Canada is one of the wealthiest and most resource-rich countries in the world.
We have oil, natural gas, uranium, potash, lumber, freshwater, hydroelectricity, farmland, nickel, copper, cobalt, gold, iron ore and many of the critical minerals that modern economies increasingly depend upon.
We have highly educated workers, skilled tradespeople, world-class universities, enormous pension funds, sophisticated banks, major ports on three oceans and preferential trade agreements with much of the developed world.
And yet millions of Canadians are struggling with housing costs, grocery bills, taxes and stagnant purchasing power.
Canada also remains extraordinarily dependent on one customer: the United States.
That raises an obvious question.
Could Canada simultaneously improve its economy, make life more affordable, reduce taxes on ordinary Canadians and become significantly less economically dependent on the United States?
The answer is yes — but not through one tax cut, one pipeline, one housing program or one trade agreement.
Canada needs something much larger:
A Canadian Economic Independence Plan
Economic independence should not mean isolating Canada from the United States.
The United States is our neighbour, one of the world’s largest economies and a natural trading partner. Canada should want a prosperous and mutually beneficial trading relationship with Americans.
The objective should instead be to ensure that no foreign government has the ability to place Canada’s entire economy under severe pressure simply by changing its trade policy.
Canada should continue selling to Americans.
We simply need many more customers — while producing more of what Canadians consume ourselves.
That distinction is critical.
Canada’s Dependence on the United States Is Still Enormous
Statistics Canada reported that the United States accounted for 71.7% of Canadian merchandise exports in 2025.
That was actually a significant reduction from 75.9% in 2024.
At the same time, Canadian merchandise exports to countries other than the United States increased by 17.2% in 2025.
That is important because it demonstrates that diversification isn’t theoretical.
It is already happening.
Canada should build upon it.
A realistic long-term objective would be to bring the American share of Canadian merchandise exports below approximately 60–65% — not by deliberately reducing profitable U.S. trade, but by growing Canadian exports to the rest of the world much faster.
If Canadian exports to the United States continued growing while exports to Europe, Asia and other markets grew even faster, Canada’s dependence on the American market could decline without sacrificing American customers.
That would be genuine diversification.
Step One: Make Canada One Economy
Before Canada worries about foreign trade barriers, we should finish removing trade barriers inside our own country.
More than $500 billion worth of goods and services moves between Canadian provinces and territories every year, representing almost 20% of Canadian GDP.
Yet businesses can still encounter different licensing requirements, transportation regulations, certification standards and administrative rules simply by crossing a provincial boundary.
The Government of Canada estimates that eliminating internal trade barriers could increase Canada’s GDP by as much as $200 billion over time — equivalent to approximately $5,100 per Canadian.
Canada has already begun significant reforms through the One Canadian Economy initiative and mutual-recognition measures.
But the objective should ultimately be very simple:
If a product, worker or professional qualification is legally accepted in one Canadian province, there should be a strong presumption that it can operate throughout Canada.
There will always be legitimate exceptions involving safety, environment, language, geography and other provincial responsibilities.
But exceptions should be exceptions.
A truck should not effectively become a different truck when it crosses a provincial boundary.
A qualified Canadian tradesperson should not suddenly become unqualified because they crossed an invisible line.
A Canadian manufacturer shouldn’t need to navigate what amounts to thirteen small regulatory markets before being able to call Canada its home market.
Before Canadians can become less dependent upon foreign customers, Canada needs to become its own best customer.
Step Two: Treat Housing Like Critical Infrastructure
Canada cannot claim to have solved the cost-of-living crisis if housing remains unaffordable.
CMHC estimates that restoring affordability approximately to 2019 levels would require Canada to construct roughly 430,000 to 480,000 homes annually through 2035.
Current projections are closer to 245,000–250,000 annually.
In other words, Canada would need to nearly double its housing construction rate.
That cannot be accomplished simply by giving buyers more money.
Increasing purchasing power without increasing housing supply risks simply increasing what buyers can bid for the same limited number of houses.
Canada needs to manufacture housing at scale.
Housing needs an industrial revolution
Municipalities and provinces should expand pre-approved building designs.
Modular and factory-built housing should become mainstream rather than a niche product.
