
Which Ontario party would make your life more affordable? Depends who you are
Social Sharing
Ontario's main political parties are competing for the hearts of voters by appealing to their wallets, with a mix of tax cuts and money-back rebates pitched as helping with the cost of living.
Doug Ford and his Ontario PC Party is campaigning off the one-time $200 cheque that his government is sending to every Ontarian, a $3 billion spend.
Marit Stiles of the NDP is promising an ongoing monthly "grocery rebate" that would put about $4.9 billion per year back into the pockets of low-to-moderate income earners
Bonnie Crombie's Liberal Party and Mike Schreiner's Green Party are both promising income tax cuts.
The Liberals are targeting the middle-income bracket with about $2.8 billion in annual tax relief, while the Greens' proposal would cut about $4.7 billion from the the income taxes of both middle- and low-income earners.
Here's a comparison of each party's promises to make your life more affordable.
WATCH | Duelling affordability measures make for heated debate:
Ontario's major party leaders debate their plans on improving affordability
2 days ago
Duration 3:25
Ontario's four main party leaders went head to head on their plans to tackle the province's affordability crisis — and things got heated.
PC: $200 cheques, gas tax cut
Ford — who had not taken questions from reporters in Ontario for nine straight days as of Wednesday — spoke to factory workers about the $200 cheques during a campaign stop in Waterloo on Feb. 6.
"The banks told me it was the largest cheque run they've done in the history of this country," Ford said of his government's decision to put some 15 million cheques in the mail starting in January.
"It's not our money, it's your money. You paid it," said Ford, adding that his party's philosophy is to "give it back to the people that paid it."
Ford, whose government was running a $6.6-billion deficit when he called the election, has repeatedly denied the rebate was designed as an election gimmick.
"We were going ahead no matter if there was an election or no election," Ford said during a campaign news conference in Ottawa on Feb. 4.
Ford's rivals are attacking him for sending an identical rebate to every Ontario taxpayer, regardless of their income.
"Mr. Ford has handed out $200 cheques to millionaires and billionaires like (Loblaw chairman) Galen Weston, the guy gouging you at the grocery store," said Schreiner during a segment on affordability in Monday's televised debate.
"Let me tell you, I am not going to be giving a $200 cheque to Galen Weston," Stiles chipped in shortly afterward.
The other broad-based cost relief measure in the PC platform is a promise to make the ongoing 5.7 cent per litre cut in the provincial gas tax permanent. The PCs say it saves the average household $125 per year and costs the treasury roughly $620 million per year.
NDP: Means-tested grocery rebate
The NDP's promised grocery rebate would provide $40 monthly per adult and $20 monthly per child to all families with annual net household income of $65,000 or less and all individuals with annual net income of $50,000 or less.
It is a means-tested rebate, so individuals and households earning more than those thresholds would receive smaller rebates. The rebate shrinks to zero for households with $100,000-plus or individuals with $65,000-plus annual incomes.
During the Feb. 8 news conference in Toronto when she unveiled the promise, Stiles described it as one of the most important announcements of her election campaign.
"This is going to help people every month, not just one time, one year, before an election, like Doug Ford just did," Stiles told reporters. "It's also going to help those people who need it the most."
A family of four eligible for the full amount would receive $1,440 annually. The measure would cost the treasury $4.9 billion per year.
A background document provided by the NDP says around 3.7 million households would receive some rebate, and roughly 30 per cent of Ontario families would be eligible for the maximum amount.
The NDP is also pitching its rent control promises as an affordability measure. Stiles would rein in how much landlords can increase rent between tenants and also impose rent control on units built since 2018, which are currently exempt..
Liberal: Middle-income tax cut
The Liberals released their tax cut plan in November, before the campaign began. It would reduce the provincial tax rate on income between $51,446 and $75,000 to 7.15 per cent from the current rate of 9.15 per cent.
In a background document, the Liberals say this would save an average household $950 per year.
Along with a promise to remove the HST from home heating and hydro bills — saving each household an average of $200 per year — the Liberals say the measures would cost the treasury $2.8 billion per year.
The income tax cut would not do anything for anyone earning less than $51,446 per year. In response to a question on that during Monday's debate, Crombie responded by pointing to the promised HST cut and her promise to double Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) rates.
"I ask people, 'Is your life more affordable today than it was before Doug Ford?' Clearly the answer to that is no," Crombie said Wednesday at a campaign event in the eastern Ontario riding of Glengarry-Prescott-Russell.
"We're going to put money back in your pocket," Crombie said, echoing a line that Ford used frequently in previous campaigns.
Green: Income tax cut
Schreiner's Greens are proposing an income tax cut that would apply to all individuals earning less than $65,000 and all households with joint income less than $100,000.
The promise would deliver as much as $1,700 per person in annual tax relief, according to Schreiner.
