logo
Will Canada's double whammy of tax cuts and defence spending hurt its AAA credit rating?

Will Canada's double whammy of tax cuts and defence spending hurt its AAA credit rating?

Yahoo4 days ago
Canada's top-tier credit rating remains intact despite a post-election surge in federal spending and tax cuts, according to a new Desjardins report — but growing debt and a costly NATO defence commitment could threaten that standing in the years ahead.
Canada currently holds some of the highest possible credit ratings among advanced economies — AAA from S&P, Aaa from Moody's and AA+ from Fitch — making it one of the best-rated bond issuers in the G7. Desjardins' report says that standing appears safe for now, despite growing fiscal pressures.
'The likely substantial increase in borrowing ahead probably doesn't mean much for the government of Canada's top-notch credit rating, at least in the near term,' it said.
A sovereign credit rating is both an absolute and a relative assessment. On an absolute basis, it reflects a sovereign country's outstanding debt and its capacity to manage it, while also taking into account the relative credit developments of other sovereign countries.
At NATO meetings at the end of June, member countries agreed to increase defence spending up to five per cent of their GDP by 2035. The spending is to be divided into core defence expenditures of 3.5 per cent and 1.5 per cent in defence-adjacent spending, according to Desjardins.
For Canada, which lags behind its fellow NATO members in spending, this is a significant increase from its current defence outlay of 1.4 per cent of GDP. It has now committed to raising that number to two per cent by the end of the 2025-26 fiscal year.
Randall Bartlett, chief economist at Desjardins, said that the spending could impact Canada's AAA credit rating.
'Canada has a lot of things going for it on the fiscal front. But over time, if our fiscal situation erodes, particularly if we can't find those savings, that does put Canada in a precarious position of potentially putting our AAA credit rating at risk,' he said.
Bartlett noted that Canada has a long way to go to close the gap with its NATO partners, and a much further way to go than most other members to meet the new requirements.
'For the amount of spending that requires, the share of GDP is going to be a lot higher in Canada than it is in other countries, and that's certainly going to increase the debt burden of the federal government,' he said.
According to IMF forecasts cited in the report, Canada's gross general government debt as a share of GDP would need to be about seven per cent higher if defence expenditure is to reach 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2030. This is assuming no new spending and/or revenue cuts are introduced in other sectors to offset military spending.
Bartlett reiterated that, in the near-term, Canada's rating is safe due to its strong fiscal positioning. However, he emphasized that the debt to GDP ratio will move higher.
The new NATO defence spending framework could prove to be an issue for countries like Canada who have committed to meeting the targets and might find it hard to live up to that commitment, Bartlett said.
He also raised concerns regarding Canada's fiscal path moving forward, citing the lack of information from the government.
'I think the fiscal path in Canada is certainly headed in the wrong direction at this point. Not only is spending higher, but the federal government has decided to cut taxes at the same time. That could put us in a very challenging situation in the future, which would potentially require deeper savings through spending cuts and lead to some very difficult choices,' Bartlett said.
Michael Wernick: Canada needs a Defence and Security Tax to meet its new NATO commitments head on
Expect higher deficits to meet Canada's 5% NATO defence spending target
He further emphasized that the lack of a fiscal plan is a major concern, especially considering the dynamics of the global economy.
'I think it is deeply concerning, because not only does our forecast and those of others show that the GDP ratio is rising consistently over time, but it speaks to a lack of transparency in financial reporting (from the government)' he said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump is transforming the GOP's energy policies — and not all conservatives are happy
Trump is transforming the GOP's energy policies — and not all conservatives are happy

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump is transforming the GOP's energy policies — and not all conservatives are happy