Building-code differences should be harmonized wherever practical.
Permitting systems should become completely digital.
Applications complying with zoning and building requirements should have guaranteed decision timelines.
More land should be serviced.
Infrastructure financing needs reform so that enormous upfront costs for sewer, water and roads are not simply loaded onto the purchase price of each new house.
And municipalities permitting substantial housing construction should receive priority access to infrastructure financing.
The objective should not be to destroy the value of Canadians’ existing homes.
The objective should be to make shelter gradually return to being something Canadians can afford from Canadian wages.
Step Three: Stop Exporting So Much of Canada’s Value-Added Opportunity
Canada has historically been extremely successful at digging, cutting, pumping or harvesting resources.
We have not always been equally successful at turning those resources into finished products.
Consider two economic models.
Model A
Canadian mine
↓
Canadian raw mineral
↓
Export
↓
Foreign refinery
↓
Foreign component manufacturer
↓
Foreign finished product manufacturer
↓
Finished product imported back into Canada
Canada receives the value of the resource and extraction work.
Everyone farther down the chain receives the processing, engineering, manufacturing, logistics and intellectual-property value.
Now consider another model.
Model B
Canadian mine
↓
Canadian processing
↓
Canadian refinery
↓
Canadian component manufacturing
↓
Canadian finished product
↓
Domestic sale + global export
The exact manufacturing chain will differ enormously by resource, and Canada should not try to manufacture everything.
But whenever Canada possesses a genuine competitive advantage, public policy should make it easier to move farther up the value chain.
Canada’s current critical-minerals strategy is already moving in this direction. In March 2026, Natural Resources Canada announced more than $3.6 billion in new programs and investments aimed at moving Canadian critical minerals from mine to market, including processing and enabling infrastructure.
That principle should extend beyond critical minerals.
It applies to agriculture.
Forestry.
Energy.
Metals.
Food processing.
Advanced manufacturing.
Nuclear technology.
Aerospace.
Defence.
Artificial intelligence.
And emerging technologies Canada hasn’t even developed yet.
Step Four: Build the Infrastructure That Gives Canada Choices
A resource isn’t particularly valuable if you cannot economically deliver it to a customer.
Canada therefore needs another generation of nation-building infrastructure.
That means rail.
Ports.
Electricity transmission.
Roads.
Pipelines where economically and environmentally justified.
Telecommunications.
Interprovincial power connections.
Northern infrastructure.
Mineral-access corridors.
And considerably greater capacity at Canadian gateways to the Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic.
There is already movement in this direction.
Canada’s Major Projects Office currently includes projects involving ports, critical minerals, nuclear energy, LNG, northern roads, transmission lines and other national infrastructure.
The objective should be straightforward:
Canadian producers should be capable of reaching major global markets without requiring the United States as the only practical route or customer.
That changes Canada’s negotiating position dramatically.
Step Five: Build National Trade Corridors Before We Need Them
Major Canadian infrastructure frequently spends years trapped between political announcements, environmental studies, regulatory processes, court challenges, financing questions and disagreements among governments.
Some of those reviews are essential.
Environmental protection cannot simply disappear.
Indigenous rights cannot be ignored.
Local communities deserve meaningful consultation.
But Canada can still become far more efficient.
One solution would be to establish several designated National Economic Corridors through agreements involving federal, provincial, territorial and Indigenous governments.
Those corridors could identify where future railways, roads, transmission infrastructure, telecommunications and other strategic infrastructure are most appropriate.
Projects would still require individual approval.
But investors would begin with a much clearer understanding of where Canada actually wants major infrastructure developed.
Canada is already pursuing versions of this idea. Federal Major Projects Office initiatives include Arctic and critical-mineral corridors intended to connect resources with domestic and international markets.
That approach should become a permanent part of Canadian economic planning.
Step Six: Sell Canadian Energy to More Than One Customer
Canada possesses one of the world’s largest energy endowments.
That should provide Canadians with enormous economic leverage.
Instead, our geography and infrastructure have historically directed much of our energy trade toward the United States.
Diversification is starting to change that.