The Green Party is the only one of the four major parties that has released full costing details of its promises.
The document shows the incom tax cut would cost the treasury $4.7 billion, which would be offset by a roughly identical increase in annual revenue from a new wealth tax on households with $10 million or more in assets.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


National Post
22 minutes ago
- National Post
Adam Pankratz: David Eby's CleanBC initiative a greater hit to economy than Trump's tariffs
Article content Open any book on politics and you will find that, in Canada, the NDP stands for the New Democratic Party. In British Columbia under David Eby, the acronym needs to be updated to — Not Delivering Prosperity. Article content Since Eby and his government took over in 2022, British Columbia has been an economic basket case. The deficit projection for 2025 was revised upwards in March to $10.9 billion — a record — which followed hot on the heels of the 2024 deficit of $9.1 billion — also a record until 2025 stole the deficit crown. The result in April was a downgrade to BC's credit rating from AA to A+. By any measure, the outlook is grim, as total debt for the province is predicted to soar by 70 per cent over the next three years. Article content Article content The ruling NDP and Premier David Eby have been quick to blame economic woes on Donald Trump and his tariff policies. While tariffs are no doubt hurting B.C. — as they are all of Canada — this tactic is already tired. In truth, the damage appears to be mostly self-inflicted, caused by poor budgeting and economic policy driven by ideology rather than actual economics. Article content Article content At the B.C. Chamber of Commerce AGM on June 4th, Ken Peacock, the former Chief Economist at the Business Council of B.C., presented analysis indicating the NDP's CleanBC initiative has actually been a far greater hit to the province's sputtering economy than any tariffs. From 2019-2024 it cost B.C. $29.3 billion in lost GDP and is projected to cost the province a further $109.7 billion between now and 2029. That's David Eby's economic leadership in action: ideology torpedoing economic prosperity for hard working British Columbians. Article content Eby and the NDP will of course point to the fact that they have passed Bill 14 and 15. Bill 15, the Infrastructure Projects Act, is ostensibly a bill to speed up major infrastructure project development, particularly in the resource industry. Eby and the NDP say the bills are 'critically important' to respond to a 'rapidly evolving situation' (read Trump) rather than acknowledge their need as a result of the NDP's actions in creating a provincial economic dud. Bill 15 gives cabinet sweeping powers to override existing regulations for projects in the provincial interest and fast-track them to permitting. It has been met with serious pushback from B.C. Municipalities and from First Nations who claim it ignores their voices and dismisses their rights. Article content Article content While any business which has tried to work in the province's economically critical resource sector may applaud the notion of a government finding ways to stop B.C.'s quagmire of delays and regulatory hell, the bill fails to address the real problem and merely hands unmerited power to a small group of NDP ideologues. This is always the Eby NDP way: power consolidation for decision making. Article content Article content The problem should be obvious to any free-market supporter. Bill 15 does not reignite B.C.'s economy by streamlining regulation for private enterprise; it merely allows cabinet to pick and choose which projects it will decide to ram through any further regulatory oversight. This is ripe for abuse and political interference. It is a pay-to-play system where randomness and arbitrary decisions based on cabinet whims, without clear process, will become the norm. Eby's NDP claim the bill brings investment clarity, in fact, it does anything but. Article content The vague backroom modus operandi of the NDP is, however, consistent in one way. They echo the closed-door decision-making attempts and history of the NDP when deciding how the province's crown land will be used; something essential for investment and resource development. This important process has been shrouded in secrecy on multiple occasions. The latest announcement in this regard covers all of Northwestern B.C. including the mineral-rich Golden Triangle. As a result, nearly a third of British Columbia is now subject to a one year pause on new mining-tenure registrations. This is the exact of opposite of what attracts investment to the province and will send the critical dollars B.C. needs to friendlier investment regions. Article content David Eby's NDP has bankrupted the province and has no plan back for the simple reason that they cannot trust the free market to do its work. They are trapped in an ideologically-driven mindset which does not permit British Columbians to make full use of their own province. This arbitrary and regressive policy must change. Article content


National Post
22 minutes ago
- National Post
Joel Kotkin: Carney's Canada will devolve into feudalism
Article content In this shift towards oligarchy, homeownership and investment profits play a major role. This is particularly true in terms of housing, where the Liberal Party has long championed 'urban containment,' a policy that seeks to limit suburban and exurban development while promoting dense urban growth. The result, notes a new study by demographer Wendell Cox, has been housing prices that, in terms of the relationship between median home prices and household income, are increasingly out of reach for the average Canadian. Article content Immigration, key to Canada's population surge, has contributed to this shortage. While the country's working population swelled by a record 3.7 per cent at the start of this year, housing starts remained essentially flat. At one housing start for every 4.9 people entering the working-age population, 'there is no precedent for a housing supply deficit of this magnitude,' notes National Bank of Canada economist Stéfane Marion. The biggest losers have