unexpected bills all at once, Fetch Pet Insurance helps cover up to 90% of unexpected vet bills, and you can use any vet in Canada or the U.S. Fetch offers fast and easy reimbursements and you can customize your coverage to fit your budget. Get a free, no-obligation quote in just three minutes with Fetch Pet Insurance and rest easy knowing your fur-baby and your finances are protected.

How Canadian pet owners are coping

Budgeting is the biggest lever people are pulling. In Rover's most recent True Cost of Pet Parenthood survey, 37% of pet parents said they specifically save for surprise costs like vet visits, and 36% track their pet spending with a budget. Smaller numbers lean on pet insurance (18%), subscription savings on toys and treats (10%) or pet prescription services (7%). Still, roughly a third (34%) haven't explored any cost-saving options yet — and some are making bigger sacrifices to keep up: 35% have cut back on their own groceries or entertainment, and 15% have taken on a side gig.

Canadians are also shopping differently to manage rising prices. With tariffs affecting pet goods, 55% of pet parents say they now prioritize Canadian brands or locally sourced pet products, even if it costs more.

Next steps: Protecting your pet budget

If a surprise vet bill would strain your finances, a dedicated pet emergency fund is one of the simplest fixes. A high-interest savings account or TFSA earmarked for pet costs, topped up with $50 to $100 a month, can build a $1,000 to $5,000 cushion over time — enough to cover most non-catastrophic emergencies. Comparing pet insurance premiums before you need them, rather than after a diagnosis, is also worth the hour it takes, since coverage and exclusions vary widely between providers.

For the 90% of pet parents who say they actively think about ways to help their pet live a longer, healthier life, the extra planning tends to feel less like a chore and more like part of the job.

Canada’s Big Six banks lost more than 6% over four trading sessions in the last weeks of August. Bank of Montreal (TSX: BMO) shares fell as much as 4.4% in a single session on August 19, according to data from Trading Economics, while share prices for Toronto-Dominion Bank (TSX: TD), Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (TSX: CM), Bank of Nova Scotia (TSX: BNS) and Royal Bank of Canada (TSX: RY) also slid.

For Canadians who hold bank stocks, a valuation drop like this raises an obvious question: Will dividend payouts be cut?

Keep in mind, falling share prices and a shrinking dividend are not the same thing. And context matters. Over the last few quarters, banks have been trading well above historic valuation levels. But with tariff turbulence and ongoing global economic sluggishness, the stakes are shifting even as Canada’s big banks prepare to report their earnings for the fiscal third quarter next week. Here’s why investors need to be cautious about a reforecast in anticipated earnings from Canada’s Big Banks.

What triggered the most recent selloff?

Turns out the August selloff trigger actually came from south of the border. Meeting minutes from the U.S. Federal Reserve’s July 28-29 meeting, released August 19, showed a more hawkish tone than markets expected — three regional Fed presidents dissented in favour of a rate hike, and several officials warned that tightening could still be needed if inflation does not cool. As a result, bond yields edged up, and this put pressure on rate-sensitive financial stocks, like banks.

The timing amplified the move. Canadian bank stocks had already rallied 19% to 34% year-to-date, and Morningstar analyst Maoyuan Chen puts the sector around 22% above her team’s fair value estimates on average. But does that mean this current pullback is a reflection of weakening fundamentals? While CIBC analyst Paul Holden concedes it is hard to predict whether bank stocks will push even higher, it’s much easier to say these third-quarter results aren’t a good enough reason for the stocks to trade lower.

Does a lower stock price mean a smaller dividend?

For investors holding Big Bank stock for income purposes, the real question is whether this pullback will prompt dividend cuts.

A bank’s dividend is set based on earnings and capital levels, not its share price. This means banks are required to hold minimum regulatory capital buffers. As Morningstar’s Chen points out, the balance sheets for Canada’s Big Six banks are strong enough to absorb higher credit costs even if tariffs escalate.

The real risk lies in the underlying business — a prolonged, severe round of tariffs could still create what Chen calls “credit cost headwinds and growth headwinds” for the sector.

What can investors glean from BMO and Scotiabank reports?

Two of the Big Six have already reported third-quarter results, and both beat analyst forecasts.

BMO held its quarterly dividend at $1.71 a share — 5% higher than a year earlier — after posting adjusted earnings per share of $3.96, up 22% from a year ago. According to BMO executives, less than 1% of BMO’s loan book carries direct tariff exposure — and any exposure rests with investment-grade borrowers.

Scotiabank posted record adjusted earnings per share of $2.28, up 21%, and has returned $6.3 billion to shareholders this year through dividends and buybacks. Its chief risk officer said tariff-affected loans also make up less than 1% of the bank’s book.

As Holden pointed out in a note released last week: “Banks have a significant amount of excess capital, and we believe those that can deploy more capital and at higher returns could be the relative winners going forward.”

What’s left to watch

National Bank (TSX: NA) reported its earnings on August 26, and CIBC, RBC and TD Bank released reports on August 27. Prior to the release of these reports, analysts expect profit across the Big Six to climb almost 13% on average from a year earlier, once again led by capital markets and wealth management.

Dividend investors should watch for updates on credit-loss provisions, which Chen expects to peak this fiscal year before improving in 2027, and for hints on how the remaining banks plan to deploy their excess capital — through further dividend increases, buybacks or acquisitions.

What investors should do right now

If financials are a part of your investment portfolio, consider taking four steps to evaluate next steps:

1. Check a bank’s payout ratio and capital ratio before assuming a stock-price drop threatens its dividend.
2. Watch National Bank, CIBC, RBC and TD Bank’s results this week to confirm credit costs and tariff exposure remain contained.
3. Remember bank stocks remain historically expensive, according to Morningstar’s analysis, even after the pullback.
4. Be sure to shelter your dividend-paying bank stocks from income tax by keeping these holdings inside a TFSA, RRSP or other tax-advantaged savings account.

Sell, buy or hold those bank stocks

While mid-August proved a bit rougher for bank stocks, it doesn’t mean a dividend cut is impending. Results from BMO and Scotiabank suggest Canada’s lenders are absorbing early trade-war effects without touching their payouts — and this is a good thing, particularly for income-focused investors. The clearer picture comes once CIBC, RBC and TD Bank report — that’s when all investors will know whether the rest of the sector is in a similar position, meaning a pullback from a hot run is no time to adjust a successful investment strategy.

For the many Canadians who hold S&P 500 index funds inside a TFSA or RRSP, that number is worth a second look — even if it isn’t, on its own, a reason to sell.

What is the Buffett indicator actually flagging?

Buffett has said that when the indicator sits in the 70% to 80% range, buying stocks is likely to work out well; above 200%, he warned, investors are taking on real risk. The last time it touched that lower range was at the bottom of the 2008 financial crisis.

It isn’t the whole story, though. S&P 500 earnings growth has been strong over the past few quarters, largely on the back of artificial intelligence spending. Moreover, the forward price-to-earnings ratio on a broad S&P 500 fund sits around 20 — this is certainly elevated, but not in bubble territory by that measure alone. In other words, the market is pricing in a lot of optimism about future earnings. Whether that optimism is justified is the real question, and no single ratio answers it.

Why this matters for Canadian TFSA and RRSP investors

S&P 500 exposure is common in Canadian registered accounts, whether through Canadian-listed funds or by holding a U.S.-listed fund directly inside an RRSP, where the Canada-U.S. tax treaty exempts investors from the 15% U.S. dividend withholding tax that applies inside a TFSA or non-registered account. That tax quirk doesn’t change the valuation picture, but it’s a reminder that a lot of Canadian retirement savings are directly tied to U.S. large-cap performance, which is exactly what the Buffett indicator is measuring.

If a large share of your TFSA or RRSP sits in a single U.S. index fund, a historically expensive market means less room for error if earnings growth slows or interest rates move against stocks.

Should you sell your S&P 500 holdings?

History suggests caution about using this indicator as a timing tool. An investor who sold when it first crossed 140% in early 2015 and stayed in cash would have missed a roughly 350% gain in a Vanguard S&P 500 fund and a roughly 650% gain in an Invesco Nasdaq-100 fund since then.

The lesson isn’t that valuation doesn’t matter. It’s that a single number rarely tells you when a correction will happen. Instead, it shows when stocks are pricier than usual relative to the economy that ultimately supports their earnings.

What to do instead of guessing the top

A few practical steps make more sense than trying to time an exit:

• Check how concentrated your TFSA or RRSP is in U.S. large-cap stocks, and whether you have enough Canadian or international exposure to balance it out
• Keep contributing on a regular schedule instead of pausing because of one warning sign — dollar-cost averaging smooths out the entry price over time
• Use available registered room strategically — the RRSP contribution limit for this year is $33,810 giving long-term investors a tax-deferred place to hold both U.S. and Canadian positions while also sidestepping the dividend withholding tax
• Revisit your risk tolerance and time horizon, not the headline — investors closer to retirement have less time to ride out a downturn than someone in their 30s

The bottom line

An historically high Buffett indicator is a signal to check your diversification, not an instruction to sell. The more useful question for Canadian investors isn’t whether the market is expensive right now — it likely is, by this measure — but whether a portfolio is built to withstand a correction whose timing nobody can predict.

Deere & Company (NYSE: DE) posted its first quarterly profit increase since 2023, according to Bloomberg — and the boost came almost entirely from bulldozers and excavators, not tractors or combines.

The company’s construction and forestry segment, which supplies machinery used to build data centres and infrastructure, posted an 18% jump in net sales as AI-driven construction demand surged, even as its core farm equipment business kept sliding.

Quarterly profit came in at US$5.10 per share, above analysts’ estimate of US$4.70 — and up from US$4.75 a year earlier; revenue rose 6% to US$11 billion. After posting Q2 results, Deere raised its full-year 2026 net income forecast to a floor of US$4.75 billion up from an earlier forecast of US$4.5 billion. To be clear, the company’s quarterly results were aided by a one-time US$110 million tariff refund.

For investors, this isn’t a quirky detail about a long-running farm equipment brand — it’s about sector-focused businesses pivoting to meet demands of newly-created industries. And that same push for AI infrastructure isn’t just an American phenomenon; it’s happening across the world and within Canada’s borders. Recently, Ottawa committed C$2 billion through its Canadian Sovereign AI Compute Strategy to build domestic data centre capacity, and private projects are following, including a roughly US$540 million AI-ready data centre under construction in Calgary.

Whether or not you’d ever buy a share of Deere, the factors shaping this brand are the same trends helping to reshape demand for construction labour, equipment and electricity across the country.

What should investors do?

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell Deere (NYSE: DE) or any other stock; it is a reminder to review your investment plan — and act accordingly.

For instance, some investors may be prompted to buy a few shares whenever a stock, like Deere, pops off; however, holding this U.S.-dividend-paying stock matters.

Why account choice matters for US dividend stocks

As a hypothetical, let’s assume a Canadian investor holds C$10,000 of a U.S. dividend payer with a yield in the range of Deere’s current payout, around 1.3%. Held in a non-registered account or a TFSA, a 15% U.S. withholding tax applies to that dividend income. Held in an RRSP or RRIF, the withholding tax doesn’t apply because of the Canada-U.S. tax treaty exemptions.

In a TFSA specifically, that withheld tax is usually gone for good, since a TFSA isn’t treated as a pension plan for U.S. tax purposes (and there’s no tax return through which to claim it back). In a non-registered account, an investor may be able to recover some of it through the foreign tax credit.

Bottom line

Withholding tax is not a reason to avoid U.S. industrials or the AI infrastructure trade broadly. It’s also not a reason to assume Deere is a sure-bet, from an investment perspective. Remember, the company’s core agriculture equipment business is still working through a stretch of higher costs and softer crop prices, and revenue at its mainstay Production & Precision Agriculture segment fell 6% in the quarter. As Chief Executive Officer John May said: this profit marks “the bottom” of that cycle — not the start of a rebound.

A poll from the Toronto Region Board of Trade (TRBOT), conducted by market research firm Ipsos, found that 76% of residents rank the cost of living among the city’s top economic challenges, while 53% call it the single most pressing issue facing Toronto’s economy today.

For many Torontonians, this isn’t an abstract concern about municipal policy. It shows up daily in household budgets — and for a growing share of residents, it’s driving a critical choice: whether to stay in the city at all.

What the data shows

Surveying 801 adult residents ahead of Toronto’s municipal election, the polling highlights a city losing confidence in its economic trajectory. Overall, 55% of residents believe Toronto’s prosperity is on the wrong track, and 37% say the city is falling behind — compared to just 22% who feel it is moving forward. Furthermore, 57% report that it has become harder to get ahead in Toronto than in past years.

Why affordability is driving people out

The most striking finding for household planning is that 37% of Torontonians say they are likely to leave the city within the next five years due to affordability concerns. That number jumps to 52% among Gen Z residents and 46% among Millennials. These are demographics most likely to be renting, carrying student debt or trying to save for a home in an expensive housing market.

Residents also see a direct link between personal cost pressures and broader economic health:

• 92% state that the cost of living directly impacts Toronto’s long-term prosperity.
• 89% cite housing affordability as a major factor in regional competitiveness.
• 87% point to access to well-paying jobs as essential for economic sustainability.

“Torontonians know that despite some progress, the challenges facing this city are significant. They want leaders who are prepared to act with urgency,” noted Giles Gherson, president and CEO of the Toronto Region Board of Trade.

Running the “stay-or-go” calculation

For residents evaluating whether to relocate, the decision generally hinges on three core factors: housing costs relative to income, local career advancement opportunities and the financial trade-offs of moving.

Staying often makes sense for residents with below-market rent, established career networks, or local family support that would be costly to replicate elsewhere. However, for early-career professionals with greater location flexibility, moving to a lower-cost area in Ontario or another province can significantly boost purchasing power.

Rather than reacting emotionally to living costs, run a formal comparison: evaluate total housing, transportation, tax rates and local amenities in Toronto against your target destination, set against realistic earning potential in both locations.

Practical financial steps before deciding

• Audit total spending: Track every expense for two to three months — not just rent or mortgage payments — to identify where your budget is being squeezed most.
• Compare net take-home pay: Account for provincial tax differences and regional cost variations before accepting a job offer outside Toronto.
• Maintain automatic savings: Keep up TFSA or RRSP contributions even in small amounts; consistent automated transfers build long-term security even during tight budget cycles.
• Verify tenancy protections: If you rent in Ontario, confirm whether your current or prospective unit falls under provincial rent control guidelines before signing a lease.

While municipal policy shifts will take time to materialize, individual residents can take control of their immediate financial health. Running the numbers now — before a lease renewal or job transition forces a decision — provides the clarity needed to make the right move for your financial future.

The SFU findings highlight the escalating financial burden placed on provincial resources as climate change drives more frequent and intense wildfire seasons.

Between 2016 and 2025, British Columbia spent an average of $525 million annually on wildfire suppression, according to the data. That represents a dramatic increase compared to historical spending levels from the previous decade.

The report’s authors say these figures show BC households are already bearing the financial cost of climate change. That cost arrives largely through taxpayer-funded emergency response.

Rising price tag for provincial taxpayers

The cost of wildfire management extends beyond the immediate operational expense of deploying crews, water bombers and heavy machinery. SFU researchers point out that suppression costs are only part of the picture. Add in infrastructure damage, health care costs from smoke exposure, and disruption to forestry and tourism, and the true bill climbs far higher.

In fact, provincial suppression expenditures accounted for only a fraction of the total economic loss suffered by communities hit by major wildfire events in recent years.

Because wildfire suppression is funded through provincial budget allocations and emergency contingency funds, everyday taxpayers continue to absorb the growing operational costs year over year.