Republicans spent four years railing against former President Joe Biden's use of Washington's money and regulatory heft to promote wind farms, solar panels and electric cars. Now President Donald Trump is wielding the same mighty federal arsenal on behalf of oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power — and his party is cheering along. The result is that the GOP is embracing the same style of big government intervention in the energy markets for which they slammed Biden's Inflation Reduction Act — mirroring the ways that Trump has reshaped Republican long-standing orthodoxies on matters such as trade and international alliances. Trump's aims are worlds apart from Biden's, of course: The administration is offering billions in financial support for energy sources long favored by Republicans while rolling back environmental rules that raised costs for the fossil fuel industry. That's a huge contrast from Biden's effort to steer hundreds of billions of dollars to clean-energy manufacturing in an effort to counter climate change. But it's also a departure from longtime Republican arguments that free-market forces should steer the future of the U.S. energy supply, and that the federal government's job is to get out of the way. 'They're picking winners and losers. No doubt of that,' said Shuting Pomerleau, director of energy and environmental policy at center-right think tank American Action Forum. 'There has been a convergence of both Democrats and Republicans into the industrial policies propping up the industries or technologies they love with the resources and the legal authorities they have.' One fresh example is a July 7 executive order from Trump that Interior Secretary Doug Burgum cited to impose tight restrictions on wind and solar projects, to the dismay of moderate Senate Republicans. Trump had promised House conservatives that he would crack down on any federal support for clean energy, despite language in the GOP's recently passed megabill easing the phaseout of tax credits. The Trump administration's actions threaten a massive chill on private investments in wind, solar and battery companies, and run counter to the global markets' growing embrace of clean energy technologies. But the White House says the changes serve major Trump priorities, such as meeting the growing energy demands of artificial intelligence data centers. 'Under President Trump's leadership, America is dedicated to leading every industry, particularly as the global leader in Artificial Intelligence,' White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement. 'Advancing A.I. requires substantial energy resources, modern infrastructure, and top-tier technological expertise — America is well-prepared to meet these demands and drive progress forward.' Trump's willingness to use the levers of government to reward his energy allies began on the first day of his second term. His Inauguration Day executive order declaring an energy emergency called for weakening environmental rules and focusing federal resources to expedite energy production. But its definition of energy sources notably excluded solar and wind. 'We're in by far the most politicized environment for energy I've ever seen or I'm aware of in history, absolutely. Very sad,' said Robert McNally, who is president of the consulting firm Rapidan Energy Group and served in former President George W. Bush's White House. 'But why should energy be different? What isn't highly political these days?' Trump went further on wind with an executive order that threw up new onerous new hurdles to federal projects, such as by blocking new offshore wind lease sales and halting wind permitting. He doubled down on that with an executive order this month attempting to limit solar and wind developers from accessing federal tax credits, and with the Interior directive requiring Burgum's personal review of wind and solar projects. Other Trump administration actions have overtly benefited fossil fuel sources. Energy Secretary Chris Wright used authorities under the century-old Federal Power Act to keep an aging coal power plant in Michigan running just eight days before it had been slated to go offline. Michigan ratepayers are now paying to keep it afloat — although Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed a motion against DOE's move, saying retiring the plant was part of a plan to save Michigan ratepayers $150 million in capital expenditures. Wright later used that same authority to force an oil- and gas-fired power plant outside Philadelphia to continue operating. 