been people under 40, for whom the homeownership rate has dropped to around 50 per cent, almost 10 per cent less than a decade before. It also helps to have wealthy parents who own a home; children of homeowners are twice as likely to acquire a home as those who do not. Article content If you wish to live in Canada's two great international cities, and are not of aristocratic stock, it's getting tough to get shelter. Four of the six major markets in Canada have a median multiple — a ratio of the median house price by the median gross (before tax) annual household income — of 5.4, considerably higher than the US's 4.8. Vancouver now ranks fourth among all anglophone markets at 11.8, behind Hong Kong, Sydney, and San Jose. Toronto, at 8.4, stands as the second-least affordable market in Canada and ranks 84th out of 95 markets in international affordability, with a severely unaffordable median multiple of 8.4. As late as about 1990, national price-to-income ratios were 'affordable,' at 3.0 or less in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Article content This pattern severely restricts homeownership, which has been declining since 2021. Not surprisingly, rates are lower in both Vancouver and Toronto than in much of the country. Clearly densification, the preferred growth option of the elites, does not help a housing shortage or reduce prices as Patrick Condon of the University of British Columbia has shown. Indeed, now Vancouver is now producing less-than-half the housing units needed to meet demand, one reason for the high prices even in a weak economy. Condon, an eloquent advocate of densification, cites the 'indisputable' evidence that 'upzoning' increases the value of land (by increasing the development value). Article content Concentrations of property and wealth are likely to worsen under the renewed Liberal regime. Planners and climate activists, as in California, a place which almost rivals Toronto and Vancouver in their progressive domination, will likely get even stronger with 'net zero' devotee Carney in charge. Similarly, industries that tend to create high-wage jobs, notably in oil and gas, will find themselves constrained, leaving the big money to financial institutions and those firms who rely on protectionism to shield themselves from both Chinese and American competition. Article content


Globe and Mail
a day ago
- Globe and Mail
Does the EV Industry Have a Truck Problem?
There's a truth in Detroit for Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F) and General Motors, and that's that trucks are king. The dirty little industry secret, if you can call it a secret, is that full-size trucks cost only marginally more to produce than a passenger car, yet the former can sell for two to three times as much. Full-size truck sales are the backbone of Detroit automakers, but as the industry transitions to electric vehicles the scene may be set to change. In fact, the EV industry might have a truck problem, and that would be horrible news for auto investors. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » Disappointing results Long, long ago Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) CEO Elon Musk essentially mocked stereotypical trucks noting their stale design. Perhaps that's why the young EV maker swung for the fences with the Cybertruck's controversial design. But the unique design didn't stir up sales as much as it stirred conversation. Originally predicted to reach annual sales between 250,000 to half a million units, the Cybertruck has been a commercial flop. It reached only 40,000 U.S. registrations last year, and while that was good enough to be the top EV pickup truck, it was a fraction of original estimates. Because Tesla doesn't break out its sales per model, registrations can serve as a proxy to sales. Ford's highly anticipated F-150 Lightning also disappointed compared to initial hype. Ford noted before the truck's launch it had 200,000 reservations and anticipated producing 150,000 trucks annually. Its actual results were a more modest 24,695 registrations in 2023 before growing to 32,893 in 2024. Rivian (NASDAQ: RIVN), which only offers the R1T, R1S, and its electric delivery van, relies on its truck for a substantial chunk of its business, but also saw less-than-thrilling results. Rivian last reported its backlog in late 2022 at 114,000 for the R1T and R1S combined, and not only did its registrations of 11,311 feel lackluster in 2023, they actually declined to 9,876 last year. What's the problem? The problem facing investors and their love of truck profits is twofold. On one end, we have the consumer issue, which is the stigma that electric powertrains are forced to their brink when it comes to performance and towing. Consumers that use their trucks as tools sometimes have difficulties with the concept of EVs performing at the required level. On the other end, the business case also gets more difficult for trucks that require towing power. Towing requires immense power and thus larger batteries which, as the most expensive component of an EV, pushes the cost up significantly. That eats into the precious juicy margins that full-size trucks have historically presented. The head of Rivian's rival company, Lucid, had this to say when discussing the potential of Lucid making an electric truck: "I really think that it's very tough to make an electric pickup truck work today," Lucid CEO and CTO Peter Rawlinson said, according to InsideEVs. "Not one that's usable and cost-effective." At the end of the day, it's important for investors to note that trucks are struggling in the EV industry. Full-size trucks have long been the backbone for automakers that thrive in the segment. Full-size trucks haul profits like few other segments can. But without a great deal of battery technology progress or cost reduction, the day of lucrative full-size truck profits could be over for automakers in the near term. Should you invest $1,000 in Ford Motor Company right now? Before you buy stock in Ford Motor Company, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Ford Motor Company wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to171%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025