Investing in prevention over emergency response

The report calls for a strategic shift in how the province allocates financial resources to address the wildfire crisis.

Researchers argue that British Columbia must dramatically increase investments in proactive risk reduction, such as forest thinning, prescribed burns and community FireSmart initiatives, rather than relying predominantly on emergency suppression once blazes are already out of control.

Advocates argue that upfront investment in landscape management shrinks the size and intensity of future fires — saving money in the long run and protecting communities from catastrophic losses.

LaSalle College has filed for creditor protection after facing nearly $30 million in clawbacks and penalties from the Quebec government. The offence? Accepting enrollment of more English-language students than allowed under provincial caps. When combined with the additional withheld provincial funding, the college’s total financial debt to the province now sits close to $48 million.

Most families assume that once tuition is paid to a licensed, subsidized institution, that money is safely invested in their child’s future education. However, historical precedents with private colleges demonstrate that paid tuition carries inherent risks — a critical lesson for anyone paying higher-education fees in Canada.

Here’s the current situation, the legal loopholes that leave prepaid tuition unprotected during bankruptcy, and the concrete steps families can take to safeguard their funds against institutional financial risk.

What’s happening at LaSalle College

Under Quebec’s 2022 language legislation (Bill 96), caps were placed on student enrollments in English-language college programs. According to Quebec’s Higher Education Ministry, LaSalle College exceeded its authorized limit by 716 students in the 2023-24 academic year and by an additional 1,066 students in 2024-25. As a result, the province moved to recover approximately $8.7 million and $21.1 million in associated subsidies, respectively.

The Quebec Superior Court granted LaSalle a temporary protection window to negotiate a resolution with the provincial government. While college management has characterized the financial measures as unprecedented and unfair — noting that the affected students were legally admitted — government officials maintain that institutions must comply with established enrollment caps.

Why paid tuition isn’t automatically guaranteed

This is not the first time a private college’s financial strain has put student funds at risk. In 2022, three Quebec private colleges filed for creditor protection, leaving hundreds of international students attempting to recover over $11 million in prepaid tuition and fees.

When an educational institution enters creditor protection:

• Unsecured Status: Students claiming tuition refunds typically rank as unsecured creditors.
• Repayment Priority: Unsecured creditors stand behind secured lenders, such as banks and tax authorities, meaning full recovery of funds is rarely guaranteed.

LaSalle’s situation differs in scale — it’s a large, established institution seeking restructuring to keep its doors open rather than shutting down. However, the fundamental exposure remains: Any funds handed over to a private entity, prior to the delivery of a service, carry financial risk regardless of the school’s licensing or subsidy status.

Actionable steps for affected students and families

If your tuition is tied up with LaSalle College or any private school undergoing restructuring, these steps can help minimize any financial loss:

• Document all terms: Secure written copies of cancellation and refund policies, specifically noting terms regarding delayed or cancelled academic sessions.
• Review account structures: Clarify whether tuition payments are maintained in segregated trust accounts or general operating accounts. Operating accounts carry higher risk during creditor proceedings.
• Pause RESP withdrawals: Delay requesting Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP) or Educational Assistance Payments (EAPs) until course start dates are officially confirmed, avoiding tax complications for unfulfilled terms.
• Clarify loan obligations: Remember that government and private student loans remain payable, according to their terms, independent of an institution’s operational status.
• Maintain detailed records: Keep all proof of payment, enrollment confirmations and formal correspondence. Should a formal claims process open, proper documentation will help you negotiate.

What to do before enrolling in a private institution

Families evaluating private career or community colleges should exercise due diligence before transferring tuition funds to these schools. Here are three steps to take:

1. Verify standing: Confirm accreditation and subsidy status directly with the provincial ministry of education rather than relying solely on marketing materials.
2. Opt for installment payments: Where available, arrange tuition payments in installments tied to the start of each term rather than paying full program fees upfront.
3. Limit advance deposits: Avoid paying non-refundable deposits far in advance of verified course start dates.

The situation surrounding LaSalle College remains fluid as negotiations with the Quebec government continue. Still, it serves as a practical reminder that a tuition invoice is not a financial guarantee.

The federal agency issued an alert detailing a rise in scheme tactics where swindlers contact past targets via phone, email or social media while pretending to be official investigators offering a chance to recover stolen funds.

Fake logos and official documents used to deceive

Authorities note that perpetrators often present fake letterhead or falsified documentation bearing government insignias to convince recipients that an active investigation is underway.

“They may tell you there are unauthorized transactions on your account or that your banking information has been compromised,” the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre said in an advisory regarding fake investigator tactics.

The deceptive practice, broadly categorized as recovery fraud, relies on exploiting a victim’s desire to retrieve lost assets. Fraudsters demand upfront fees under the guise of legal costs, taxes, administrative processing or security deposits before any funds can be released. In other instances, victims are asked to move funds into supposedly secure accounts or provide remote computer access.

Recovery fraud losses continue to climb

According to statistical data from the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre, recovery pitches and investigator impersonations account for tens of millions of dollars in losses annually. In 2025 alone, Canadians lost over $25.9 million specifically to recovery pitch schemes, alongside an additional $28.3 million lost to fraudulent investigator impersonation scams.

Agency officials issued a direct warning regarding any demands for upfront payment to restore missing funds.

“If someone asks you to pay money to recover money you have already lost, it is a fraud,” officials stated.

The advisory stressed that legitimate law enforcement organizations and government agencies will never demand money transfers, request remote device control, ask for online banking credentials or instruct citizens to participate in undercover operations by sending funds.

How Canadians can protect themselves

Canadians who receive unexpected communications claiming to be from financial institutions or anti-fraud bodies are advised to end the call immediately. Individuals should verify claims independently by using the telephone number printed on the back of their debit or credit card rather than relying on phone numbers provided by unsolicited callers.

Anyone targeted by suspicious contacts should file a report with their local police department as well as the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre.

Forbes called the tariff fight “utterly pointless” and urged President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Mark Carney to settle it quickly. It was a bold — and very public — request made by a very influential man heading up a very influential media brand. (More than 150 million people read Forbes through digital, print or social media each month.)

Why today’s tariffs jeopardize tomorrow’s economic future

Forbes’s central point is that a tariff works like a tax paid by importers and typically passed on to consumers. This is the very point many trade economists have been making over the last 18 months.

The concern is that a trade war jeopardizes the renewal of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA / USMCA), the pact governing continental trade. CUSMA is currently under negotiation — with a future that hinges on how the current U.S./Canada trade dispute is resolved. According to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, CUSMA is vital for Canada because it secures duty-free access to its largest and most critical foreign markets, underpinning millions of Canadian jobs and cross-border supply chains

What’s different about the tariffs this week

The most recent U.S. tariffs invoke a Depression-era provision of the Tariff Act of 1930 that had never previously been used, applying a 50% duty to more than 550 Canadian products.

These new tariffs, which kicked in on Saturday, August 22, are expected to affect about C$27.68 billion (US$20 billion) in Canadian goods, which represents roughly 5% of the C$528.52 billion (US$381.92 billion) worth of products that the country sent to the U.S. last year.

The list of goods impacted by the tariffs is long and includes: wine, honey, cement, hockey equipment, furniture and jewelry.

Trump has also said he will double the tariff on Canadian-made cars, trucks and auto parts — from the current 25% to 50% — starting January 1, 2027.

Ottawa’s response, effective September 8, is to match the U.S. duties dollar-for-dollar, targeting American steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, and electronics.

Where this new tax will show up in your budget, first

For most households, the near-term price effect is likely to be modest since the tariffed goods make up a small slice of total trade. The bigger risk, according to Andreas Schotter, a professor of international business at Western University’s Ivey Business School, is to jobs and local spending in exposed industries.

This more serious risk won’t show in household budgets due to direct sticker price changes. As Schotter explains, the invisible impact will be felt when job shifts are cancelled, hiring delays become the norm, and businesses opt to postpone investment and development.

For example, a family that regularly buys imported dairy, small appliances or electronics could see prices on those specific items climb faster than the broader inflation rate, even while their overall grocery bill barely moves.

And this isn’t theory — as markets have already reacted. The S&P/TSX Composite whipsawed after talks collapsed late last week, according to Bloomberg reports, with industrial and consumer-discretionary stocks sliding even as gold miners gained.

What it means for your rate outlook and portfolio

The Bank of Canada held its policy rate at 2.25% on July 15 for a sixth consecutive decision, citing continued uncertainty tied to U.S. trade policy, and its own tariff assumptions now peg the average U.S. duty on Canadian exports at about 5%. The next rate announcement lands September 2 — six days before Canada’s retaliation begins — so any signal from Governor Tiff Macklem will fall squarely inside the trade-war timeline.

For homeowners renewing a mortgage within the next year, that argues for budgeting around a hold rather than betting on a near-term cut.

For investors, the swings already hitting tariff-exposed sectors are a reminder that concentrated bets on any single industry carry more risk while this dispute is ongoing.

Canada has announced $27.6 billion in dollar-for-dollar counter-tariffs on US goods — a direct response to President Donald Trump’s 50% tariffs on Canadian exports. The federal government paired the retaliatory measure with $7.5 billion in aid to help shield domestic workers and businesses from the fallout.

The counter-tariffs land just days after trade talks between the two countries broke down, and amid new tariff threats from Trump to extend the 50% rate to Canadian vehicles and auto parts starting January 1, 2027.

Tensions rise over trade deal collapse

Trump took personal aim at Ottawa on Tuesday, accusing Prime Minister Mark Carney of lying to Canadians “to gain political support.” Trump also mused publicly about changing the name of Lake Ontario to “Lake America.”

Carney dismissed the latest tariff threats in a statement, stating it was “not a surprise” that Washington was threatening additional “unjustified tariffs.” Carney maintained that Canada could not accept a deal that compromised its national sovereignty, key domestic industries or cultural protections.

In his address detailing the collapse of negotiations, Carney revealed that Canada walked away after US negotiators introduced last-minute demands that would “destroy” key industries. Washington sought to exclude medium- and heavy-duty trucks from tariff relief, restrict Canada’s ability to sign trade agreements with other nations and roll back protections for Canadian language and culture.

Carney maintained that Canada could not accept a deal that compromised its national sovereignty, saying Canada was willing to drop existing retaliatory measures only in exchange for a fair agreement.

Provinces split on retaliatory tactics

As the trade dispute escalates, Canadian premiers are divided on how far Canada should go in retaliating against its largest trading partner.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford signalled readiness for severe countermeasures, noting that imposing electricity surcharges and halting critical mineral exports to the US remains “on the table.”

Conversely, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith firmly rejected using energy exports as leverage, ruling out any intentional disruptions to Canadian oil and gas shipments.

Ottawa’s $7.5-billion support package aims to help vulnerable sectors retool, pivot to non-US international markets and retain workers as the cross-border duties take effect.

The initiative, spearheaded by Canada's largest business advocacy group, brings together the former Conservative premier and former NDP premier to present a united front to Albertans ahead of an upcoming provincial referendum on whether to initiate a legal process toward leaving Canada.

Why Kenney and Notley are joining forces

Despite years of fierce political battles, both former leaders state that protecting Alberta’s economic stability overrides their ideological differences.

Notley said in a statement that while she and Kenney disagree on most issues, they share the conviction that the referendum is "bad for business" and creates dangerous economic uncertainty. For his part, Kenney argued that while Alberta has valid grievances regarding federal policy, pushing for separation threatens to undermine constructive resolution and destabilize the province's economic foundation.

Compounding these internal friction points are external geopolitical pressures, including broader trade tensions with the United States and global financial instability.

“With geopolitical and economic uncertainty reshaping global trade and investment, Canada will be only better off with greater economic co-operation — not less,” Canadian Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Candace Laing said in a statement.

Economic concerns behind the movement

The Chamber’s campaign is driven by data reflecting growing apprehension across the provincial business community:

• Business sentiment: According to a survey by the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, 80% of member businesses believe the separation debate is causing direct harm to the provincial economy, with 63% reporting a negative impact on their own operations.
• Investment hesitancy: Models project the province could risk losing $10 billion to $15 billion in capital investment over the coming year as investors adopt a cautious approach amid political instability.
• Wider market slowdown: Economists and industry analysts note that the uncertainty is already creating headwinds in local credit and housing markets, as both institutional investors and consumers defer major financial commitments until political clarity returns.

By establishing a bipartisan leadership team, Kenney, Notley and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce aim to frame the referendum not as a party-line debate, but as a critical economic choice for Alberta's financial future.

Parrish took to X to brush off the president’s suggestion, pointing to the region’s long Indigenous history and making sure everyone knows just how much the lake means to local communities.

“Dear Mr. Trump: Since the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation established their homes close to and along the shores of this lake, it has been our lifeblood,” Parrish posted on X. “I, and everyone in Mississauga, am proud to be living along the shores of LAKE ONTARIO. We will defend its good name!”

Trump targets trade partner in latest naming push

Her message came right after Trump jumped on Truth Social to claim Washington was giving real thought to changing the name of the shared waterway.

“The United States is giving serious consideration to changing the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America in that we don’t expect to doing much business with Ontario any longer,” Trump wrote Tuesday morning.

The proposal follows a pattern for the American president, who has repeatedly used geographical rebrandings to signal economic pressure and nationalist policy goals.

Earlier in his term, Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to drop the name Gulf of Mexico in favour of the “Gulf of America.” That move was framed by the White House as a way to assert American sovereignty over coastal assets, and Trump is now applying similar branding tactics as cross-border trade friction grows.

Tensions boil over as trade talks fall apart

The back-and-forth over Lake Ontario comes as trade relations between Canada and the US hit a new low. Talks between negotiators fell apart over the weekend after Washington slapped 50% tariffs on Canadian goods.

Since then, Premier Doug Ford and Prime Minister Mark Carney have made it clear Canada is ready to hit back with its own targeted tariffs on US imports.

Parrish is no stranger to calling out decisions coming out of Washington. Last year, Mississauga city council went so far as to take down all American flags from municipal buildings, sports pads and piers along the lake after initial tariff threats.

Lake Ontario marks a natural border between Ontario and New York State. It holds deep roots for several Indigenous communities, including the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation, who have called its western shores home for generations.

The battle of barbs began early Monday morning when Ford was informed on air during a live interview with Toronto radio station NewsTalk 1010 that Trump had threatened new 50% tariffs on Canadian cars, auto parts and steel. Ford reacted immediately, telling the host that Trump “can kiss my ass, as far as I’m concerned.”

Trump fired back on Truth Social around 2 p.m., writing that Ford was full of “bluster” and mocking him as the “less charismatic, intelligent and overall unimpressive brother of the late, great, Rob Ford.”

Stepping up to the microphone at an afternoon press conference in Hamilton shortly after, Ford refused to back down, telling Trump to “bring it on, buddy” and doubling down on his earlier profanity.

“I have a lot of real estate on my ass, so (Trump) has a lot of room to kiss my ass,” Ford told reporters. “I just do. I’m a big dude. What can I say?”

Ford hits back at ‘dictator’ and ‘bully’

A fed-up Ford compared the U.S. president to a wayward bully, while taking direct aim at his business acumen.

“I don’t respond to a dictator like President Trump,” he asserted. “As I said before, he’s the type of guy in school that would take your lunch money one day, take your toque off your head the next day and then steal your running shoes. But I’m not going to take any advice off a guy that’s the king of bankruptcies. He’s actually tariffing his own people, taxing his own people.”

However, a frustrated Ford was Elbows Up in defense of Canadian workers, cautioning that Ontario is ready to inflict real economic pain on U.S. markets.

“It’s about Team Canada,” he told reporters. “We’ll see how this goes but he wants to put pain on Canadians, we’ll leverage every bit of pain we possibly can on Americans.”