In May 2026, Canada announced a long-term agreement involving the proposed Ksi Lisims LNG project and Germany’s SEFE for up to one million tonnes of LNG annually for as long as 20 years, with deliveries expected in the early 2030s.
Another European agreement with Germany’s Uniper followed in July.
Whatever Canadians individually think about particular energy projects, the larger economic principle deserves attention.
A country with numerous customers has options.
A country with one dominant customer has vulnerabilities.
Canada should pursue competitive international markets for oil, natural gas, uranium, electricity, hydrogen and emerging energy technologies while continuing to meet domestic environmental obligations.
Step Seven: Fix Canada’s Productivity Problem
Canada cannot permanently improve living standards simply by transferring more money between Canadians.
Eventually, the country has to produce more economic value.
The Bank of Canada has warned repeatedly about Canada’s productivity problem.
In November 2025, the Bank estimated that if Canada’s productivity growth since 2000 had approximately matched other G7 economies, Canadian GDP would be roughly 9% higher — almost $7,000 more per person.
Productivity does not mean telling Canadians to work harder.
A mechanic using modern diagnostic equipment can locate a fault faster.
A farmer operating precision equipment can manage more acres with less waste.
A carpenter using modern machinery can produce more components.
A factory with robotics can produce more goods per worker.
Software can eliminate hours of paperwork.
Artificial intelligence can automate routine administrative tasks.
That is productivity.
Canada should make investment in productive equipment extremely attractive.
Accelerated tax treatment for legitimate machinery, robotics, manufacturing equipment, software, agricultural technology and industrial automation should become a central component of Canadian tax policy.
Instead of taxing companies less simply because they are companies, Canada should reward them for building productive capacity in Canada.
Step Eight: Grow Canadian Companies Instead of Constantly Selling Them
Canada produces entrepreneurs and innovative companies.
But too many promising Canadian businesses reach a certain size and are acquired by larger foreign companies.
The founder may do extremely well.
But Canada can lose the headquarters, intellectual property, executive jobs and future corporate growth.
Canada needs a deeper domestic growth-capital market capable of financing companies from startup through global-scale operations.
Canadian pension plans oversee enormous pools of investment capital.
They must remain professionally managed and should never become political piggy banks.
But Canada should ensure there are enough financially competitive infrastructure, industrial and technology opportunities here that investing domestically becomes attractive on its own merits.
The goal should be to create more Canadian multinational businesses rather than simply more Canadian startups.
Step Nine: Increase Competition Inside Canada
Economic nationalism can become dangerous if it simply protects Canadian companies from competition.
The objective should not be:
Canadian companies can charge whatever they want because they’re Canadian.
The objective should be:
Canadian companies should become capable of beating international competitors.
Canada’s Competition Bureau has specifically concluded that the Canadian grocery industry is concentrated and that additional competition could benefit consumers through increased choice and lower prices.
The Bureau has also noted concentration concerns extending beyond groceries into other industries.
Competition policy should therefore be considered part of affordability policy.
Barriers preventing new grocery chains, telecommunications providers, financial services businesses and other legitimate competitors from entering Canadian markets should be examined.
Canadian ownership is valuable.
Canadian competition is equally valuable.
Consumers benefit most when Canadian companies have to earn their business.
Step Ten: Make Canada a Food-Processing Powerhouse
Canada is already a major agricultural country.
But the most valuable part of the food economy isn’t always growing the commodity.
It can be processing it.
Consider wheat.
Growing wheat creates agricultural income.
Milling it adds value.
Turning flour into finished food adds more.
Packaging adds more.
Distribution adds more.
Marketing adds more.
Exporting the finished product captures considerably more economic activity than exporting the original grain alone.
The same concept applies to meat, dairy products, vegetables, pulses, canola, potatoes, greenhouse crops and countless other agricultural products.
Canadian policy should encourage food-processing facilities near agricultural production wherever economically practical.
That would strengthen rural communities, reduce certain supply-chain vulnerabilities and create another source of Canadian exports.
Step Eleven: Use Government Procurement More Strategically
Canadian governments spend enormous amounts of taxpayer money every year.
That creates purchasing power.
Where trade agreements permit it and Canadian products are competitive, governments should consider Canadian economic value when procuring equipment and infrastructure.
