Sections 1 and 2 have been repealed by SOR/2006-162, s. 1 and are no longer in force. The original text is not provided, indicating the regulation is defunct.
Obsolete: already repealed, meaning it was unnecessary or harmful. Keeping dead law creates confusion and legal uncertainty with no benefit.
Regulation prescribes specific values for GST/HST purposes on certain tangible personal property: art and jewellery at $2,000, rare books at $2,000, stamps at face value, and coins at zero.
Creates arbitrary thresholds that distort market transactions (e.g., $1,999 vs $2,000 paintings), imposes compliance costs on dealers, and includes a zero valuation for coins that appears to be an unjustified special interest exemption. These distortions misallocate resources and add complexity without achieving a compelling public benefit that cannot be obtained through simpler, uniform rules.
Regulation sections 1-3 have been repealed by SOR/2006-230, section 4. No substantive provisions remain.
Already repealed due to its flaws; keeping it would waste administrative resources and cause legal confusion.
These regulations impose height restrictions and land use limitations on properties surrounding Chatham Airport to ensure safe aircraft operations. The rules establish imaginary surfaces (approach, outer, transitional) around the airport and prohibit any buildings, structures, or objects from exceeding these surfaces. They also ban activities that could interfere with aircraft communications or attract birds (waste disposal). The Minister can require removal of excessive natural growth. The regulated area is precisely defined by metes and bounds covering lands adjacent to the airport.
This regulation prevents catastrophic third-party harm: one landowner's building or land use could cause aircraft crashes killing hundreds. Unlike typical regulations that distort markets for marginal social goals, this addresses a clear, physical externality with direct, immediate consequences. Alternatives like liability lawsuits or private bargaining fail because accident victims cannot sue after death, and coordination among hundreds of affected landowners would be impossible. The restrictions are narrowly tailored to specific altitude limits based on aviation safety standards, not open-ended discretion. Canadians would be far worse off without it—the regulatory cost is tiny compared to lives lost from preventable aviation accidents.
This regulation establishes zoning controls around Thompson Airport in Manitoba to protect aviation safety by restricting building heights and land use near the airport. It defines approach surfaces, outer surfaces, and transitional surfaces that limit construction heights, and prohibits bird-attracting waste disposal on affected lands.
This is a classic example of regulatory overreach that imposes significant costs on property owners without clear evidence of safety benefits. The height restrictions effectively devalue nearby properties and restrict development rights without compensation. Modern aviation technology and airport operations can accommodate safer approaches through voluntary agreements and market-based solutions rather than blanket restrictions that harm local property rights and economic development. The bird waste disposal ban is similarly paternalistic - property owners can be held liable for negligence without needing blanket prohibitions.
Airport zoning regulation establishing imaginary airspace surfaces (approach, outer, transitional) around Chesterfield Inlet Airport. Prohibits construction of buildings/structures that penetrate these elevation-defined surfaces within a 4,000m radius of the airport reference point.
Prevents physical harm to third parties - an obstruction can cause aircraft crashes that kill passengers and people on the ground. This addresses a clear negative externality where property use creates direct, life-threatening hazards to others. While tort liability could theoretically deter such obstructions, aviation accidents are irreversible; ex ante prevention is justified under the non-aggression principle. The regulation provides objective, predictable boundaries rather than discretionary control.
Sets a $435 fee for applications to the Canadian Heraldic Authority for grants of coats of arms, with payment instructions.
This fee-for-service regulation for a ceremonial function imposes no meaningful restrictions on liberty, property, or trade. Deleting it would not improve economic freedom or reduce regulatory burden in any substantial way, though one could question whether the state should be in this business at all; its current operation at full cost recovery through user fees creates neither distortions nor significant taxpayer burden.
The Secondary Lead Smelter Release Regulations set maximum allowable emissions of particulate matter and lead content from secondary lead smelting operations, with specific concentration limits for different furnace types, storage restrictions, malfunction allowances, and mandatory monitoring and reporting to the Minister.
Deletion would likely increase lead emissions, exposing Canadians—especially children—to a potent neurotoxin causing irreversible harm. The regulation's enforceable standards address a classic externality that market mechanisms alone cannot control, as victims are diffuse and timing of harm is delayed, making tort remedies impractical.
