
Why the Bank of Canada could be done cutting its policy rate for now
After a quarter-point cut in March, the central bank held its benchmark interest rate steady at 2.75 per cent in April and June.
With last month's jobs figures showing a surprise gain and core inflation levels holding steady at around three per cent, economists now broadly expect the central bank will continue its holding pattern at its next decision on July 30.
The central bank lowers its policy rate when it wants to encourage spending and boost the economy but keeps borrowing costs elevated when there are concerns inflation could pick up steam.
Most economists expect the Bank of Canada will deliver at least one or two more quarter-point cuts in the months ahead.
Lower rates would help shore up the economy in the trade war, the argument goes.
RBC is among a small group making the case for no more interest rate cuts from the Bank of Canada for the time being.
Frances Donald, RBC's chief economist, said the central bank could opt to cut again amid 'pockets' of weakness in the economy — a soft housing market and a sharp slowdown in tariff-struck sectors like manufacturing, to name a few.
'On the flip side,' she said in an interview, 'it's worth considering, would Bank of Canada rate cuts actually help what's hurting the Canadian economy?'
The policy rate is a broad tool that affects every Canadian — and every market — regardless of their need for support, Donald noted.
That means that tariff-sensitive Windsor, Ont., where the unemployment rate now tops 11 per cent, would see the same stimulus from a rate cut as Victoria, B.C., where the jobless rate currently sits at just 3.9 per cent.
'Rate cuts would probably be inappropriate in an economy like that,' Donald said.
Instead, RBC argues that markets like Windsor need the precision of fiscal policy support from the government.
The Bank of Canada has already delivered 2.25 percentage points of interest rate cuts over the past year, and that support is only now starting to filter into the economy, Donald said.
The central bank can now hand the baton to the federal government without having to provide much more support for the economy, she said, unless signs of a broader downturn start to materialize.
Donald said RBC has a more optimistic view of the economy than some other forecasters, expecting growth to pick up through the rest of the year thanks to resilient consumer spending and an expected rebound in business confidence.
But Oxford Economics, which expects Canada is already in a recession that will persist through the rest of the year, also expects no further interest rate cuts from the central bank.
The firm said in an updated outlook this week that while it expects job losses to pick up steam in the months ahead, it also sees inflation rising to three per cent by mid-2026 thanks to tariffs and related supply-chain strain.
The Bank of Canada will want to lean against any potential rise in prices and will keep its policy rate on hold even as the trade war stymies growth, Oxford Economics argued.
Donald said that after inflation surged over the pandemic, consumers are likely feeling 'scarred' as new price pressures bubble up around them.
'Canadians have been through a very serious affordability crisis and this is a Bank of Canada that's likely going to lean on the side of wanting to prevent a second round,' she said.
BMO, meanwhile, has three more interest rate cuts in its forecast currently, with the final coming in March of next year.
But BMO chief economist Doug Porter acknowledged the arguments are growing for fewer, if any, cuts.
'If you look at what the financial markets are expecting, and they're often a very good judge, at this point they're really only looking for one more cut,' he said in an interview after Tuesday's inflation release.
Porter said the federal government is expected to rapidly ramp up spending, particularly on defence and infrastructure, in the coming months, taking some of the pressure off the Bank of Canada to cut rates.
Stephen Brown, deputy chief North America economist at Capital Economics, believes it's not reasonable to expect the central bank is done cutting with the unemployment rate holding near seven per cent and the economy's output well below potential.
'I think it's quite unlikely that we're in a position where the economy doesn't need any cuts at all,' he said.
At 2.75 per cent, the Bank of Canada's benchmark interest rate is at the middle of its so-called 'neutral range,' where monetary policy is neither boosting nor stifling economic growth.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
Brown said he expects the policy rate will likely drop to 2.25 per cent before the central bank's easing cycle is done, giving the economy some tailwinds through the trade uncertainty.
Donald believes the Bank of Canada is well positioned at the middle of its neutral range — able to pivot lower with a couple of interest rate cuts as needed or keep rates elevated if inflation proves stubborn in the months ahead.
She said she doesn't expect interest rate hikes will be in the cards anytime soon, but argues the Bank of Canada maintains overall flexibility by keeping its policy rate on hold until the data tells it which way to move.
'They could choose to stay at this level for the next one to two years waiting for the next shock, which could go in one direction or the next.'
This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 19, 2025.