Imagine two bids for a major public project.
One costs $100 million and produces almost no Canadian employment or taxation.
Another costs $101 million but supports Canadian suppliers, Canadian workers and Canadian intellectual property.
Strictly choosing the lowest sticker price might not always produce the lowest net economic cost to Canada.
However, Buy Canadian rules should never become an excuse for unlimited overpricing.
Canadian businesses receiving preference must remain competitive.
The policy should reward Canadian economic value — not subsidize inefficiency.
Step Twelve: Control Government Spending Before Promising Massive Tax Cuts
This is the part politicians often avoid.
Canada cannot permanently lower taxation while indefinitely increasing expenditures faster than government revenues.
According to the federal government’s Spring Economic Update 2026, Ottawa projects a $65.3-billion deficit for 2026–27.
Even more concerning is the cost of servicing accumulated federal debt.
Federal public-debt charges are projected to increase from approximately $54 billion in 2025–26 to $80.9 billion in 2030–31.
That $80.9 billion does not build a new hospital.
It does not train an apprentice.
It does not repair a bridge.
It does not construct a house.
It does not purchase an MRI machine.
It is essentially the cost of financing past borrowing.
That is why responsible tax reduction needs to be paired with expenditure reform.
Canada needs continual reviews of overlapping administration, obsolete programs, outside consulting, inefficient procurement, duplicated federal-provincial functions and programs whose results no longer justify their costs.
The objective should not be arbitrary cuts.
It should be:
Spend aggressively where government creates long-term Canadian capacity — and ruthlessly eliminate spending that accomplishes very little.
Step Thirteen: Create a Canadian Growth Dividend
This is how Canada could eventually reduce taxes without simply borrowing the tax cuts.
Imagine that productivity improvements, internal trade reform, resource development, housing construction and export growth cause government revenues to rise faster than originally projected.
Instead of automatically spending every additional dollar, Parliament could establish a Canadian Growth Dividend.
For illustration, every dollar of sustained revenue above an agreed economic baseline might be allocated approximately like this:
40 cents — permanent personal tax reduction
30 cents — deficit and debt reduction
30 cents — productivity-enhancing infrastructure
Those exact numbers would need serious economic modelling.
The important idea is the mechanism.
Economic growth would automatically begin flowing back to Canadians through lower taxation.
The country would simultaneously become richer, reduce its debt burden and continue investing in future productivity.
Which Taxes Should Canada Reduce First?
The first priority should be taxes that directly affect working Canadians.
Canada could progressively increase the amount of employment income Canadians can earn before paying federal income tax.
Lower-income tax brackets could gradually be reduced as fiscal conditions permit.
Tax rules could better recognize overtime and additional employment income so workers do not feel that taking additional shifts produces disproportionately little additional take-home pay.
Investment incentives should favour businesses purchasing productive Canadian equipment, constructing factories and expanding operations.
And once Canada’s fiscal position genuinely permits it, reductions in payroll and personal income-tax burdens could become part of the Growth Dividend.
The guiding principle should be:
Tax productive work and productive investment as lightly as Canada can responsibly afford.
What Should Not Be Done
Canada should not attempt economic independence through indiscriminate protectionism.
Putting enormous tariffs on everything imported into Canada would increase the cost of living.
Canada should not abandon the American market.
Approximately 72% of merchandise exports going to one country represents a vulnerability, but the solution isn’t intentionally destroying profitable Canadian-American commerce.
Canada should not fund enormous tax cuts entirely through borrowing.
Borrowed tax reductions eventually appear as higher debt-service costs.
Canada should not subsidize every Canadian company merely because it is Canadian.
And Canada should not pretend government can directly order prices lower.
The sustainable way to make housing, telecommunications, groceries and other necessities more affordable is usually some combination of greater supply, greater productivity and stronger competition.
A Ten-Year Canadian Economic Independence Roadmap
Years 1–2: Remove the Obstacles
Finish major internal-trade reforms.
Accelerate mutual recognition of Canadian credentials and regulations.
Establish national economic corridors.
Create strict service standards for project approvals.
Expand pre-approved housing designs.
Begin comprehensive federal program and expenditure reviews.