Ford warned that he is eager to slap export surcharges on electricity flowing south if his hand is forced. “We’ll use every tool in our toolbox, then we’ll see if President Trump says, ‘Do I need Canada?’ Watch how he does cartwheels and he shouts and screams when we put the (export electricity) surcharge on,” Ford declared. “As a matter of fact, I can’t wait.”

Eyeball to eyeball on upcoming U.S. midterms

Drawing on his years in politics, Ford brushed off Trump’s personal digs, insisting his political background has left him thick-skinned.

“I’ve been in this game a lot longer than he has. I got a skin on me like an alligator,” Ford told reporters. “And you think an insult from him hurts me? Well, bring it on, buddy. I’m ready. Bring it on. I’ve dealt with guys like you my whole life, and guess what? You all become losers because you’re a loser.”

Ford went even further by threatening to campaign against Republicans in the upcoming U.S. midterm elections.

“You know your own people, President Trump, don’t even like you. And they’re going to speak loud and clear when it comes to the midterms,” Ford said. “And if I was allowed to, I’d be down there door-knocking.”

Closing out his remarks, Ford offered one last sharp assessment of the U.S. leader.

“This guy’s a loser; he’s going to be a loser, simple as that,” Ford said. “We’re going to fight with everything we have. And, you know something? I have more courage, more brains in my baby toe than he has in his whole body.”

This week, Stanley Druckenmiller, the billionaire investor who mentored Bessent early in his career, publicly broke with him over a bond-buying program meant to calm jittery markets. And the disagreement matters well beyond Wall Street. Canadian bond yields tend to move in step with U.S. Treasuries, and a fight over U.S. debt strategy is already showing up in the fixed mortgage rates Canadian lenders are quoting.

Here’s what changed, why it may be backfiring, and what it means if you’re renewing, refinancing or shopping for a mortgage right now.

What did the Treasury just do?

The U.S.Treasury announced it would at least double the size of its long-term bond buybacks, from US$2 billion to US$4 billion per operation, starting September 9. The purchases target bonds maturing between 10 and 30 years — the debt that anchors long-term borrowing costs.

The goal was to soak up supply, push bond prices up and yields down, which would ease pressure on the American government’s own interest bill. Bessent has described the move as routine liquidity management rather than an attempt to artificially suppress rates, and has said the Treasury has significant room to expand purchases further if needed.

Why is Bessent’s own mentor calling it a mistake?

Stanley Druckenmiller, who trained Bessent at George Soros’s Quantum Fund in the early 1990s, argued in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that the plan amounts to price management dressed up as liquidity management. “Governments defending prices against fundamentals always lose,” he wrote. His argument: Rising long-term yields aren’t a malfunction — they’re the market’s signal that Washington’s deficits and debt load need attention.

Suppress that signal, and one of the few real checks on government borrowing disappears. The market’s early reaction backed him up. Yields dipped briefly after the buyback announcement, then climbed back toward where they started before the plan was unveiled.

Why does a US bond fight affect Canadian mortgages?

Canadian fixed mortgage rates are priced off Government of Canada bond yields, not the Bank of Canada’s policy rate — and those yields tend to track U.S. Treasuries closely because capital flows freely across the border. When U.S. long-term yields climb, Canadian yields usually follow within days.

That’s exactly what’s been happening. The five-year Government of Canada bond yield was trading around 3.36% in late August — up eight basis points in a week and close to a 12-month high — as a global bond selloff tied to U.S. debt concerns spilled into Canadian markets. Lenders responded by raising fixed rates on three- to five-year terms by 10 to 15 basis points, with some rates edging toward 20.

What should Canadian borrowers do now?

For anyone renewing, refinancing or shopping for a new mortgage, the instinct is to either lock in immediately out of fear, or wait indefinitely for rates to fall. Neither is a strategy. Here’s a more useful checklist:

• Get a rate hold. Most lenders lock a quoted rate for 90 to 120 days, which protects you if yields keep climbing before your closing date
• Watch the 5-year Government of Canada bond yield, not U.S. headlines directly — it’s the more direct signal for what your lender will quote next
• Compare fixed and variable rates carefully. The lowest 5-year fixed rate, currently around 4.02%, is projected to rise to 4.32% by the end of 2026, while variable rates stay lower for now but are expected to rise faster through 2027
• Talk to a mortgage broker about timing, especially if your renewal falls in the next few months — a small move in yields can add real dollars to a monthly payment

The bond market doesn’t care who’s in the White House or who’s defending the plan on cable news. If Druckenmiller is right that suppressing yields is a losing bet, Canadian borrowers may be watching this fight play out for a while yet. The safer move isn’t guessing who wins — it’s locking in a rate hold early enough that the outcome doesn’t decide your mortgage payment for you.

President Trump’s investment accounts purchased Moderna shares in March 2026. By mid-August market close, those shares were worth more than 225% above what he paid for them, according to financial data platform Quiver Quantitative.

The exact dollar gain isn’t public; however, U.S. disclosure rules require officials to report the purchase range for all publicly traded investments. As a result, official documentation shows a Moderna equity purchase by Trump on March 2 in the range of US$15,000 to US$50,000. A second purchase was recorded March 17, the range of US$1,001 and US$15,000.

Based on a rough calculation, a 225% gain would turn the low end of those combined purchases (about US$16K) into more than US$52,000. On the high end, a US$65K purchase would’ve turned into US$211,000. It’s a paper profit of somewhere between US$36,000 and US$146,000.

To be clear, nothing President Trump did is considered illegal. Merck and Moderna’s announcement was public, and that triggered the equity price surge. However, this situation does highlight a structural difference between Canada and the U.S.

In America, Trump is legally free to hold and trade individual stocks, like Moderna, all while sitting in office.

In Canada, cabinet ministers, Prime Ministers and elected officials in equivalent positions of power generally must give up their investment holdings, or place their accounts in a blind trust. The core reason is conflict of interest: someone who can influence government policy shouldn’t be able to make investment decisions based on — or profit personally from — decisions they help make.

The rule that makes this legal

In America, the main conflict-of-interest statute — 18 U.S.C. Section 208 — barring federal officials from acting on matters tied to their own financial holdings explicitly exempts the president and vice-president.

According to documentation, Congress carved out that exemption because the president’s responsibilities touch too many industries and interests to realistically require recusal from all of them.

Under current U.S. law, presidents are not required to place their holdings in a blind trust or divest them. Almost a decade ago, a bill that would have imposed exactly that requirement, the Presidential Conflicts of Interest Act, was introduced in Congress but never passed.

That doesn’t mean U.S. president and other senior officials don’t have to follow rules. Insider-trading is still illegal, and each elected official must disclose their holdings and trades, in accordance with the STOCK Act.

The STOCK Act requires covered officials, including the president, to publicly report securities transactions over $1,000 within 45 days. However, the disclosure allows those reporting to disclose a dollar range, not an exact amount; the act also explicitly affirms officials aren’t exempt from insider-trading laws. Prior to 2012 and the introduction of this disclosure requirement, it wasn’t fully clear those laws applied to Congress at all.

In practice, it means that all trades must be disclosed publicly, but the public may learn about the trade more than a month after it happens.

To be clear, the Trump Organization has said the president’s accounts are managed independently and without his input.

How Canada does this differently

Canadian federal politicians work under a stricter framework.

Under the Conflict of Interest Act, cabinet ministers and the prime minister are generally required to either divest controlled assets like individual stocks or place them in a blind trust within 120 days of taking office, with a trustee who cannot consult the office-holder about day-to-day decisions. Prime Minister Mark Carney, for example, moved his holdings into a blind trust before the legal deadline required it.

None of this means Canadian politics is free of conflict-of-interest controversy — it means the mechanism is different: Canada leans on divestment before the fact, while the U.S. leans on disclosure after the fact.

What this means for Canadian investors

The practical lesson for Canadian retail investors has less to do with any one politician and more to do with information timing generally.

By the time any market-moving news is public — a trial result, a policy change, a disclosed trade — the earliest movers, whether that’s corporate insiders, institutional funds, or officials filing a delayed disclosure report, have already acted. A retail investor reading the headline is, structurally, always near the back of the line.

That argues for caution rather than speed. A single biotech stock that just moved 177% in a day is a concentrated, high-volatility bet, not a core holding, and buying because of a headline about someone else’s gains doesn’t restore any lost edge.

Canadians who want exposure to the broader promise of mRNA and oncology research can consider diversified health care sector funds instead of chasing one name after its best day.

The headline here is a 225% gain. The more durable story is a legal gap that lets it happen the way it did — and a reminder that, gap or no gap, the public is never the first to know. For smart investors, that means creating an investment plan and sticking to it regardless of market swings.

OnlyMarms, as it’s known online, is entirely G-rated — just marmots being marmots — but the platform choice alone was enough to make headlines and pull in roughly $6,000 in necessary funding for the 64-year-old mammal study. (It’s the second-oldest long-term field study of individually identifiable wild mammals, trailing Jane Goodall’s study of chimpanzees by just a couple of years.)

The biggest surprise wasn’t the debate regarding the unusual but successful OnlyMarms fundraising initiative; it was the additional fundraising initiatives that began to spring up as a result.

How OnlyMarms helped kickstart a new fundraising initiative

While funding can be complicated for academic projects, the marmot study’s researchers, Professor Julien Martin and his colleague Professor Daniel Blumstein, knew that funding cuts and lost labour resources meant the study faced an annual shortfall of at least US$300K. After thoughtful (and at times humorous) discussions with their team — of whom more than nine out of ten were women — the researchers agreed to launch the OnlyMarms page on OnlyFans.

“My plan was absolutely no human in the images or videos, not even the shadow of a finger,” explained Martin in an interview with Money.ca. “[OnlyMarms was] only marmots doing marmot things.”

Martin said that he and the team wanted to raise money, but really considered this unusual approach as a way to raise awareness.

“We chose not to use a crowdfunded platform, like GoFundMe, as we would not get the media attention,” he revealed. “It would have slowly died on that platform.”

The OnlyMarms strategy worked. Since its launch in late May, OnlyMarms has generated about $6,000 in funding — but more importantly, it’s raised interest in marmots, the importance of this long-term ecological study and the power of creative outreach.

New partnerships and more money start flowing in

Quite quickly, Martin and his colleague began to field emails and calls from local businesses looking to partner with the researchers to help raise awareness and funds.

Denver, Colorado’s Upslope Brewing Company reached out to partner with Professors Martin and Blumstein to release a limited-edition OnlyMarms Extra Thicc Double IPA to benefit the long-running, yellow-bellied marmot research project at the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory.

The team is now in discussions with another American brewery to launch a year-long, marmot-inspired brew to help raise awareness and funds. Additionally, recognized artists are eager to produce and auction off art-inspired marmot pieces, with proceeds going directly to helping fund the research project.

As excited as Martin and his colleagues are about these initiatives, the most lucrative — and surprising — was the $OnlyMarms memecoin, which is a type of cryptocurrency that fluctuates in price based on viral trends.

The memecoin has raised more than US$120,000 in fees. These “fees” are the total cost paid by $OnlyMarms memecoin investors, a signal that millions of dollars worth of trading volume has passed through the token in just a few months. The creator — in this case, the marmot research project — gets a portion of these fees. As Martin points out, it’s still a significant sum — and it’s net-new funding for a long-term project.

“The memecoin is the initiative with the most potential [to raise critical funds] and the one we expected the least,” he explained.

Why this research matters beyond the marmots

Why bother keeping a long-term research project going, particularly about marmots — a mammal considered “a pest” in some parts of North America?

As Martin explained, the project has tracked the same Colorado population since 1962, monitoring births, deaths, mating and body weight closely enough to build a genetic record spanning 12 generations. Paired with decades of local snowpack and temperature data, it’s one of the most detailed long-term ecological datasets in the world, and one of fewer than five research systems that are detailed enough to separate genetic effects from environmental ones in real time. That combination makes it a rare window into how a fast-warming mountain ecosystem is actually responding to climate change — data with implications well beyond marmots.

But keeping that window of examination open costs money, and increasingly, more than what granting bodies are willing to cover.

A shrinking pool of money, chasing the same research

Martin says a funding freeze tied to broader University of California budget cuts eliminated the fully funded PhD position his U.S.-based collaborator, Blumstein, used to renew every two years. This forced the team to consider ways to independently raise roughly US$300,000 just to keep training new researchers and maintain the data integrity of this long-term study.

The OnlyFans page was a long shot by design

The team appreciated the concerns of launching a page on the adult-content-friendly platform OnlyFans and made sure to include all stakeholders in the decision before launch. And even with their guardrails — only marmots doing marmot things — their funding expectations were modest. As Martin recalls, they considered $1,000 of extra funds and a bit of media coverage “a success.”

While the team ended up raising quite a bit more than anticipated, it was the coverage from across the world that really made a difference. After the story went viral, fans created an independent meme coin tied to the project, and Martin, who says he “didn’t know anything about crypto” beforehand, began fielding emails offering to route the coin’s creator fees directly to the research project. After verifying the offer wasn’t a scam, he claimed the fees himself, and they’ve kept accumulating since. He’s now working with both the University of Ottawa and UCLA to move the money into the university system with minimal tax friction, while cautioning that the coin’s value is inherently unstable. “It’s a meme coin,” he said, “so it might crash in a week.”

A windfall, not a plan

For now, Martin says the roughly US$120,000 sitting in what he calls the marmot research account gives the project breathing room it didn’t have a few months ago when $OnlyMarms wasn’t a thing. But he’s careful not to treat it as a permanent fix. A meme coin’s value can evaporate as fast as it appeared, and the team is still leaning on brewery partnerships, a university donation page and conventional grant writing to fund the actual science for the long run.

For anyone interested in learning more about the project, check out Julien Martin’s GitHub page. To support the initiative through $OnlyMarms, go to Solana’s landing page.

The irony is that the first real casualty wasn’t Tehran. It was Wall Street.

For Canadians, that may sound like someone else’s problem — it isn’t. A large share of RRSP money sits in U.S. stocks, in part because of a tax rule that makes this account the best place to hold them. When the S&P 500 dips, a chunk of many Canadians’ retirement savings drops with it — even for people who never chose to bet on American companies.

Here’s what’s happening, what it’s costing and what Canadians who are nearing or in retirement should do about it.

What is ‘economic D-Day’ and why is it hitting markets now

In that Truth Social post, Trump warned that Iran had failed to seize the opportunity for a deal and would face crippling economic pressure, adding that any country aiding Tehran would face “TREMENDOUS Economic Consequences.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent echoed the stance, signaling that new secondary sanctions could target foreign institutions that continue to trade with Iran.

The threat comes as shipping through the Strait of Hormuz (a transit point for roughly a fifth of global oil and gas supply) remains heavily disrupted. Brent crude topped US$93 a barrel last week, while U.S. crude climbed near US$86.70.

How much did this actually cost a typical RRSP

Consider this hypothetical scenario: a Canadian retiree with C$500,000 in an RRSP, with 40% invested in an S&P 500 index fund — a common setup in balanced and growth portfolios. A 0.87% single-day drop in that index erases roughly $1,740 from that portion of the portfolio in a single session, before factoring in any spillover into Canadian equities.

Fixed-income markets aren’t immune either. The 30-year U.S. Treasury yield pushed past 5.25%, near a two-decade high, as investors pulled back from long-dated U.S. government debt. Even an attempt by the U.S. Treasury to double its buyback of long-dated bonds to $4 billion failed to steady the market.