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


Vancouver Sun
7 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Trump's tariff threats against Canada face legal hurdles ahead of August deadline
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'We don't have a deal with Canada, we haven't been focused on it,' Trump told reporters Friday. Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Canadian officials have also downplayed expectations of a new economic and security agreement materializing by Friday. 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses. 'We are hopeful — we can't know for sure obviously — we are hopeful that we will continue to prevail in court,' Somin said. Somin said they are arguing that IEEPA does not 'give the president the power to impose any tariff he wants, on any nation, for any reason, for as long as he wants, whenever he feels like it.' He added that 'the law also says there must be an emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat to American security or the economy' — and neither the flow of fentanyl from Canada nor a trade deficit meet that definition. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. The White House has said the Trump administration is legally using powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address America's 'national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking.' There have been 18 amicus briefs — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — filed in support of the small businesses and states pushing against Trump's tariffs. Two were filed in support of the Trump administration's actions. Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Trump administration is taking a vague statute and claiming powers never deployed by a president before. The Cato Institute submitted a brief that argued 'the Constitution specifies that Congress has the power to set tariffs and duties.' Skorup said there are serious issues with the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA. 'We don't want power consolidated into a single king or president,' he said. It's expected the appeals court will expedite its ruling. Even if it rules against the duties, however, they may not be immediately lifted. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this.' There are at least eight lawsuits challenging the tariffs. Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .


Global News
9 hours ago
- Global News
As Trump's trade deal deadline approaches, his tariffs face legal pushback in court
Donald Trump's plan to realign global trade faces its latest legal barrier this week in a federal appeals court — and Canada is bracing for the U.S. president to follow through on his threat to impose higher tariffs. While Trump set an Aug. 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the United States, the president's ultimatum has so far resulted in only a handful of frameworks for trade agreements. Deals have been announced for Japan, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines and the United Kingdom — but Trump indicated last week that an agreement with Canada is far from complete. 'We don't have a deal with Canada, we haven't been focused on it,' Trump told reporters Friday. Trump sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney threatening to impose 35 per cent tariffs if Canada doesn't make a trade deal by the deadline. The White House has said those duties would not apply to goods compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Story continues below advertisement Canadian officials have also downplayed expectations of a new economic and security agreement materializing by Friday. 'We'll use all the time that's necessary,' Carney said last week. Countries around the world will also be watching as Trump's use of a national security statute to hit nations with tariffs faces scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled in May that Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. No previous president had ever used it for tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. The Trump administration quickly appealed the lower court's ruling on the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs and arguments are set to be heard in the appeal court on Thursday. The hearing combines two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One involves five American small businesses arguing specifically against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other came from 12 states pushing back on both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. Story continues below advertisement George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called Trump's tariff actions a 'massive power grab.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, is representing the American small businesses. 'We are hopeful — we can't know for sure obviously — we are hopeful that we will continue to prevail in court,' Somin said. Somin said they are arguing that IEEPA does not 'give the president the power to impose any tariff he wants, on any nation, for any reason, for as long as he wants, whenever he feels like it.' He added that 'the law also says there must be an emergency and an unusual and extraordinary threat to American security or the economy' — and neither the flow of fentanyl from Canada nor a trade deficit meet that definition. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. The White House has said the Trump administration is legally using powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address America's 'national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking.' There have been 18 amicus briefs — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — filed in support of the small businesses and states pushing against Trump's tariffs. Two were filed in support of the Trump administration's actions. Story continues below advertisement Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Washington-based Cato Institute, said the Trump administration is taking a vague statute and claiming powers never deployed by a president before. The Cato Institute submitted a brief that argued 'the Constitution specifies that Congress has the power to set tariffs and duties.' Skorup said there are serious issues with the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA. 'We don't want power consolidated into a single king or president,' he said. It's expected the appeals court will expedite its ruling. Even if it rules against the duties, however, they may not be immediately lifted. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this.' There are at least eight lawsuits challenging the tariffs. Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.


Toronto Star
11 hours ago
- Toronto Star
A private Toronto college abruptly closed — and left these students out thousands of dollars, with no diplomas
Students are accusing a private advertising college in Toronto of broken promises after it allegedly failed to deliver on internships or even a functioning campus before abruptly shutting down — leaving them thousands of dollars in debt and without diplomas. The group of nine say they were drawn to Miami Ad School Toronto by guarantees of hands-on experience, professional instruction and vital connections in the advertising industry. That the American-based college also boasted global awards and graduates who ended up at Ogilvy & Mather, BBDO, Droga5 and Canadian firm Rethink, among others, added to the appeal.