'We're expecting more than that. That's the tip of the iceberg,' Devin Hartman, director of energy and environment policy with the conservative think tank R Street Institute. 'The case to subsidize those power plants is really flimsy.' To the Trump administration and its defenders, its actions are a much-needed course correction. They have pointed to warnings from the North American Electric Reliability Corp., a nonprofit that monitors the power grid for potential blackouts, that regional grid operators face higher risk of supply shortages due to coal and natural gas power plant retirements. Addressing grid reliability is crucial for a Trump economic agenda that places a huge priority on growing artificial intelligence, which forecasters have said will require vast amounts of electricity. Trump administration officials contend that ending renewable power subsidies and reversing Biden's environmental rules will attract more AI investment by preventing retirement of coal and natural gas power plants. 'The need for power is scaling so fast that if President Trump hadn't been elected president, I think we would already be in trouble,' said Carla Sands, vice chair of the center for energy and environment at the Trump-aligned think tank America First Policy Institute. 'The American regulatory environment had become anti-production, anti-energy, anti-business, and this is changing under President Trump's brilliant leadership.' An energy and AI summit that Sen. David McCormick (R-Pa.) convened last week in Pittsburgh — which included an appearance by Trump — crystallized the emergence of the president's brand of industrial policy. The administration touted $90 billion in announcements for new AI investments from U.S. tech companies, investment houses and the 'hyperscalers' that build the data centers such as Google, CoreWeave, Blackstone and Brookfield Asset Management. 'The AI revolution will change the way the world works, and we cannot lose. The Trump administration will not let us lose,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said during the event. 'We need to do clean, beautiful coal. We need to do natural gas. We need to embrace nuclear. We need to embrace it all because we have the power to do it — and if we don't do it, we're fools." But wind, solar and battery storage projects have been the United States' leading source of new power in recent years, while backlogs for new natural gas turbines, yearslong timelines to build nuclear power plants and the remote chances of greenlighting new coal-fired power plants have stunted growth of those sources. Solar, wind and batteries accounted for 93 percent of all new power added to the grid last year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. People who identify themselves as traditional small government conservatives expressed wariness of some of Trump's moves. They say the party is using the same heavy-handed tactics to reward favorites for which they criticized Democrats. Republicans have even dialed it up a notch, they said. Republicans have cast aside the all-of-the-above mindset of the pre-Trump era, said Drew Bond, CEO of conservative climate organization C3 Solutions and an Energy Department adviser in the George W. Bush administration. Now, they preach a 'best of the above' mentality that invites subjective choice over the ebbs and flows of a free market, he said. 'You're sort of seeing a bit of an intellectual compromise, if you will, in order to secure more of an agenda focused on abundance and reliability and affordability,' he said. Trump and his team have not been shy about that, said Tom Pyle, president of the conservative Institute for Energy Research. Pyle said he doesn't necessarily agree with GOP efforts to tip the scales for specific energy sources, and he opposed a lucrative tax subsidy worth tens of millions of dollars that the Republican megabill contained for coal used in steelmaking. With tariffs, a flurry of executive actions and other steps, Pyle said, Trump has gone far beyond even Biden's use of executive authority to forge his industrial policy. But, on balance, Pyle said Trump's approach to cutting regulations aligns with Republican orthodoxy — and that means he can stomach the rest for that. 'This is a Republican president who has moved the Republican base and changed what it means to be a Republican,' Pyle said. 'Everyone keeps saying, 'Oh, well, when Trump leaves the scene, things will get back to normal. We'll just be like good old Republicans again.' Well, no. If that's the case, say goodbye to the Electoral College map.'