Why your RRSP has more U.S. exposure than you think

Under the Canada-U.S. tax treaty, American stock dividends paid directly into an RRSP are exempt from the 15% non-resident withholding tax that applies to TFSAs or non-registered accounts. Because of this tax treatment, financial advisors frequently recommend holding U.S. equity allocations inside an RRSP.

Years of record Canadian capital flows into foreign equities, combined with this tax treatment, mean most off-the-shelf target-date or ‘balanced growth’ funds carry significant U.S. exposure — placing them directly in the splash zone when Wall Street stumbles.

Could this squeeze your gas budget and mortgage rate?

Geopolitical tensions feeding energy markets create broader inflationary pressure. As Frederic Schneider, a nonresident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told Al Jazeera, sustained oil strength fans inflation, which in turn pressures the bond market and leaves central banks with limited room to ease monetary policy.

For Canadians, higher U.S. bond yields filter into domestic borrowing costs, mortgage pricing and fuel costs at the pump, making global supply shocks a direct household issue.

What Canadians should do with their RRSP right now

A short-term market reaction to geopolitical headlines isn’t a reason to abandon a long-term plan, but it is a good trigger to review your fundamentals:

• Audit your actual U.S. weighting: Check your fund statements or ETF fact sheets to confirm your true exposure.
• Plan your withdrawal sequence: If you are withdrawing from an RRIF, establish which liquid or defensive assets to sell first during volatile periods so you avoid locking in equity losses.
• Track bond allocations: Rising yields impact bond fund values; ensure your fixed-income strategy aligns with your immediate cash needs.
• Avoid panic selling: Selling during geopolitical uncertainty historically locks in short-term losses rather than protecting long-term capital.

The settlement motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, resolves litigation initiated in 2021 against MindGeek. The online adult entertainment company, located in the Côte-des-Neiges neighbourhood of Montreal, rebranded as Aylo in 2023.

Under the terms submitted to Justice Wesley L. Hsu, the US$120 million settlement will be distributed across seven financial installments. The payout structure begins with an initial sum of US$25 million (C$34.5 million) this year, followed by annual payments of US$15.8 million (C$21.8 million) on each of the first six anniversaries of June 17, 2026.

Class members covered under the agreement include individuals who were under the age of 18 when they appeared in media uploaded to Aylo platforms between Feb. 19, 2021 and Dec. 6, 2024.

Allegations and financial liability

The legal proceedings stemmed from class-action suits filed by plaintiffs in California and Alabama, who alleged that explicit media filmed when they were minors was posted to Aylo sites including Pornhub, YouPorn and Redtube without consent.

According to court filings, plaintiffs claimed the platform operator knowingly profited from the distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and allowed content to be viewed thousands of times.

In the California filing, the plaintiff stated her former boyfriend recorded her without her knowledge during a sexual encounter.

Their relationship came to an end after he pushed her out of a moving car — years later, she learned that he had uploaded sexually explicit videos of her “as revenge porn” to the defendants’ website, where users could “freely view, download, and reupload” the media, according to the settlement motion.

In the Alabama case, the plaintiff alleged she was drugged and raped as a minor before her abuser uploaded videos of the assault to Pornhub. Plaintiffs in both jurisdictions argued the company reviewed media before approving it for public viewing.

Aylo has denied all allegations made in the lawsuits.

Corporate obligations and operational safeguards

In addition to direct financial payouts, the proposed settlement imposes operational mandates designed to curb non-consensual and illegal material across Aylo platforms.

Under the injunctive relief terms, the parent company must verify the age of every individual uploading or appearing in content on its websites by requiring government-issued identification to confirm they were 18 or older when the media was recorded.

The company must also deploy automated content moderation technology to identify CSAM, enforce mandatory prevention training for all trust and safety personnel and issue immediate account bans to users uploading suspected or confirmed illegal material.

To track compliance, a dedicated monitoring committee will meet annually for five years, and the business will be subject to third-party external audits over the same five-year period.

Court records highlight scope of exposure

Document filings from the multi-year legal proceedings emphasized the extent of illicit content discovered during evidentiary phases.

“The scope of the injunctive relief is particularly significant given that discovery revealed tens of thousands of potential CSAM videos and photos that were viewed on Defendants’ websites millions of times before they were removed,” the court document stated.

Attorneys representing the class highlighted that the settlement avoids a public trial that could expose plaintiffs to public scrutiny and additional distress.

“As discussed, the personal risks (including of potentially having their identities exposed at trial) and the inevitable trauma that Plaintiffs would have experienced in a public, adversarial trial cannot be overstated,” the document added. “This settlement obviates those risks and offers Plaintiffs and Class Member survivors the closure and privacy that even a resounding trial victory could not.”

Aylo maintains that it operates under a zero tolerance framework for non-consensual material and child sexual abuse media across its global web network.

According to CBRE’s newest Scoring Tech Talent report, Seattle now outranks the Bay Area for tech talent growth, and Toronto isn’t far behind — sitting third among the 75 North American markets CBRE studied.

That’s a big deal for Canadians, because the report also found that the ranks of workers with artificial intelligence (AI) skills across Canada and the U.S. grew by 45%, with AI-related roles now touching nearly a third of U.S. tech-talent job listings. And in Canada, that growth isn’t spread evenly: 60% of the country’s AI jobs are concentrated in just three cities — Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

For Canadians, the obvious takeaway might be “get an AI job in Toronto.” But the numbers show that decision is more nuanced, since pay, competition and cost of living all shift depending on which market you’re looking at. Now the real question is: What city will help me crack that IC (individual contributor) ceiling — the indivisible barrier where hands-on technologists (like software engineers or designers) stop advancing in pay and influence unless they abandon coding/building and transition into people management.

What’s actually happening in Canada’s tech job market

Overall tech-talent employment in Canada grew 7.6% in 2025 according to CBRE, and much of that came from AI-related hiring. Across the U.S. and Canada combined, there were 751,000 AI-related workers as of mid-2026, a year-over-year increase of 45%. The top two fastest-growing AI roles were data scientist, which added 29,000 jobs, and computer and information systems manager, which added 24,600.

CBRE’s Colin Yasukochi, executive director of the firm’s Tech Insights Center, said growth of AI jobs “far outpaced the broader tech-talent category,” which expanded by less than 2% even as employers cut some non-AI tech positions.

Why ‘any tech job’ isn’t the safe bet it used to be

This AI shift matters because it changes who benefits. A tech job alone no longer guarantees the biggest pay gains — those are flowing disproportionately to AI-adjacent roles.

CBRE Group President John Morris has said some jobs will still be phased out as AI takes on routine tasks, even as the overall job count holds up.

For workers, that means the safer long-term bet is aligning skills with AI-specific demand, rather than banking on staying professionally relevant in the tech field at large.

Where the jobs — and the leverage — really are

In CBRE’s overall rankings, Toronto placed third, Vancouver ninth, Waterloo Region tenth, Montreal 11th, Ottawa 14th and Calgary 15th, with Quebec City and Edmonton also making the top 50.

Among the reasons why Toronto and Calgary stood out was that both cities added more tech jobs than they produced tech graduates between 2022 and 2024 — Toronto by 50,636 positions and Calgary by 25,240. When employers hire faster than local schools can supply talent, it typically strengthens workers’ hand in salary negotiations.

What it costs employers — and what that means for your paycheque

Tech salaries run about 15% above the broader U.S. average, but Canadian markets remain the cheapest place on the continent to employ that talent.

Quebec City had the lowest total cost for a 500-person tech company — which combined annual wages and office space — at US$36.1 million (~C$50.1 million), while Toronto was the priciest Canadian market at just over US$42 million (~C$58.4 million), which is still well below the San Francisco Bay Area’s roughly US$90.6 million (~C$125.7 million).

But that cost gap cuts both ways. Toronto tech workers tend to earn more than their counterparts in smaller Canadian hubs — but they also pay more to live there. In cities like Quebec City or Waterloo Region, a smaller paycheque can actually stretch further, since rent and everyday costs are lower. So a bigger salary in Toronto doesn’t necessarily mean more money in your pocket at the end of the month.

And that gap may only grow. CBRE Canada Research managing director Marc Meehan said Toronto is “putting more distance between itself and the rest of the markets” — meaning the city isn’t just ahead of other Canadian tech hubs; it’s pulling further away from them. If that trend continues, the tradeoff between chasing higher pay in Toronto versus a lower cost of living elsewhere could become even more pronounced.

What should Canadian tech workers do next?

For Canadians currently in the tech field, or students looking for the next possibility in this area, here are four steps to consider:

• Compare your role against the fastest-growing AI job titles, such as data scientist and information systems manager, since these captured the bulk of new hiring.
• If you’re job hunting, weigh markets with a talent gap, not just headline salary — Toronto and Calgary’s graduate shortfall points to more hiring leverage.
• Run the math on take-home pay after local rent and living costs, not just posted salary, before comparing offers between cities.
• Don’t treat ‘tech’ as a synonym for job security — ask whether a role sits on the AI-skills side of the growth curve or the side more exposed to automation.

The bottom line for Canadian workers isn’t whether AI is reshaping tech jobs — it already is; the more useful question is where a specific role and city land on that curve, and what’s left of the paycheque once rent and living costs are subtracted.

Const. Travis Marcott of the Lacombe Police Service, which is investigating the case, told the CTV that scammers are “definitely getting more creative” in how they try to take people’s money.

What Schweer and Harder simultaneously experienced is an overpayment scam, and it’s a reminder that fraud aimed at a business can still land on a homeowner’s doorstep. As a result, Canadians on both sides of a home-service transaction need to know the warning signs before falling victim.

How the overpayment scam worked

A scammer posing as Schweer had initially contacted Harder, using an image pulled from the home’s real estate listing to schedule a tree removal. Harder requested a 50% deposit in advance, but he received a cheque for more than that amount, and was asked to forward the extra funds to a third party claiming to be roofers working on the same job. He refused, and later learned there were no roofers and the cheque was fraudulent.

That’s the mechanics of a classic overpayment scam: A fraudster sends a cheque for more than the amount owed, then asks the recipient to wire back the difference, or forward it to someone else, before the cheque is exposed as fake. Because funds can appear in an account before a cheque clears, the business that sends money back is often the one left covering the loss.

It’s unclear if the scammers knew the Schweer family would be away when Harder arrived, or how they might have obtained that information. Schweer said the timing is what concerns her most, since the earlier attempt on Aug. 3 was caught only because she happened to be home to say no.

As a result, Schweer estimates that in order to fix her property, which includes digging out the remaining roots so it can be levelled, resodded and landscaped, she may have to shell out anywhere between $5000-$15,000.

What’s worse is the home, which was listed for sale, will have to wait until next year to go back on the market..

However, Schweer doesn’t blame Harder for what happened.

“At the end of the day they got scammed too,” she said. “I just think they were very trusting. And that’s the unfortunate part of society.”

This wasn’t a one-off

The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) told CTV News it has received two reports since May involving tree-removal businesses targeted in similar schemes. In one, scammers tried to use a fraudulent electronic cheque and obtain online banking information before the business grew suspicious. In another, two tree-removal businesses were sent to the same property on consecutive days after scammers used a photo from a real estate listing.

Overpayment scams fall under the umbrella of impersonation fraud, which, according to an Equifax survey, is a cause of significant stress for Canadians, with 67% of citizens being most worried about falling victim to identity theft and impersonation.

How to spot and avoid this form of fraud

Harder learned a valuable lesson by falling prey to this scam. “I’m going to be a lot more vigilant,” he told CTV. “Sort of like, ‘Are you actually the homeowner?’ And probably stop doing quotes by pictures,” he said.

Knowing the distinct warning signs of an overpayment scam is the best way to protect yourself from being similarly victimized. Be on high alert if:

• A payment is received for more than the agreed-upon amount, which a scammer may argue was a mistake or offer explanations such as shipping costs, agent fees or account errors
• There is pressure to return the funds quickly, before a payment can be properly verified, especially through cheque
• The victim is instructed to refund the overpayment using hard-to-recover methods such as e-transfer, wire transfer, gift cards or cryptocurrency
• The buyer or client is unable to meet in person prior to the service being performed

Canadian homeowners can take certain steps in order to safeguard their finances, and their properties, from this type of fraud:

• Confirm any unexpected service request, cancellation or ‘did you text this’ question directly
• Ask a neighbour or property manager to check in if you’re away and no work should be happening at your home
• Report suspicious requests to the CAFC and your local police

The timing made the leak sting. Within 48 hours, the trade talks Vance was mocking fell apart entirely. Carney suspended negotiations on August 21, and at midnight, the U.S. followed through on a threatened 50% tariff on Canadian goods.

JD Vance made these comments at a private fundraiser to donors, not in a diplomatic setting.

It’s reasonable to assume that his bravado was more to appeal to a friendly room of supporters than U.S. policy; however, it’s also unusual for VP-level officials to editorialize so candidly about a G7 ally’s head of government — unless they feel there’s little cost to it.

What did JD Vance actually say

At the fundraiser in Southampton, New York, on August 19, Vance told the room he is friendly with Carney personally but dismissed his public claim of having “out-toughed” Trump as overstated. Vance also credited Ontario Conservative MP Jamil Jivani — a longtime friend — as a more effective behind-the-scenes advocate for Canada than either Carney or Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, whom he dismissed as a non-factor in the negotiations.

Vance elevating backbench Conservative MP Jamil Jivani above both the sitting prime minister and the Leader of the Opposition is a notable signal. It says less about trade mechanics than about which Canadian political figures the U.S. administration finds useful — regardless of who actually holds negotiating authority.

Vance’s remarks landed just as Canadian and U.S. negotiators were working through the final days of talks meant to avert this new round of U.S. tariffs.

Despite the disrespect of Canada’s PM, the U.S. VP’s insulting comments are really a subplot — the bigger story is what a stalled trade relationship and what it will cost consumers and citizens on both sides of the border.

Why did the trade talks collapse

Trump initially said the 50% tariff would take effect August 19, then backed off the deadline with a three-day pause while negotiators worked toward a deal. But talks broke down late on August 21, when Canada rejected the final U.S. terms. Carney said last-minute changes to the proposed deal were unfair and uneconomic, and that they undermined confidence in the reliability of any agreement. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer countered that Canada had introduced new demands and pulled back on commitments already made, pointing to Canada’s continued restrictions on some American goods.

What’s actually being tariffed, and who gets hit hardest

At the end of the three-day pause — at midnight — the U.S. imposed 50% tariffs on a variety of Canadian products, including building materials and plywood, furniture, electrical equipment, certain clothing categories, liquor and sporting goods, such as wooden hockey sticks.

According to the Prime Minister’s Office, the new U.S. tariff applies to roughly $28 billion of Canadian goods.

British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec are particularly exposed given their manufacturing and forestry ties to the newly tariffed categories. Because these goods don’t qualify for tariff-free treatment under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), affected businesses have no exemption to fall back on.

What does dollar-for-dollar retaliation mean

Prime Minister Mark Carney has pledged Canada will “match those tariffs dollar for dollar,” extending a countermeasures approach Ottawa has used since the trade dispute began in 2025. In practice, that typically means new or expanded tariffs on a comparable value of American imports — a cost that historically gets passed directly to consumers rather than absorbed by importers.

And, according to U.S. negotiators, Canadian tariffs can and do sting.

According to The White House, the original tariff threat from U.S. President Donald Trump was in retaliation for provincial bans on U.S. alcohol sales in 8 of 10 provinces and all three territories. Canada had introduced those bans in 2025 in response to Trump’s earlier tariff threats. As a result, there’s been an 81% year-over-year drop in Canadian imports of American alcohol.