Expand investment tax treatment for productivity-enhancing machinery and technology.
Years 3–5: Build
Massively increase housing construction.
Expand ports and rail capacity.
Build electrical transmission infrastructure.
Develop strategic roads and northern infrastructure.
Expand Canadian critical-mineral processing.
Grow food-processing capacity.
Accelerate manufacturing investment.
Strengthen Canadian energy access to international markets.
Years 5–7: Export
Aggressively build commercial relationships throughout Europe and the Indo-Pacific.
Use Canada’s trade agreements much more effectively.
Expand Canadian export-financing capacity where justified.
Develop Canadian brands internationally.
Measure success by increases in non-U.S. exports, not by decreases in American trade.
Years 7–10: Return the Growth
As productivity, exports and the tax base increase, activate progressively larger Growth Dividend tax reductions.
Reduce lower personal income-tax rates.
Increase basic tax-free income.
Lower taxes on productive investment.
Use another portion of additional revenue to reduce federal borrowing.
Continue infrastructure investment without allowing routine government expenditures to absorb the entire growth dividend.
What Success Could Look Like by 2036
Canada would still trade extensively with the United States.
But perhaps only 60–65% of merchandise exports would depend upon that market because Canada’s European, Asian and other trade had grown much faster.
Canadian minerals would increasingly be processed in Canada rather than simply shipped overseas.
More agricultural products would leave Canada as finished food products rather than raw commodities.
Housing construction would approach the level required to gradually restore affordability.
Workers and businesses could operate across provincial borders with dramatically fewer regulatory obstacles.
Canadian ports would handle considerably more international commerce.
Productivity growth would begin narrowing the gap with other advanced economies.
Debt-service costs would consume a smaller share of future government revenue than under current projections.
And Canadians could begin keeping a larger percentage of each additional dollar they earn.
The Bigger Idea: Canada Needs to Become Harder to Pressure
Economic sovereignty isn’t achieved by putting a Canadian flag on everything.
It comes from having options.
If the United States doesn’t want our energy, Canada should have infrastructure capable of selling more of it elsewhere.
If one country doesn’t want Canadian minerals, another should.
If an international supply chain fails, Canadian manufacturers should be capable of producing more of what we require.
If one province has a shortage of skilled workers, qualified Canadians should be able to move there and begin working without unnecessary bureaucracy.
If international trade becomes unstable, Canadian businesses should have a genuine national market of more than 40 million people available to them.
That is economic resilience.
Canada Does Not Need to Become Anti-American to Become More Independent
This may be the most important point.
The United States and Canada share geography, families, industries, infrastructure and one of the world’s largest trading relationships.
That relationship should continue.
But friendship is not the same thing as dependency.
A business owner would not normally want 72% of company sales dependent upon a single customer.
A farmer would not intentionally grow a crop that could only be sold to one buyer.
And a country should think about economic risk in much the same way.
Canada should remain one of America’s closest economic partners.
But the Canadian economy should be strong enough that losing part of the American market would be painful rather than catastrophic.
The Canadian Advantage Already Exists
Canada does not need to invent the ingredients required to become a substantially wealthier and more independent country.
We already possess many of them.
Resources.
Farmland.
Energy.
Water.
Ports.
Universities.
Technology.
Stable institutions.
Skilled workers.
Manufacturing knowledge.
Capital.
And access to major international markets.
What Canada has frequently lacked is coordination.
Housing policy operates separately from immigration policy.
Mining operates separately from transportation planning.
Energy policy becomes disconnected from trade policy.
Tax policy becomes disconnected from productivity.
Provincial economic policy becomes disconnected from the national economy.
A Canadian Economic Independence Plan would connect these pieces.
The ultimate objective would not be isolation.
It would be resilience.
Not protectionism.
Competitiveness.
Not simply higher government revenue.
Higher household prosperity.
And not lower taxes financed through larger deficits.
A larger and more productive Canadian economy that allows governments to collect what they require while taking a smaller percentage from each Canadian.
Canada has the resources to become one of the most economically secure countries in the world.
The question is not whether the country has enough.
The question is whether Canada is prepared to build enough, process enough, trade widely enough and work together enough to take full advantage of what it already has.
Leave a Reply