These regulations establish a legal framework for determining prisoner-of-war status for detainees in Canadian Forces custody, creating tribunals to assess entitlement under international humanitarian law and providing procedural safeguards including hearings, representation, and review mechanisms.
This regulation provides essential legal protections for detainees under international humanitarian law, ensuring proper determination of prisoner-of-war status which affects treatment, rights, and legal obligations. The procedural safeguards prevent arbitrary detention and ensure compliance with Geneva Conventions, which would be difficult to achieve through ad-hoc military decision-making.
Heritage Railway Stations Regulations establish a bureaucratic process for railway companies to modify heritage railway stations, requiring public notice, municipal notifications, and applications to the Minister of Environment, with a 60-day filing deadline and 60-day objection period.
Creates costly delays and bureaucratic hurdles for railway infrastructure improvements without clear evidence of protecting heritage value. The process imposes unnecessary administrative burden on railway companies, discourages beneficial modifications, creates uncertainty for property owners, and centralizes decision-making without demonstrable preservation benefits.
This Order grants privileges and immunities to the OECD in Canada, including legal capacity for the organization and diplomatic protections for representatives of member states, officials, and experts, based on the UN Convention framework.
Without these privileges, the OECD could not function independently in Canada, depriving the country of valuable economic research, policy coordination, and international cooperation that enhance prosperity and competitiveness. The immunities are standard and necessary for any international organization to operate free from local political interference; removing them would undermine Canada's ability to participate in and influence multilateral economic governance aligned with free-market principles.
These regulations require owners of mines, oil wells, or gas wells located within 50 meters of railway lines to provide 60 days written notice to the railway company and the Railway Safety Directorate before constructing, altering, or operating. The notice must include plans, descriptions, threat assessments, and safety measures. The regulation prohibits operations that threaten railway safety and allows railway companies to escalate unresolved threats to the Minister.
Without this regulation, mining operations near railways could impose catastrophic risks on train passengers and railway infrastructure through explosions, ground instability, or fires. The notification requirement leverages the railway company's specialized knowledge of its operations at minimal compliance cost. Deleting it would shift from proactive harm prevention to reactive liability after damage occurs, violating the principle that one's liberty ends where it threatens others' safety.
The Notice of Railway Works Regulations require advance notification for railway construction/alteration projects, including 60-day notice periods, detailed technical information submission, and notification to municipalities, railway companies, and affected property owners. The regulations cover railway lines, bridges, tunnels, road crossings, and drainage-impacting works.
These regulations create bureaucratic delays and compliance costs that discourage infrastructure investment and maintenance. The 60-day notice requirement and mandatory stakeholder notifications impose fixed costs on all railway projects, disproportionately affecting smaller operators. The regulatory framework stifles timely safety improvements and modernization efforts by requiring extensive pre-approval processes for even minor alterations, ultimately reducing railway network efficiency and capacity.
Regulation establishes safety zones around Rimouski Airport prohibiting structures exceeding defined approach/outer/transitional surfaces, requiring removal of overgrown vegetation penetrating these surfaces, and banning waste disposal that attracts birds—all to prevent obstructions and bird strikes endangering aircraft.
Protecting public safety from catastrophic aircraft crashes justifies overriding property rights. The regulation uses precise, engineering-based standards to address clear physical dangers (obstructions, bird strikes). Private alternatives (tort, insurance) fail at ex ante prevention—they compensate after harm occurs but cannot reliably prevent loss of life. The narrow, non-arbitrary design achieves safety outcomes that market mechanisms would struggle to replicate without a uniform standard.
Airport zoning regulations establishing protected airspace zones around Moncton Airport to ensure aviation safety through height restrictions, approach surfaces, and land use controls in surrounding areas
Canadians would be worse off without these regulations as they prevent dangerous obstructions to flight paths, maintain safe approach corridors for aircraft, and protect critical aviation infrastructure. The height restrictions and land use controls are essential for preventing mid-air collisions, ensuring emergency landing capabilities, and maintaining the airport's operational safety that serves thousands of passengers annually.