What to expect in the days and weeks ahead

Vance’s comments may fade from the news cycle quickly. The tariffs, and the industries now absorbing them, won’t. For Canadian households and small businesses, the practical question isn’t who won the argument at a New York fundraiser — it’s how long a 50% tariff regime lasts, and what Ottawa’s dollar-for-dollar response ends up costing at checkout. Neither side has scheduled further talks, which means current terms could hold at least for a few days.

It also means that Canadians should expect to see price movement, not certainty, on renovation materials, furniture and some clothing and beverage categories tied to the new tariffs. As a result, consumers looking to make purchases in these areas should budget with a buffer rather than waiting for a “normal” price to return.

For any Canadian — or business — who is midway through a renovation or development project, these tariffs will impact plywood, electrical components, and other building materials; to keep ahead of the costs, get updated supplier quotes before locking in a budget.

For those shopping for liquor, Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew offers some clear, actionable advice: “Buy the Canadian stuff instead” where a comparable option exists.

For employees in impacted sectors, and residents of BC, Ontario and Quebec, keep an eye out for Ottawa’s promised new support measures which are expected in the coming days.

Finally, remember to treat this situation as fluid — since both governments have reversed tariff deadlines before, sometimes within days.

Murray’s sharp rebuke came as lawmakers and state leaders across the border condemned the administration’s aggressive trade strategy and nationalistic rhetoric. The breakdown of talks has triggered immediate economic anxiety across border states while sparking widespread outrage among Canadians standing up for their economic independence.

Prime Minister Mark Carney pulled Canadian negotiators out of the high-stakes trade talks late Friday, refusing to yield to last-minute White House demands that targeted Canadian trade sovereignty and culture.

American lawmakers condemn White House approach

The collapse of the talks brought 50% tariffs into force against $28 billion worth of Canadian exports. Carney quickly responded by pledging matching dollar-for-dollar counter-tariffs on US goods, making clear that Canada will not accept economic coercion from our southern neighbour.

The firm response from Ottawa drew immediate backing from US politicians who warned that the White House is damaging vital trade partnerships.

“Canada is NOT the 51st state,” Murray said in a statement posted to social media. “Trump owes our friends and neighbors an apology for nearly 2 years of his boorish insults and jeers. Canada IS Washington state’s biggest trading partner and our country’s closest ally. Dump Trump’s tariffs. NO TRADE WAR.”

Other border-state leaders echoed those concerns, warning that American consumers and businesses will bear the cost of the trade dispute.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul took to social media to criticize the administration’s actions.

“Needlessly picking fights with our allies and raising prices here at home. That’s Trump’s economic policy in a nutshell,” Hochul posted on X.

Stalled negotiations and tariff escalation

The political fallout follows months of friction over sector-specific exemptions and broader trade terms. Canadian officials drew a hard line when US terms began threatening core domestic industries.

Carney explained at an Ottawa press conference that the US attempted to introduce last-minute restrictions on Canada’s economic independence, including limits on pursuing deals with global trading partners and reduced tariff relief for manufacturing sectors like auto assembly.

“The U.S. introduced in the last hours efforts to restrict our ability to have other trade deals,” Prime Minister Mark Carney said during his address on the failed talks. “Because we believe in free trade, we’re the partner of choice, in many respects, for countries around the world, and Americans wanted to restrict that, they had language to restrict that. Unacceptable.”

Carney framed the cumulative pressure from Washington as a direct challenge to the nation’s independence, noting that “it’s a power play, and it becomes a question of sovereignty.”

Former US trade official Ryan Majerus, now a partner at law firm King & Spalding, says the two countries are at an impasse.

“Canada likely wanted further sector-specific relief than the U.S. was willing to offer, or Canada’s concessions did not go far enough,” Majerus said. “Either way, I think both sides will be under immense pressure in the coming days to still find an off-ramp. But if Canada has agreed to also impose tariffs, the off-ramp may be even harder to find.”

Deepening rift in cross-border relations

The breakdown in talks marks one of the most serious ruptures in U.S.-Canada relations in decades, with political leaders in both countries acknowledging a permanent shift in the bilateral dynamic.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford offered full backing for Ottawa’s retaliatory measures, emphasizing that Canadian provinces and the federal government remain united against economic pressure. Carney noted publicly that Canada accepts that “America has changed,” stressing that Ottawa will continue expanding economic partnerships worldwide rather than accepting forced terms.

With US midterm elections approaching, economic experts warn that cross-border supply chains face prolonged disruption as both nations brace for an extended trade battle.

The timing matters for Canadian households. More than 70% of teens have used an AI companion and half of them do so regularly, according to a 2025 Common Sense Media study on teens and AI companionship.

The new teen mode is free, and OpenAI says it’s built to be safe even for families who never touch a single parental setting. However, child-safety advocates say some of the most important protections still depend on a parent opting in — and that gap could leave families deciding whether to spend their hard-earned cash closing it themselves.

Here’s what actually changed, where the coverage still has gaps and what filling them might cost.

What does ChatGPT for Teens actually change?

OpenAI told the AP that the teen version, for kids aged 13 to 17, blocks romantic or sexual exchanges and stops the chatbot from suggesting it has feelings — guardrails meant to head off the kind of attachment a teen might form with the tool. It also restricts how the chatbot responds to topics like suicide, self-harm and eating disorders, while shifting homework help towards guiding a student to formulate an answer themselves rather than simply producing one.

OpenAI doesn’t perform age verification. Instead, it estimates whether the individual is a minor from how they use the app, automatically shifting anyone it flags into the teen version. Parents and teens can also link accounts, which unlocks quiet hours and sends notifications tied to eating disorder-related conversations or high-risk situations, such as signs a teen may be exhibiting signs of hurting themself.

Why ‘free’ protection may not be complete

Linking accounts requires both the teen and the parent to opt in, and some of the most consequential safeguards, including limits on how much the chatbot remembers about a teen over time, are only available through that setup rather than being switched on by default.

Brendan Bouffard, associate general counsel for AI and privacy at children’s advocacy group Fairplay, cautioned against “parents being lured into this false sense of safety,” in comments to the AP, arguing the default protections leave a real hole for families who assume the basic version is enough on its own.

That’s the financial decision that looms with Canadians: Whether to treat OpenAI’s free safeguards as sufficient, or budget for a second layer of oversight.

What would it cost to close the gap?

Third-party monitoring apps are the main paid alternative, and pricing depends on coverage. Qustodio’s basic plan runs about US$43 a year for time limits, web filtering and location tracking, while its more complete tier, with AI-powered alerts and social monitoring, runs between US$89 and US$138 a year depending on how many devices are covered.

For a Canadian family with more than one teen or device, that can mean roughly C$60 to C$190 or more a year just to backstop features OpenAI already offers for free through parental controls, if both the parent and teen agree to turn them on.

What Canadian parents should do first

Before spending anything, link accounts inside ChatGPT itself; it costs nothing and closes the biggest gap advocates flagged. Turn on quiet hours if screen time is a concern, and check the notification settings so alerts about self-harm or eating-disorder content actually reach a parent’s phone. Then have a direct conversation with a teen about how the chatbot gets used for socialization, not just homework, since that’s the use case the free settings can’t fully police.

Only after that conversation does a paid monitoring app start to make sense, and only for the specific gap it fills, such as broader web and social monitoring the built-in tools don’t cover.

The resulting nightmare left her facing over $4,000 in equipment charges and an unauthorized $2,500 third-party loan opened in her name. While the lender eventually canceled the loan following media coverage, the ongoing financial dispute over the physical devices illustrates a fast-growing threat across Canada: Phone impersonation scams leveraging compromised personal data and sneaky delivery tricks to leave victims holding the bill.

According to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC), Canadians lost over $17 million to service-related fraud in just the first half of 2026, with carrier impersonation topping the list of reported tactics.

Anatomy of a cellphone delivery scam

Moss’s experience follows a precise multi-stage tactic designed to exploit standard return procedures:

• The inbound pitch: Scammers contact victims posing as telecom providers like Rogers, Bell, or Telus offering a "loyalty upgrade." Armed with previously leaked account details, the call sounds entirely legitimate.
• Identity harvesting: Under the guise of confirming the order, callers request sensitive verification data — such as a driver’s licence number or security code — granting them full access to open new lines or finance hardware.
• The "wrong item" return: The victim receives actual devices fraudulently ordered through their own account. The fraudster calls back, claims a warehouse mix-up occurred, and emails a prepaid courier label to send the hardware "back." The return address, however, belongs to the scammer.
• Secondary financing fraud: Using the stolen identification details, fraudsters may simultaneously apply for third-party Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) credit (such as Affirm) in the victim’s name.

Essential habits to protect your account

• Treat all inbound calls as unverified: Hang up and dial your provider directly using the number on your official statement or debit card.
• Never share ID over incoming calls: Telecoms already have your primary identity details on file and will not require driver’s licence numbers or PINs to apply a promotional rate.
• Set up account passcodes: Request a verbal PIN or secondary password on your account for any future hardware orders or plan changes.
• Refuse third-party return labels: If an unexpected package arrives, do not use shipping labels emailed by an unverified caller. Take the device directly to an official carrier store.
• Escalate unresolved disputes: If your provider refuses to clear fraudulent charges, submit a formal complaint to the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-television Services (CCTS).

For victims like Jeannie Moss, navigating thousands of dollars in bogus debt was an exhausting fight that required public pressure to resolve. Adopting these proactive safeguards ensures you won't be forced to battle your own provider over devices you never intended to buy.

The central bank last adjusted its policy rate in October 2025 with a 25-basis-point reduction. Since then, the Governing Council has chosen to hold borrowing costs steady.

Another pause on Sept. 2 would signal continued stability in monetary policy, but it also carries distinct financial implications depending on the type of mortgage a borrower holds.

Variable-rate mortgages

For homeowners with variable-rate mortgages, a decision to hold the policy rate keeps prime lending rates anchored at commercial banks.

When the Bank of Canada maintains its overnight rate at 2.25%, the prime rate across major Canadian financial institutions remains at 4.45%.

• Variable-rate holders with floating payments: Monthly mortgage payments will remain unchanged following the announcement.
• Variable-rate holders with fixed payments: The proportion of monthly payments going toward principal versus interest will stay static, preventing further shifts in amortization schedules.

Because variable rates track the central bank rate directly, borrowers on floating plans will not see the relief of lower monthly costs, nor will they face the sudden payment spikes seen during previous tightening cycles.

Fixed-rate mortgages

For fixed-rate borrowers, a central bank rate hold has no direct, immediate impact on existing contracts. Fixed mortgage rates are priced primarily off Canadian benchmark bond yields rather than the central bank’s target overnight rate.

However, a rate hold provides a clear picture for upcoming renewals and new buyers:

• Current fixed-rate contracts: Monthly payments remain fixed for the duration of the agreed term regardless of the Sept. 2 decision.
• Pending renewals: Homeowners holding fixed rates negotiated during earlier low-rate periods will continue to face higher interest environments upon renewal.
• Market stability: A prolonged holding pattern helps stabilize fixed mortgage pricing, allowing buyers to compare multi-year fixed offers without rapid fluctuations.

Economic context and central bank projections

In its monetary policy guidance, the Bank of Canada indicated that the economy has shown signs of underlying recovery following flat growth earlier in the year. Statistics Canada data and Bank projections estimate an annualized real GDP growth rebound in the second quarter, while overall 2026 growth is projected at 0.7% before picking up to 1.8% in 2027.

“The Governing Council judged that the current policy rate remained appropriate to sustain the economic recovery and bring inflation back to the 2% target,” the central bank noted in its July policy statement.

Data from Statistics Canada showed Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation at 3.0% in July. The central bank expects total inflation to average around 2.5% over the second half of 2026 before returning closer to the 2% target in early 2027.

With labour market conditions remaining soft and unemployment hovering near 6.5%, central bank officials have emphasized that future monetary policy steps will remain strictly data dependent.

What to do if you are signing a mortgage in September

With the Bank of Canada expected to hold its benchmark rate on Sept. 2, borrowers facing a mortgage renewal or closing on a home purchase in September need a clear execution strategy. Here are three key steps for navigating the decision:

• Secure a rate hold immediately: For those leaning toward a fixed term, securing a 90-day to 120-day rate hold through a broker or lender locks in current pricing. If bond yields slide following the central bank’s announcement or upcoming economic reports, lenders will typically drop the rate to match the lower market pricing.
• Weigh short-term fixed vs. variable risks: Because variable rates are linked to prime lending rates, borrowers choosing variable options will face immediate exposure to any sudden shift in future inflation or policy direction. Short-term fixed rates (such as two- or three-year terms) have grown in popularity among buyers who want immediate payment certainty without locking themselves out of potential rate cuts over a longer five-year horizon.
• Stress test your budget above the contract rate: Canadian regulations require all buyers to qualify at the benchmark stress test rate (the higher of 5.25% or the contract rate plus 2%). Borrowers finalizing agreements in September should ensure their household cash flow comfortably handles the contractual payment alongside lingering cost-of-living pressures.

Navigating the path ahead

As Sept. 2 approaches, it’s important to understand that key monetary policy has entered a phase of predictability rather than rapid movement. While a sixth straight hold means borrowing costs will not fall in the immediate term, it eliminates the threat of surprise rate hikes that defined recent years.

Whether you’re holding a variable rate, are approaching a fixed renewal or are shopping for a first home, the current landscape rewards careful planning over waiting for sudden rate shifts. Aligning your mortgage choice with personal cash flow, securing rate guarantees early and running worst-case stress tests remain the most reliable ways to safeguard household finances through September and into the year ahead.

The amended legal filing in Quebec’s Superior Court alleges that Loblaw Companies Limited, Metro Inc., Sobeys Group Inc. and Groupe Épicia Inc. were “betraying their customers’ trust” by stocking cans of syrup that were allegedly cut with cheap cane sugar.

For those of us who take deep national pride in our quintessential export, the allegations touch a sensitive cultural nerve. Canada produces the vast majority of the world’s maple syrup supply, and strict regulations govern the purity of the national staple.

Allegations expand to target major retail chains

The legal challenge was initially launched in April by plaintiff Maude Fraser-Jodoin. That original application named only the producer, Saint-Chrysostome, Que.-based Érablière Steve Bourdeau, as a defendant.

However, an amended court filing submitted earlier this month by the law firm Slater Vecchio added the nation’s grocery giants to the action. The suit claims the supermarket chains displayed “negligence, recklessness, carelessness, or serious indifference” by putting the compromised product onto store shelves across Canada.

According to the newer filing, the retailers failed to perform basic checks on products carrying significant price discounts compared to genuine maple syrup.

“The grocery stores should have exercised caution and due diligence before offering this ‘pure’ maple syrup for sale at a low price, given the disparity with the value of other products,” the court document states. “They should even have suspected that the disputed syrup was tampered with after it went on sale, in light of the available information.”

Investigative report revealed diluted cans

The legal proceedings stem from an April investigative report by Radio-Canada. Laboratory testing on cans of syrup purchased at a local grocery store revealed that product labelled as pure maple syrup was actually composed of at least 50% cane sugar.

In the report, the producer’s owner, Steve Bourdeau, also allegedly acknowledged buying syrup from Ontario and mislabelling it as a “product of Quebec” in violation of provincial regulations.

Financial remedies and punitive damages sought

The lawsuit targets sales dating back to Oct. 5, 2010, suggesting the group of affected consumers could number in the thousands or potentially millions.

The proposed class includes anyone in Canada who bought at least one can of maple syrup produced by the company since October 2010, whether directly or through Metro, Sobeys, Groupe Épicia or Loblaws.

In addition to full refunds and unspecified compensatory damages, the lawsuit demands $100 in punitive damages per class member to deter similar actions in the future.