How the dropping dollar could scramble Trump's agenda
How the dropping dollar could scramble Trump's agenda

Yahoo

time42 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How the dropping dollar could scramble Trump's agenda

President Trump and his aides are closely watching the US dollar's drop over the first six months of this year as they track a change that could have wide-ranging effects, from how tariffs are felt to Federal Reserve policy to America's role in the world. The question, which notably remains a somewhat open one even among Trump's aides, is whether the net effects may include at least some positive short-term consequences for the president's agenda or whether the dollar needs to be strengthened at all costs. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick offered a limited case for a weaker dollar on CBS over the weekend when he responded to a question about rising consumer prices by saying that "the dollar declining sort of softens tariffs completely." The currency's moves so far this year — which have surprised some economists who expected Trump's tariffs to put pressure in the other direction — could indeed boost exports but could also complicate Trump's goals for the coming months, primarily by pushing prices up for US consumers of foreign goods. Trump himself remains very much in the strong dollar camp, as he reiterated just a few days ago, saying that he is "never going to let the dollar slide." The only way that could happen, he added, is "if you have a dummy" as president. The somewhat mixed messaging comes as the US dollar index — a measure of the US currency against various foreign currencies — has fallen significantly and is now down almost 10% since Inauguration Day. Declines in recent days have put the currency, as of Tuesday afternoon, near two-year lows. It's a change that, if it sticks, will have varied consequences for Trump's agenda — and not just on the trade front. RSM's Joe Brusuelas offered in a note this week that a weakening dollar tends to be followed by inflation pressure — "but it usually takes nine to 12 months" — which could work most directly against Trump's keen interest in lower interest rates. If the dollar holds or declines further, the economist wrote, "such a scenario will most likely lead the Federal Reserve to hold its policy rate steady through the end of the year at best" due to inflation uncertainty. 'People vote with their feet' The somewhat surprising dollar moves so far this year have also spurred some concerns that recent declines could be early signs of a loss of faith from global investors. As JPMorgan Chase (JPM) CEO Jamie Dimon put it recently, "people vote with their feet," and "if people decide that the U.S. dollar isn't the place to be ... that will become a problem." Eurasia Group's Ian Bremmer added in a recent analysis that the dollar's role as the world's global reserve currency is likely safe for now, but the US is entering a period where investment trends "could start a long term slide to become closer to parity in trust and utility with the Euro." Some analysts are pushing back, saying the evidence isn't there (at least yet) for a long-term slide. A recent analysis from Monty Gandhi at the SMBC Group called the flows away from the dollar "still more myth than reality" and found that "speculative positioning may reflect short-term bearishness on the dollar, actual capital flows continue to favor U.S. assets." Another note of skepticism about any long-term effects came from Torsten Sløk, chief economist at Apollo Global Management, who wrote in a note that his expectation is that if the trade uncertainty is resolved, "the US dollar is expected to appreciate again" after what he describes as a rebound in demand for US assets that began in May. (Disclosure: Yahoo Finance is owned by Apollo Global Management.) It's also a narrative that the White House pushes hard against, with Trump taking an aggressive stance against BRICs, an intergovernmental organization comprising 10 countries that had floated a long-shot idea of a common currency. "They wanted to try and take over the dollar," the president said. Trump promised a 10% tariff in response and gloated last week that the group's influence is "fading out fast," likening the possible loss of the dollar's status as a reserve currency to "losing a world war." "Ten-year Treasury yields rallying down since Inauguration Day, four consecutive expectation-beating inflation reports, and the trillions in historic investment commitments that have poured into the United States since Election Day are all indicative of the confidence that investors and markets continue to have in our economy and currency," added White House spokesperson Kush Desai in a statement. Read more: What is the 10-year Treasury note, and how does it affect your finances? A long-simmering Trump-world debate This summer's focus on the dollar is just the latest in a debate within Trump's orbit that stretches back even before the 2024 election around whether the dollar is overvalued. As the Atlantic Council recently put it: "What's the Trump administration's dollar strategy? It depends on who you ask." On one side historically are figures like Stephen Miran, the chair of Trump's Council of Economic Advisers, who touted the idea of a "Mar-A-Lago accord" last year, before he joined the administration, that was largely built on a premise that the US dollar is "persistently overvalued" and that tariff inflation can be avoided if currency issues are also addressed simultaneously. His argument was that tackling the currency question alongside tariffs could rebound in America's favor on a variety of fronts — from the national debt to national security arrangements to providing a boost to US businesses. It was an argument that Lutnick appeared to resurface in part over the weekend. It's also a line of thinking that has faced clear resistance from other aides (and apparently from Trump himself) who shy away from any public suggestion that the Trump administration is interested in lessening the US dollar's strength. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent — a former currency trader himself — has repeatedly downplayed the dropping dollar, saying that "it's natural for currencies to go up and down and what we've seen is not out of the ordinary." Bessent is often quick to note that the dollar also declined in 2017 — the beginning of Trump's first term — but then rose in the following years. He often casts the moves — as he did on CNBC earlier this month — as better understood as a strengthening of the euro instead of a weakening of the dollar. So far, at least, Trump's actions have focused on one side of Miran's thesis, the implementation of tariffs, but with much less focus on his corollary currency ideas beyond things like a mention of "currency practices" in his "Liberation Day" tariffs executive order. It has even led Miran to offer some distance from his own paper and, on possible currency actions, to suggest "could it be something that is entertained down the road? Sure." Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Premiers entering final day of meetings with public safety, internal trade on agenda
Premiers entering final day of meetings with public safety, internal trade on agenda

Yahoo

time42 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Premiers entering final day of meetings with public safety, internal trade on agenda

Canada's premiers are set to meet for the third and final day of their gathering in Ontario's cottage country, with internal trade, public safety and health care on the agenda. The premiers met with Prime Minister Mark Carney in Huntsville, Ont., on Tuesday to discuss the ongoing trade war with U.S. President Donald Trump after meeting with First Nation leaders the previous day. The prime minister and the premiers presented a united front in the face of U.S. tariffs, but revealed little about the negotiations with an Aug. 1 deadline in trade talks fast approaching. The prime minister and the premiers all downplayed the importance of getting a deal done soon to avoid further U.S. tariffs, saying they want the best deal possible regardless of timing. A number of provinces also signed several free trade deals to open up internal trade while others committed to building pipelines to get oil and gas to new markets. The premiers are set to hold a closing press conference this afternoon. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 23, 2025. Liam Casey, The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store