“Without an award of significant punitive damages, nothing will deter L’Érablière from continuing such practices to the detriment of maple syrup enthusiasts, maple syrup producers, and the integrity of this product, which is integral to Quebec’s identity,” the court filing reads.

The application to authorize the class action must still be authorized by a judge in Quebec’s Superior Court before the lawsuit can proceed to trial, and none of the claims have been proven in court.

Data released by the Canadian Real Estate Association shows national home sales edged up 0.5% on a month-over-month basis in July, registering a fourth straight monthly gain.

At the same time, the number of newly listed properties fell 1.6% from June. The combination of modest sales growth and tightening inventory pushed the national sales-to-new listings ratio to 51.3%, moving closer to the historical average of 54.7%.

In real estate terms, ratios between 45% and 65% generally signify balanced conditions between buyers and sellers.

“At the national level, July’s housing data was a carbon copy of the June numbers, with home sales edging up a little further, listings down, and prices remaining stable,” Shaun Cathcart, senior economist at CREA, said in a statement.

Cathcart noted that regional markets across Canada are broadly returning to balanced territory. Sellers’ markets in Quebec, the Prairies and the East Coast have cooled over the past year, while previously buyer-friendly conditions in British Columbia’s Lower Mainland and Ontario’s Greater Golden Horseshoe have shifted back into balanced territory.

The buyers gain patience while tight supply benefits selective sellers

Prospective homebuyers stand out as primary beneficiaries of the shifting environment. With overall national inventory holding at 4.7 months and price growth largely flat, buyers face reduced exposure to high-pressure bidding wars and rapid value drops.

“The ongoing shift towards a more normal balance between supply and demand in so many markets across Canada is good news for buyers, whether that means not having to worry about your new home falling in value, or not feeling pressured to make a decision due to competing offers,” Garry Bhaura, chair of CREA, said in a statement.

Sellers in regions with tight supply also continue to hold an advantage. According to the association, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador remain borderline sellers’ markets, giving property owners in those provinces stronger negotiating leverage compared to the rest of the country.

Rapid gains fade as inventory remains constrained

Sellers accustomed to rapid price acceleration and swift transactions may find the current environment less advantageous. The national composite MLS Home Price Index edged up just 0.1% month-over-month and remained down 3.3% compared to July 2025.

Additionally, actual non-seasonally adjusted monthly sales activity fell 5.3% short of July 2025 levels, indicating that overall transaction volumes remain historically subdued.

Prospective buyers waiting for a vast selection of discounted inventory are also facing constraints. Total active supply sat at 205,388 properties at the end of July, up just 0.6% from a year earlier and 1.5% above long-term averages. With new listings falling for three consecutive months, inventory accumulation has stalled.

The actual non-seasonally adjusted national average home price stood at $674,819 in July, up 0.2% from the same period last year.

Harry Stinson, aka the ‘Condo King,’ who is best known for transforming heritage industrial sites into residential properties, faces a court application from the Ontario Securities Commission seeking to seize control of his assets under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

The enforcement action comes after Stinson failed to hand over more than $14 million ordered by the Capital Markets Tribunal. This is following findings that he broke securities regulations while soliciting capital for a major cross-border commercial venture.

“Where am I going to get the money?” Stinson told the Star, calling the ongoing regulatory actions against him as a “witch hunt.” Stinson now lives in a run-down warehouse in Hamilton after his $1.4-million home was sold under power of sale. He’d originally intended to convert the building into a mixed commercial and residential development, but having been found in violation of the law, he’s now on the verge of bankruptcy.

Unpaid fines trigger regulatory enforcement

The current legal feud stems from a December 2023 ruling by the Capital Markets Tribunal. Regulators determined that Stinson and his associated corporate entities improperly raised about $19 million from private investors to acquire and renovate the sprawling Buffalo Grand Hotel in western New York.

According to tribunal findings, the pitch involved distributing securities without issuing a required prospectus, failing to maintain accurate corporate accounting and mismanaging investor money.

The tribunal instructed Stinson to pay more than $13 million in disgorgement alongside $600,000 in administrative penalties and legal costs. While regulators initially delayed strict collection efforts to give Stinson time to refinance the property, the agency moved forward with bankruptcy proceedings after alternative financing arrangements fell apart.

Cross-border project collapses in New York State

Stinson’s plan to settle his debts hinged on turning around the historic Buffalo venue. However, the project hit severe delays and mounting municipal challenges across the border.

Municipal officials in Buffalo launched proceedings in late 2025 to officially declare the property abandoned, pointing to outstanding property taxes, safety code violations and an active vacate order. When additional financing negotiations collapsed earlier this year, provincial regulators concluded that investors were unlikely to recover their capital through the hotel project alone.

In court filings, provincial regulators stated that seeking a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee represents the only remaining path to potentially liquidate Stinson’s remaining assets and recover funds for affected investors.

Historic rise and current legal battle

The dispute marks a dramatic shift for a developer who helped pioneer condo loft conversions in Ontario during the 1990s. Stinson built a widespread public profile through high-energy television marketing campaigns and signature Toronto developments, including the Candy Factory Lofts and the One King West hotel tower.

Despite the pending tribunal proceedings, Stinson rejects accusations of intentional wrongdoing, maintaining that regulatory rules have unfairly paralyzed his operations. A public bankruptcy hearing is set to take place in court next month to determine if a trustee will assume control over his estate.

The bottom line

For now, the man once celebrated for reshaping Toronto’s skyline is left waiting on a courtroom decision that could strip him of what little he has left. Whether Stinson can stave off bankruptcy may come down to next month’s hearing, where a judge will decide if a trustee should take control of his remaining assets. Until then, the self-styled Condo King insists he’s the target of overzealous regulators rather than a fair reckoning for his conduct.

According to the Office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsperson (OTO), an independent body that reviews service complaints against the CRA, the federal tax agency received 3,558 complaints in the 2025–26 fiscal year — a 27% jump from the year before and the highest total in three years. Long processing times, difficulty reaching a live agent and incomplete or unclear phone answers topped the list.

None of this will come as a surprise to anyone who has sat on hold trying to sort out a delayed refund, a stuck disability tax credit application or a locked-out CRA account. But an informal, crowdsourced look at CRA call centre wait times suggests the time of day you when you try to call could matter almost as much as your patience.

Complaints are climbing, and calls are still the sticking point

The CRA redirected roughly 8.6 million calls to its automated services between April 2024 and March 2025. In April 2025 alone, more than 4 million callers hit long wait times before getting an answer. Based on published service expectations, taxpayers should wait no longer than 20 weeks for a resolution, yet the tax Ombudsperson found that some Canadians were waiting as long as 50 weeks — nearly a year — for a decision or resolution.

The gap between what the CRA says publicly and what taxpayers experience has also drawn scrutiny. According to the OTO’s annual report, the CRA answered only 35% of unique callers to its general inquiries line during the week of June 30 to July 4, 2025, yet the agency’s public messaging suggested only occasional delays.

Why so many calls are about delays, not just questions

A big driver of the call volume is processing speed.

In the 2025-26 fiscal year, the CRA was taking up to 50 weeks to process complex T1 adjustment requests, more than double its own published service standard of 20 weeks. According to OTO data, more than half of all complaints involved timeliness in some form.

Even complaining can be slow. The CRA’s own Service Feedback Program, the first stop for a service complaint, took up to 100 business days — more than four months — to respond, as of November 2025. Since the Ombudsperson’s office generally only steps in once that internal process has finished or stalled, those delays can push a full resolution well past a year.

So when should you actually pick up the phone?

The CRA’s individual and business enquiry lines are open from 8 am to 8 pm on weekdays and 9 am to 5 pm on Saturdays, based on a taxpayer’s local time. Based on this information, a contributor to the Reddit Canadian tax discussion forum, r/cantax, tracked CRA call centre wait times through early-to-mid March 2026 and found a pattern.

Calling right when the lines open, at 8 am, produced the shortest waits, often around 10 minutes. The hour after opening and the early evening window, roughly 6 pm to 7 pm, were also comparatively quick, at 20 to 30 minutes. However, anyone calling the CRA enquiry lines between 11 am and 5pm were consistently met with longest wait times — climbing well past 30 minutes on hold and approaching 50 or 60 minutes before talking to a CRA representative.

While, Reddit user 1bmathiethrowaway, isn’t releasing official CRA wait time data, the analysis could help taxpayers navigate official CRA help lines in a more expedient manner.

Need to call the CRA? What to know before you dial

The CRA and others highlight that there are several tools that can resolve simple issues without the need to call the agency, although each comes with caveats the Ombudsperson has flagged directly to the CRA.

For instance, you can use the ‘Check CRA processing times’ tool; however, this tool doesn’t account for common exclusions, such as late-filed, deceased or non-resident returns, so it can understate how long a request will really take.

Using the ‘Progress tracker’ inside the CRA ‘My Account’ and ‘My Business Account’ can help, although sometimes this tool shows a shifting target date, or none at all.

Live online chat with a CRA agent runs 8 am to 8 pm Eastern time, but only for ‘My Account’ users — not ‘My Business Account’ or ‘Represent a Client’. And while the CRA piloted a callback service for certain disability tax credit calls in 2025, that pilot has since ended

As a result, the Ombudsperson has asked the CRA to offer callbacks more broadly, without requiring an initial call first, by fall 2027.

Still waiting for a refund or decision?

If you’ve filed your tax return and you’re still waiting for a refund or decision, follow these five steps:

1. Check ‘My Account’ or ‘My Business Account’ to see if your issue already has a status or a target date.
2. If you must call, try right at 8 am local time on a weekday, or 6 pm to 7 pm as these time periods may help you avoid excessively long wait times.
3. Whenever possible, avoid calling the CRA between 11 am and 5 pm.
4. Be sure to write down the date, time and any reference number for every CRA contact.
5. If the CRA’s Service Feedback Program can’t resolve your complaint, or it takes more than 100 business days, you can escalate to the Office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsperson.

In general, if your tax matter can wait even a day, the best approach is to start online rather than by phone. Check your account, but use the processing-times and progress-tracking tools with a healthy dose of skepticism. Try live chat if you’re a ‘My Account’ user. Regardless of the tool, keep a log of what you did, what happened, and when it happened — as these details are essential if you need to escalate your complaint to the Ombudsperson.

Money.ca reached out to the Canada Revenue Agency for comment. At the time of publication, an official response had not been received.

Have you had a negative (or positive) experience with the CRA? Reach out to me directly at romana.king@wisepublishing.com.

I didn't have a will. I'd always figured my brother and sister would sort things out fairly between them if anything happened to me. Turns out that breezy assumption is more common than most Canadians realize — and more of us are without a will than you might think.

What will happen to my pets if I die?

What surprised me most wasn't the fear — it was what I thought about. Not my sister or brother. Not old regrets. My cats. All three of them.

Who would take care of them if I died? Would they end up at the Humane Society? Would they be kept together or separated? Who would tell their new owner about their hypoallergenic diets and favourite brand of catnip?

The uncertainty was crushing — and it was entirely my fault for not having a will.

I come from a long line of animal lovers. My sister is a veterinarian and has always stressed that full responsibility for a pet doesn't end at the food bowl. And yet, there I was — no will, no plan, no protection for the animals I loved most.

According to a 2026 poll conducted by Ipsos on behalf of CIBC, 94% of Canadians believe everyone should have a will — yet only 52% actually have one. Procrastination, uncertainty about where to start and the belief that they don't have enough assets to bother were the top reasons cited. An older Angus Reid Institute polling found a similar gap: Half of Canadian adults have no will in place at all, a share that's barely moved in years. Pet provisions are among the estate-planning details people are most likely to overlook.

It's a gap that has real consequences. Humane societies across Canada report that one of the leading reasons pets are surrendered is the death or sudden incapacitation of an owner who had no plan in place.

Planning for the worst-case scenario

Spoiler alert: the flight didn't crash. As we came in for landing, I made a promise to myself — I would get a legal will before the month was out.

As soon as I got home, I mapped out how I wanted to divide my estate between my sister and brother — and, critically, who would care for my three cats. My siblings were ruled out quickly: My sister has a dog who doesn't get along with cats and my brother has allergies.

So I had an honest conversation with my neighbour — a close friend, fellow cat lover and my regular cat sitter. I asked if she'd be willing to take in all three cats if I died unexpectedly. She agreed without hesitation.

I also decided to set aside $50,000 to cover their care and any significant vet bills. I don't have that sum sitting in a savings account, but I own my home. My sister, whom I named as executor, would be able to sell the property and direct funds accordingly.

For context, routine veterinary care alone runs Canadian pet owners roughly $4,100 to $5,200 a year for a dog, according to the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association's cost-of-care data — and that doesn't count emergencies. A dedicated fund makes practical sense, not just sentimental sense.

Setting up a legal will

The next step was making it official. I wanted a will that was legally enforceable, but I didn't want to spend a fortune. I did my research and discovered that Canadians have more affordable options than ever.

Online legal will platforms, such as Epilogue, let users build a complete, legally binding end-of-life plan — including a power of attorney, a personal directive and provisions for pets. The platform, built by Canadian estate lawyers, is available in most provinces and now runs $129 to $349 depending on the package.

In about 20 minutes, you can create a legally binding will from anywhere in Canada using Epilogue's online portal. That's less time than an oil change — and it also covers Power of Attorney documents, affidavits of execution and other estate planning tools.

Specific bequest vs. pet trust: What's the difference?

In Canada, pets are still considered property under the law — which means you can't leave money directly to an animal. But there are two practical ways to protect them in your will.

The first is a specific bequest: You leave your pet to a named person, the same way you may leave a piece of jewellery or an art collection. This is simple and legally straightforward, but it doesn't guarantee funds will be used for the animal's care.

The second is a pet trust: You designate a trusted guardian to care for your pet, and a separate trustee to manage and distribute funds for that purpose. The trustee releases money to the guardian at defined intervals — quarterly, annually or as needed for vet bills.

Pet trust rules vary by province. Canada's common-law provinces — including Ontario under its Succession Law Reform Act, Alberta under its Wills and Succession Act and British Columbia under its Wills, Estates and Succession Act — generally treat a pet trust as what's known as an "honorary trust." That means it isn't directly enforceable by the pet itself (animals still can't be named beneficiaries), but courts will generally uphold it if a human trustee or "enforcer" is named to make sure the funds are actually used for the animal's care. If you're setting up a trust, a lawyer can help make sure it's structured to hold up.

One complication worth knowing: There's no guarantee your chosen trustee will honour the arrangement over time. For this reason, many estate lawyers recommend appointing a third-party "protector" — someone who oversees the trustee and can step in if the trustee becomes incapacitated or fails to follow through.

How I made sure my cats would be looked after

In my case, I trusted my neighbour completely and didn't feel I needed a separate trustee. I also confirmed — outside of the formal will — that she'd temporarily take in my cats if I was ever hospitalized or incapacitated. You can, and arguably should, include that kind of provision directly in your will.

Getting a will isn't just about the people you'll leave behind — it's about every living thing in your care. Knowing my cats would be fed, loved and together, no matter what happened to me, gave me a peace of mind I didn't know I was missing.

When to update your will

Lawyers generally recommend updating your will after any major life or financial event — a new pet, a move, a change in the value of your estate or a shift in your relationships. If you already have a will but haven't named a pet guardian, a simple amendment (called a codicil) is far less costly than drafting a new document. With online platforms such as Epilogue, updates can be made free of charge at any time.

The bottom line

I think about that flight every time I renew my will. It wasn't the turbulence that scared me — it was realizing my cats had no plan if I wasn't there to make one.

If you don't have a will yet, let your pets be the reason you stop putting it off. Meet with a lawyer or set one up online — and once it's sorted, look into pet insurance so you're covering them while you're still around to spoil them.

Wealthsimple Predict, the fintech’s new prediction-market platform, lets users wager real money on questions like whether Dollarama, Loblaw or Lululemon will beat their next comparable-sales numbers, whether Air Canada’s passenger load factor will climb or where Shopify’s gross merchandise volume lands for the year. Canadians can also bet on Bank of Canada rate decisions and home-sale figures.

It feels like a natural extension of investing: Putting money on numbers you already track. But securities lawyers say the format hides a real risk. Some of the people you’re betting against may already know the answer.

Why these bets aren’t like a sports parlay

A sportsbook doesn’t usually have to worry that a player knows the final score in advance. A market betting on Air Canada’s quarterly numbers is a different story. “These would be very attractive bets for someone who might have that information ahead of time,” Gregory Hogan, a partner in the capital markets group at Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, told The Globe and Mail.

That’s because prediction markets are shrouded in legal ambiguity. Canada’s insider-trading rules were written for people trading shares of a company, not for wagers on a data point that a company will later disclose. “The insider-trading laws in Canada were built for a different world. They weren’t built for prediction markets,” noted Adam Garetson, a partner at Gowling WLG who leads the firm’s blockchain and digital assets group.

Could someone use inside information to win?

South of the border, where these markets have existed longer, the cautionary tales are already well-publicized. In May, a Google software engineer was accused of profiting more than US$1.2 million (C$1.65 million) by trading on confidential business information through Polymarket, an American prediction market similar to Wealthsimple Predict. A separate case involved an American soldier accused of using classified intelligence to bet on a U.S. military operation, netting more than US$400,000 (C$550,000).

This legal grey zone is real, but it isn’t a free pass. Evan Thomas, a Toronto-based lawyer who specializes in advising fintech clients, told The Globe and Mail that regulators have a broad public-interest power that could apply even if the insider-trading rules technically don’t. “I would expect that a Canadian securities regulator... would say that’s activity contrary to the public interest,” he said.

What banks and watchdogs are doing about it

Some of Canada’s biggest banks are already tightening the rules for their own staff, according to reporting from The Globe. Royal Bank of Canada bars employees who handle material non-public information from placing bets on prediction markets, a policy communicated through an internal bulletin. Bank of Nova Scotia’s trading policy prohibits staff from using these platforms to speculate on markets, indexes or companies. Additionally, Bank of Montreal says its code of conduct covers the use of non-public information as it relates to the bank and its clients.

The Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization says dealers offering prediction markets must have controls in place to catch improper trading, and would examine those controls if a concern surfaced. The Canadian Securities Administrators, the umbrella group for provincial regulators, says these contracts can count as securities, derivatives or both, and anyone trading them is still bound by rules against insider trading and market manipulation. Wealthsimple, for its part, says three layers of surveillance, including monitoring from its exchange partner Kalshi, are meant to catch misuse.

Before you place a bet, know this

For now, Canadian regulators don’t allow wagers on political or entertainment outcomes, only economic and corporate data points. That narrows the field, but it doesn’t remove the information gap. A Canadian Tire employee, a supplier or even a well-connected analyst could have a better read on comparable-sales trends than the retail bettor on the other side of the contract.

A few things worth doing before you fund one of these accounts:

• Treat it as speculation, not investing — the payout structure resembles a bet, not ownership, and carries none of the protections that come with holding shares
• Assume some counterparties know more than you do, and price that into how much you’re willing to risk
• Check what’s actually being wagered on — corporate and economic data points carry a different risk profile than a coin-flip market
• Watch for updated bank and employer policies, since several large institutions have only recently started addressing this directly

If you want exposure to how Dollarama or Air Canada perform, buying shares or a broad Canadian equity fund still comes with disclosure rules, oversight and decades of enforcement history behind it. Prediction markets don’t have that track record yet — and until they do, the safest approach is to treat any money you put on them as money you’re fully prepared to lose.

Case in point: the 11-year-old son of Ontario couple Hong Jin and Jason Kim, whose recent trip to Walmart turned into a four-figure shopping spree unbeknownst to his parents.

Speaking with CTV News, the couple recounted how their son stealthily stole an envelope containing $2,000 to $3,000 that was stashed as the family’s emergency fund before paying a visit to his grandmother.

She took her grandchild to Walmart for an innocuous outing of toy browsing — but it turned into anything but. Upon arriving at the megabox retailer, the son secretly made two $1,000 purchases of Roblox gift cards, using the funds from the envelope to do so. He purchased the cards by going through a Walmart cashier.

Jin and Kim only began to connect the dots once they realized their fund was depleted.

“I was shocked,” Kim said. “I’m still shocked. I can’t believe a small kid could spend $2,000 at Walmart.”

How Walmart responded to the incident

Upon discovering what had happened to their emergency fund, the couple immediately returned to Walmart in order to rectify the situation.

However, Jin and Kim were in for a rude awakening when they were informed by Walmart staff that gift card purchases are non-refundable.

“How can a little kid purchase $2,000 in cash and no one is suspicious about it?” Jin pondered.

Speaking with the news outlet, a representative from Walmart clarified that, “There are no age restrictions for purchasing gift cards at Walmart Canada, although individual gift card issuers may establish requirements, including age-related requirements, for redeeming their cards.”

For concerned parents, it’s important to implement guardrails to limit how much a child can spend online or in-store, so financial resources can’t be depleted with reckless abandon.

“Games like Roblox do offer parental controls that can limit how much children can spend in a game,” said Consumer Reports’ Nicholas de Leon. “But generally speaking, parents do have to set those up on their own. And because purchases can happen through the game, the app store, a phone, a tablet, there can be more than one layer of protection that parents need to enable.”

A safer alternative to a cash stash

While it’s admirable that Jin and Kim even had an emergency fund to begin with, 38% of Canadians with household incomes under $100,000 don’t have one at all at all, according to an RBC survey.

However, financial concerns about unexpected costs — the very shock that emergency funds are theoretically meant to absorb — are weighing on the consciences of Canadians as a whole. The survey also notes that 42% are worried that one major unexpected expense could sabotage their finances, while 33% worry that a small unplanned cost would be difficult to manage.

Jin and Kim could have been more discreet with their emergency fund as to where they chose to store it. As opposed to keeping that money earmarked in an envelope, a high interest savings account (HISA) with an accredited financial institution allows for more control and heightened security while also ensuring compound growth for contributions left untouched.

Moreover, in the unlikely event that a financial institution fails and its accounts become compromised, if it has Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC) certification, eligible deposits of up to $100,000 per deposit category at member institutions (including interest and principal) are covered.

Interest rates vary between accounts and institutions, but in Canada, digital-first banks and credit unions offer higher and more competitive rates than the Big Six, hovering around the 2% range.

Furthermore, money sitting idle in an envelope or in a regular chequing or savings account loses purchasing power over time due to inflation, whereas storing it in a HISA allows it to earn interest.

The bottom line

This is a costly reminder that both digital and physical safeguards matter when it comes to protecting family finances. On the parental controls side, taking a few minutes to set spending limits on gaming platforms like Roblox — and locking down app store and device-level purchases — can prevent kids from racking up bills they don’t understand. On the storage side, cash hidden at home offers zero protection: it can’t be recovered if lost or stolen, earns no interest, and steadily loses value to inflation.

Moving emergency savings into a CDIC-insured HISA instead gives families the security of deposit insurance, the discretion of a bank balance instead of a visible stash, and the added benefit of interest working in their favour rather than against them. In short, a few preventative steps — enabling parental controls and choosing the right place to park emergency savings — can spare families from learning this lesson the hard way.

Apadana Currency Exchange, located on Marine Drive in North Vancouver, owes between $4 million and $5 million to hundreds of clients, according to affected customers who gathered at the business seeking explanations from owner Hamidreza Karimi.

The money service business, which primarily serves members of the local Iranian-Canadian community transferring funds between Canada and Iran, has left clients facing severe financial distress.

Customers left facing financial turmoil

Many customers reported transferring life savings, home sale proceeds or funds meant for critical medical care and real estate purchases.

Affected clients gathered outside the store to confront Karimi directly as concerns grew over whether the money would ever be recovered. Several patrons said their transactions had been pending for weeks or months without resolution.

Regulatory gap limits options for clients

Unlike traditional banks or credit unions, money services businesses in British Columbia operate under a framework that leaves customers with limited regulatory protection when funds go missing.

While money transfer businesses must register with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) to comply with anti-money laundering regulations, FINTRAC does not guarantee consumer funds, insure deposits or resolve commercial disputes between businesses and clients.

Experts note that because money services businesses are largely unregulated regarding consumer deposit protection, clients faced with frozen funds often have few immediate legal or financial remedies outside of civil litigation or police complaints.

Local authorities have been made aware of the situation as customers continue seeking legal counsel and answers regarding the missing funds.

Community rallies as investigation continues

For the Iranian-Canadian community in North Vancouver, the disruption extends far beyond financial loss, threatening family support networks and international commitments reliant on those transfers.

As customers monitor developments outside the Marine Drive storefront, local advocates and community members continue organizing to assist affected families while pressing local authorities and regulators for a swift resolution to recover the missing funds.

The meeting came to light through freedom of information records detailing the premier’s calendar. The documents reveal that Ford and Bank met for lunch on Friday, April 17, accompanied by a single staffer.

The day prior to the gathering, Ford shot down calls from opposition parties at Queen’s Park urging the government to restrict grocers from using dynamic or “surveillance pricing” techniques. Addressing reporters on April 16, Ford characterized such regulatory interventions as antithetical to free-market principles.

“I believe in a capitalist society, free market, the market dictates,” Ford said at the time, arguing that government attempts to dictate or oversee individual store prices represented “socialism” that “does not work.”

Both the Ontario NDP and the Ontario Liberals had introduced measures aimed at protecting consumers from personalized or algorithmic pricing strategies at the checkout as residents continue to navigate high food inflation and broader cost-of-living challenges.

Lobbying records and official response

While the premier’s calendar did not detail the specifics of the lunch conversation, official registry filings show Per Bank registered to lobby the provincial government on retail sector policy, data and privacy regulations.

The premier’s office did not respond to queries from Money.ca by press time regarding why the meeting was held at Ford’s private residence rather than at Queen’s Park, nor whether specific topics like surveillance pricing were discussed.

In a statement provided to Global News, Loblaw noted the corporation is already on the record stating it doesn’t use surveillance pricing and highlighted its advocacy for removing property controls across the retail grocery sector.

Official opposition leaders criticized the timing and private nature of the gathering. NDP Leader Marit Stiles told reporters at Queen’s Park the sequence of events demonstrates the government’s priorities, alleging the premier is choosing to consult corporate executives over struggling consumers.

Market competition and lingering industry skepticism

While rejecting price controls, Ford maintained that his government would react strongly against anti-competitive practices.

“There’s no better way of letting people get lower costs... than competition,” Ford said, adding he would tear grocers “to shreds” if evidence surfaced of price collusion.

Public skepticism around corporate grocery conduct remains high in Canada following past industry-wide scandals. Major supermarket chains, including Loblaw, previously faced intense public scrutiny and legal oversight over a 14-year bread price-fixing scheme that artificially inflated the cost of commercial packaged bread nationwide.

Opposition parties continue to demand greater transparency and regulatory oversight, arguing that free-market forces alone have failed to protect Canadian households from escalating grocery bills.

At its height, Shein was valued at US$100 billion; now the firm’s new valuation target is closer to US$26 billion — a 73% drop.

The delay itself is minor — a few days. The valuation cut is not. It’s a reminder that even the hottest name on the shelf doesn’t guarantee a hot stock. And for Canadians who’ve watched a handful of mega-cap names dominate their index funds over the past few years, Shein’s shrinking IPO offers a useful lesson: Fast fashion may be losing its shine — both with consumers and investors — unable to shake the realities of economic uncertainty and global budgetary constraints.

What’s changed with Shein’s Hong Kong listing

Shein now aims to launch its Hong Kong initial public offering (IPO) on August 24, with a listing targeted for September 1 — slightly later than the initial August 28 date, according to South China Morning Post and reported on by Reuters. At this point, the company plans to introduce several cornerstone investors — usually major institutional buyers who agree to purchase a set amount of shares in a company before its IPO begins — though most of those positions will be filled by existing shareholders rather than new money, according to a report in the Business of Fashion.

The bigger shift is price. Shein is now targeting a valuation of US$26 billion to US$27 billion US, down from the US$30 billion to US$40 billion range it floated when investor meetings began earlier this month, and a fraction of the US$100 billion valuation it reached in a private funding round in 2022.

Why fast fashion is losing its shine

Slower growth and rising costs have cooled investor appetite for a company that was, only a few years ago, seen as a serious threat to established retailers such as H&M and Zara, thanks to its rapid supply chain and ultra-low prices. Part of the issue is that Shein — which sells items like $5 US dresses and $10 US jeans in roughly 160 countries — built its valuation on the promise of endless growth. When that growth began to slow, the market re-priced the firm’s story — and potential stock — by a lot.

Can Canadian investors even buy in?

There is relatively little impact for Canadian as Shein’s Hong Kong IPO wasn’t easily accessible to most Canadian investors. Only investors with subscriptions opened through Hong Kong-based or international brokerages, not the discount brokerages most Canadians use, would’ve had access to Shein’s IPO. And once Shein starts trading, buying its shares means holding a Hong Kong-listed stock, which comes with currency exposure, different disclosure standards and a regulatory environment that isn’t overseen by Canadian bodies such as the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO).

The real lesson for your RRSP or TFSA

Still, the Shein tale is a lesson in pricing. A $100-billion valuation was never really Shein’s value — it was investors’ bet on a growth rate that couldn’t keep compounding forever. The same dynamic shows up closer to home whenever a handful of popular stocks pull a Canadian equity fund’s returns in one direction, then reverse.

The takeaway isn’t that IPOs or fast-growing companies are bad investments; it’s that a hyped valuation is a forecast, not a fact — and forecasts get revised, sometimes by tens of billions of dollars, before a single public shareholder buys in.

Money.ca reached out to Shein for comment. The firm didn’t respond.

Have you bought an IPO? Did you regret the purchase, or was it the best investment decision? Reach out to me directly at romana.king@wisepublishing.com.

This is the beauty and appeal of the 4% withdrawal rule for retirement in Canada. It turns a complicated equation into a simple, single percentage that is easy to remember and even to calculate.

There’s just one problem: The 4% rule was designed using American market data and assumes a very specific type of retirement. In Canada, we can also rely on government benefits like the CPP and OAS, and we have different tax rules, longer life expectancies and a different mix of savings and investment tools.

So armed with that knowledge, it’s time to ask, does the 4% rule work in Canada? And if it does, how can you use it to apply to your retirement to help maintain a comfortable lifestyle?

What is the 4% rule — and where did it come from?

The 4% withdrawal rule was developed by the American financial planner, William Bengen, in 1994. Bengen studied and analyzed about 80 years of market history to calculate a withdrawal rate that would allow retirees to avoid running out of money over a 30-year retirement period.

Bengen’s math is straightforward:

• Withdraw 4% of your portfolio in the first year of retirement
• Increase that dollar amount each year to keep up with inflation

Let’s look at a realistic example for a Canadian retiree:

A $1 million portfolio would produce an initial withdrawal of $40,000 in the first year of retirement. Increase that withdrawal amount each year to cover your retirement expenses.

In theory, the 4% withdrawal rule can be closely connected to another retirement rule: the Rule of 25. In this strategy, if you expect to spend about $60,000 per year, just multiply that by 25. This will give you a total of $1.5 million you will need to have saved for a comfortable retirement.

Bengen’s original research also made some important assumptions:

• A portfolio invested roughly 50% in stocks and 50% in bonds
• A retirement lasting 30 years
• Historical U.S. market returns remain intact

Those assumptions are why the rule works well as a starting point for retirement strategies, but also why many planners say it shouldn’t be treated as a universal formula.

Why the original 4% rule doesn’t translate perfectly to Canada

The biggest Canadian difference is government income benefits.

Bengen’s original rule assumed that American retirees would fund everything from their investment portfolio. In Canada, most retirees will receive the Canadian Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS). These two benefits greatly reduce the amount that needs to come from savings and investments.

Consider a Canadian retiree who receives the following benefits:

• $12,000/year from CPP
• $8,500/year from OAS

That’s $20,500 each year in guaranteed income paid for by the Canadian government. If their target is to spend about $40,000 annually, they only need about $19,500 to supplement their benefits. From a $1 million portfolio, that is a withdrawal rate of just 1.95% and not the 4.0% Bengen suggested.

Here’s the real secret to optimizing your retirement benefits: delaying your CPP from age 65 to 70 can increase your monthly payments by up to 42% for the rest of your life. This means that your eventual withdrawals would be even smaller, and another reason why the 4.0% rule does not properly capture that tradeoff for Canadian retirees.

Taxes add another layer of complexity to this strategy:

• RRSP/RRIF withdrawals are fully taxable
• TFSA withdrawals are tax-free
• Non-registered investments may receive preferential tax treatment on capital gains

This is why RRSP and TFSA retirement withdrawal sequencing can be just as important as the withdrawal rate itself.

Higher-income retirees also need to watch the OAS recovery tax in Canada, often called the OAS Clawback. In 2025, OAS benefits begin to be clawed back once net income exceeds $93,454. A large RRIF withdrawal can unintentionally reduce OAS benefits by triggering the clawback, even if the retiree doesn’t actually need the cash.

In other words, two Canadians with the same $1 million portfolio can have very different retirement outcomes depending on CPP timing, account structure and taxes.

Is the 4% rule still safe given today’s market conditions?

This is where the debate gets interesting.

The original 4.0% rule was tested using historical returns of the U.S. stock market. Many investment firms now expect future stock and bond returns to be lower than the long-term averages that supported the classic 4.0% results founded by Bengen.

Even Bengen has updated his thinking. In his 2025 book A Richer Retirement, he suggested that a withdrawal rate closer to 4.7% may be sustainable for portfolios diversified across seven asset classes, including international stocks and other investments beyond the traditional stock-bond mix. The key point isn’t “withdraw more.” It’s that broader portfolio diversification that can change the math behind his original thesis.

In Canada, the larger risk for many retirees is something called the sequence-of-returns risk.

Imagine retiring just before a major market downturn or in the depths of a bear market. If you’re withdrawing money while your portfolio is falling, you’re selling investments at depressed prices. Even if markets recover later, the damage from those early withdrawals can be difficult to undo and can often take a long time to recover. When you are retired, the time to allow investments to grow is no longer on your side.

That’s why some Canadian planners prefer a flexible withdrawal range, often from about 3.5% to 4.5%, adjusted as markets change, rather than a rigid fixed percentage every year.

The better way to think about the rule is this: it’s a floor, not an exact formula.

How to adapt the 4% rule to your Canadian retirement plan

A practical retirement income strategy in Canada usually starts with layers of income and is supplemented by government benefits.

Layer 1: Guaranteed income

This includes sources like your government benefits or workplace pensions:

• CPP
• OAS
• A defined benefit pension, if your place of employment offered one

These payments arrive regardless of market performance and will be the backbone and foundation of your retirement income.

Layer 2: Portfolio withdrawals

This is where RRSPs, RRIFs, TFSAs and non-registered investments come in. Instead of immediately applying the 4% withdrawal rule, calculate your income gap first.

For example:

• Desired spending budget: $70,000
• Annual CPP and OAS: $22,000
• Pension: $18,000

The gap is $30,000 ($70,000 - ($22,000 + $18,000)). That’s the amount your portfolio needs to generate to meet your desired annual spending budget.

Layer 3: Flexible income

Many retirees also have part-time work, rental income or the option to downsize their home. These sources can reduce pressure on investment withdrawals, but shouldn’t be counted on as regular retirement income.

A useful protection against sequence risk is a cash buffer. Many planners recommend keeping roughly two years of planned withdrawals in cash or short-term investments. If markets fall, you can spend from the buffer instead of selling stocks at a loss.

Don’t forget the rules for the RRIF account. Starting at age 72, Canadians must withdraw at least a minimum percentage from their RRIF each year, and that percentage rises with age. Your withdrawal plan has to accommodate those mandatory distributions and account for them growing over time.

Longevity matters too. Statistics Canada data show Canadians are living longer, and many retirees will spend 35 to 40 years in retirement. Someone who retires at 60 may need their savings to last until 95 or beyond. That’s a very different challenge from the original 30-year assumption behind the rule by Bengen.

FAQs

What is the 4% rule in simple terms?

The 4% rule says you can withdraw 4% of your retirement savings in the first year, then increase that amount according to the rate of inflation each year. The goal is to make your money last for a long retirement, with recent estimates of 35-40 years.

How much do I need to retire in Canada using the 4% rule?

In Canada, it is simpler to use the Rule of 25 to calculate retirement income. Using the Rule of 25, multiply your annual spending target by 25. If you want $50,000 per year, you’d need about $1.25 million in savings.

Does CPP or OAS count toward the 4% rule withdrawal?

Yes. CPP and OAS are retirement income sources and should reduce the amount you need to withdraw from your portfolio. These are referred to as a guaranteed income source for Canadian retirees, along with any workplace pension plan.

What is the Rule of 25?

The Rule of 25 is a savings benchmark linked to the 4% rule. It says you should save 25 times your expected annual expenses before retiring.

Is the 4% rule still valid in 2025?

It’s still a useful starting point, but many planners view it as a guideline rather than a guarantee. Future market returns, taxes, CPP timing and longevity can all affect whether it works for a particular retiree. The 4% rule was also created for American retirees, so it may not apply to Canadians in 2025 and the future.

What is a safe withdrawal rate for early retirement?

For retirements lasting 35 to 40 years, many planners use a more conservative starting range of 3% to 4%. The longer the retirement, the lower the initial withdrawal rate often needs to be, so much of it will depend on your current health status and how long you expect to live into retirement.

What happens if I withdraw more than 4% per year?

Withdrawing more than 4% increases the risk that your portfolio will be depleted earlier, especially if markets perform poorly in the first years of retirement. It doesn’t guarantee failure, but it leaves less margin for error.

The medical system's failure to connect mothers with timely care persists even as new treatment options reach the market. For instance, when federal regulators in the United States approved Zurzuvae in 2023 as the first oral medication specifically designed for postpartum depression, it was expected to transform treatment options. However, a recent analysis by Simmrin Law Group reveals that only 2.0% of eligible postpartum depression patients have received prescriptions for the medication since its launch.

Rather than signalling a lack of need, this ultra-low adoption rate highlights broader structural barriers within modern healthcare systems:

• Insurance friction: Insurance protocols frequently require patients to try and fail on older, general antidepressants before granting access to newer, specialized postpartum therapies.
• Opaque guidelines: Fewer than 1.0% of health coverage providers publish clear, timely guidelines for newer oral postpartum therapies, leaving doctors and patients navigating complex authorization procedures during critical post-birth windows.

The economic and human toll

The failure to address perinatal mental health creates severe financial and medical consequences that ripple across healthcare infrastructure.

Financial impact

Data compiled by health research organization Mathematica underscores the massive financial drain caused by delayed intervention:

• $14.2 billion annual burden: The overall economic cost driven by untreated perinatal mood and anxiety disorders in large-scale patient cohorts.
• $32,000 per mother-infant pair: The average long-term cost in additional healthcare, social service utilization and lost productivity when a mother does not receive treatment.

Severe health consequences

Beyond financial metrics, missing or delayed care carries tragic human costs. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates that mental health conditions — including suicide and overdose linked to underlying mood disorders — are the leading cause of pregnancy-related deaths, accounting for 27.7% of maternal fatalities. By comparison, severe hemorrhage accounts for 14.0%.

Medical professionals emphasize that standard postpartum checkups often end too early. Peak onset for severe postpartum mood disruption typically occurs three to six months after delivery, while suicide risk peaks between nine and 12 months postpartum. Without sustained screening, vulnerable patients routinely slip through systemic gaps.

Regional care disparities

Access to care is also heavily dictated by geography. Research from the Policy Center for Maternal Mental Health identifies more than 150 regions across North America as maternal mental health "Dark Zones" — areas completely lacking basic psychiatric resources, specialized clinicians, or adequate support structures for new mothers.

In these underserved regions, the absence of specialized providers compounds social stigmas surrounding maternal mental health. When untreated symptoms escalate in isolated environments, delays in care frequently lead to emergency hospitalizations and severe health crises that proactive screening could prevent.

Closing this care gap will require comprehensive reform: streamlining coverage authorization, expanding routine screening well past the immediate post-birth window, and increasing direct investment in regional healthcare infrastructure.

The rapid surge was quickly followed by a pullback, but the final result was Moderna’s stock price rising 140% from its initial valuation at the start of the week.

It’s a valuation jump that most Canadian investors will never see in a single trading session, unless they are consistently trading high-volatility stocks, such as biotech.

Moderna worked with Merck to announce the personalized cancer vaccine, which aims to help melanoma patients go longer without their cancer returning or spreading. Merck’s stock also rose, in the same frame, by about 11%.

For investors watching ticker prices, that sudden surge may have looked like free money, but by the next morning, some of that money was already gone.

This volatile share valuation isn’t about whether Moderna’s science is promising; early trial data suggests it is; it’s about risk and timing. That gap — between the headline number and what actually happens to an account balance — is a real-world lesson on the risks of chasing a stock after a market spike.

What actually happened to Moderna’s stock

Moderna and Merck are testing a personalized mRNA cancer vaccine, called Intismeran, built around each patient’s individual tumour mutations. In their study, melanoma patients who received the vaccine alongside Merck’s drug, Keytruda, went longer without their cancer coming back or spreading than patients on Keytruda alone. The companies haven’t disclosed how much longer, or whether patients on the combination lived longer overall — those details are expected at a future medical conference.

But the promising results teased out by the trials were enough to send the stock for each drug firm soaring. At its high this week, Moderna closed at US$174.38, up from the day-before price that was just under US$63. It was one of the largest single-day gains in the company’s history.

By the next morning, Moderna stock had dropped about 10% in premarket trading as some investors who’d bought into the rally moved to lock in gains.

Why a stock doubling doesn’t make it a safe bet

A one-day pop this size says more about how markets react to a surprise trial result than about whether a stock is a sound long-term holding.

Moderna’s shares are down about 71% over the past five years, even after this week’s rally — a reminder that share prices tied to drug trials can swing hard in both directions.

Biotech stocks like Moderna have also tended to fall harder than the broader market during downturns. Across seven major market shocks since 2018, Moderna’s average peak-to-trough decline was about 31%, compared with 17% for the S&P 500 over the same stretch, and its single worst drop reached 50%. None of that means the cancer vaccine data isn’t meaningful. It means the stock’s price can move sharply on hope, and just as sharply on second thoughts, long before any of these treatments reach the market.

What this means if you hold US stocks in a TFSA, RRSP or regular account

For Canadians who already own, or are tempted to buy, Moderna or any U.S.-listed stock, the excitement of a spike comes with a few practical wrinkles. The shares trade in U.S. dollars, so a Canadian investor’s return depends on the exchange rate as well as the stock price. And where the investment is held changes the tax math if it’s eventually sold for a profit.

Inside a Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA), a capital gain is tax-free — but so is a capital loss, meaning it can’t be used to offset other income. Inside a Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP), gains grow tax-deferred until withdrawal, when they’re taxed as regular income. In a non-registered account, only 50% of a capital gain is added to taxable income, a rate the federal government confirmed in 2025 would not rise to 66.67% as it had once proposed. That 50% inclusion rate applies whether a stock is up 10% or 177% in a day — the tax bill only shows up once the shares are actually sold.

Then there’s the U.S. withholding tax. While no withholding tax applies to capital gains for Canadian investors on U.S.-listed stocks held in any type of account, the same does apply to dividends paid out on those U.S. shares. If held inside an RRSP, those U.S. dividends are exempt from the 15% withholding tax, but those same dividends are taxed inside a TFSA.

How to think about a stock spike without chasing it

Before buying into a stock after a headline-grabbing jump, a few questions can help:

• What’s actually been proven and what still needs to be? Remember that early trial data isn’t a drug approval.
• How much of a portfolio would this one stock represent? Concentrating savings in a single volatile name works against the diversification that index funds are built to provide.
• Would a 13% overnight drop be tolerable? With a stock this volatile, that kind of move can happen before the market even opens.
• Is this a bet on the company or a reaction to the headline?

Bottom line

A stock that doubles in a day can be a genuine signal that something important happened, or it can become a magnet for investors chasing a headline instead of a plan. Before adding a name like Moderna to an RRSP, TFSA or any other account, the more useful question isn’t whether the stock will keep climbing; it’s what role a single, high-volatility stock is meant to play in a portfolio built to last longer than one news cycle.

He’s not the only one. A second driver says she paid the same man for a spot she only got to use for a month before being notified she no longer had possession of the spot. Now Ottawa police say they’re investigating more than 20 reports connected to the same individual.

For any Canadian renting something informally — a parking spot, a storage locker, a driveway, a spare room — this case is a reminder that a signed agreement and a cash payment aren’t proof a rental is real. Here’s what to check before you pay, and what to do if you already have.

A signed contract isn’t proof of a legitimate rental

In at least one case, the man showed the spot in person and had the renter sign paperwork before accepting payment. But the property management company that actually controls the building says he had no authority to rent or sublet any of its spaces.

This is the assumption that trips up most victims of informal rental fraud: if someone can show you the property, hand over a key or fob, or produce a signed agreement, the deal must be real. None of that proves the person collecting your money actually controls the space.

Why parking and storage rentals are easy targets

Apartment rentals are governed by provincial landlord-tenant law, and tenants can appeal to a tribunal if something goes wrong. Informal rentals — parking spots, storage lockers, driveways — usually have no such oversight. There’s often no lease registered anywhere, and no board to complain to if the deal turns out to be fake.

That gap is exactly what fraudsters rely on. Canadians reported more than $704 million in fraud losses in 2025, per findings from the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC). Rental-type scams typically cost victims the equivalent of one to two months’ payment upfront, sometimes reaching several thousand dollars per person, according to National Bank.

What to check before you pay for an informal rental

• Ask for the building or property manager’s name and contact them directly to confirm the seller has authority to rent the space
• Search the property address along with the word ‘management’ to find the real contact information, rather than relying on a number the seller gives you
• Pay by e-transfer or credit card instead of cash so there’s a record, and in some cases, a chance to dispute the charge
• Get the manager’s confirmation in writing before handing over any money
• Be wary if the price is below market rate or if the seller pressures you to pay quickly

What to do if you’ve already paid a scammer

Contact your bank or credit card provider right away to ask about reversing the payment or flagging the transaction. Report the incident to your local police, and file a report with the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre, even if you don’t expect to recover the money. Reports help investigators connect cases like the one that occurred in Ottawa, where a pattern across more than 20 complaints led police to link them to a single suspect.

A parking spot on a busy downtown street can feel like a low-stakes rental compared to signing a lease. That’s exactly why it’s an easy way to lose thousands of dollars. Before paying for any space you don’t own, treat it the way you would treat a full rental: confirm who actually controls the property, keep a paper trail and pay in a way that you can trace and potentially reverse.