Browse regulations

These are detailed administrative regulations governing the calculation of pensions, contributions, and service credit under Part V of the Defence Services Pension Act. They prescribe specific rules for counting military and public service, computing contributions based on pay and allowances, handling arrears and interest payments, transferring between pension plans, and processing elections for various types of service including wartime and Newfoundland service. The regulations are primarily technical and actuarial, establishing precise mechanisms for administering this specific government pension scheme.

This regulation perpetuates a defined-benefit government pension scheme that creates fiscal liability for taxpayers, distorts labor markets by locking military personnel into government service for retirement benefits, and administers complex redistribution via forced contributions. The elaborate rules for counting service, computing benefits, and transferring between plans are the bureaucratic machinery of a system that should be phased out in favor of personal retirement savings. Even if the underlying pension law remains, these detailed regulations entrench administrative complexity and create compliance burdens with no offsetting social benefit—private pension plans operate with far simpler rules because they face market discipline. The regulation's existence assumes the legitimacy of compulsory pension extraction and promised benefits that bind future generations, violating the principle that individuals should be free to manage their own retirement savings without state-mandated schemes.

Procedural framework for administering federal succession duty, specifying filing deadlines, required forms, consent procedures for asset withdrawals, bond requirements, and valuation tables for estates exceeding $40,000.

Imposes significant compliance costs and emotional burdens on grieving families, interferes with voluntary property transfers, and institutionalizes state expropriation of inherited wealth. Unseen consequences include forced asset liquidation, reduced capital formation, and normalization of government claiming ownership rights over legally acquired property upon death.

These are regulations governing compensation for WWII-era war claims, including maltreatment and property losses, paid from the War Claims Fund established in 1952. Claims had to be filed by November 30, 1954, and involve a complex priority system for payments.

These regulations are completely obsolete and serve no legitimate purpose. The filing deadline expired over 70 years ago (1954), the War Claims Fund would have been exhausted decades ago, and all potential claimants are long deceased. Keeping such historical deadwood on the books creates administrative burden, risks legal misinterpretation, and contributes to regulatory bloat without providing any benefit to Canadians. There is no conceivable scenario where these 1950s-era provisions would apply to any modern situation.

This 1950 regulation designates the Canadian Army Special Force (created for the Korean War) as a special force, excludes its members from the Defence Services Pension Act unless they transferred from regular forces, and provides limited opt-in election provisions with deadlines (some as early as 1956).

Obsolete regulation referencing a temporary force from 1950 with expired election deadlines (1956). Even historically, it created unjust two-tier pension treatment for soldiers serving together based on administrative designation, violating the principle of equal treatment for equal service.

These regulations govern the accommodation and transportation of children of federal employees who live on federal land and are not subject to municipal taxation. The rules cover school placement, fee payments to school authorities, transportation subsidies, and tax-leasing arrangements for federal land used for residential purposes.

Canadians would be worse off if these regulations were deleted because federal employees living on tax-exempt federal land would face barriers to their children's education. Without these provisions, school authorities would lack funding for educating children of non-taxpaying federal employees, and transportation assistance for attending schools outside their municipality would be eliminated, creating educational access disparities for federal employees and their families.

This regulation creates an amnesty period (May 17, 2006 - May 16, 2015) allowing individuals to legally possess non-restricted firearms without registration certificates if they have a valid license, enabling them to regularize their status through registration, deactivation, export, surrender, sale, or other legal dispositions.

This regulation addresses a temporary administrative issue related to firearm registration that has already expired. It creates unnecessary legal complexity for law-abiding citizens who simply need to regularize their firearm status, while imposing costs on taxpayers for enforcement and administration. The market and private sector could handle firearm transfers and disposals more efficiently without this regulatory framework.

Exempts commission-paid salespeople in the Canadian banking industry from specific sections of the Canada Labour Code (overtime, weekly rest, and general holidays provisions).

Creates a two-tier labour system that disadvantages commission salespeople by denying them basic worker protections while providing no clear economic benefit, potentially enabling exploitation and wage suppression in the banking sector.

Airport zoning regulation controlling building heights, land use, and bird hazards in the vicinity of Waterloo Regional Airport to ensure aviation safety

Canadians would be worse off without aviation safety regulations - uncontrolled building heights could cause plane crashes, and bird hazards could lead to bird strikes that endanger lives

Regulations governing complaint procedures before the Public Service Employment Board, including timelines, document requirements, mediation processes, and participation rules for human rights and accessibility commissioners.

Provides essential procedural fairness mechanisms for public service employment complaints that protect both complainants and respondents, ensuring due process in a system where employment rights are at stake.

Defines career transition services, education benefits, and rehabilitation support for veterans, with detailed eligibility criteria, application processes, and financial mechanisms for education, training, and disability-related assistance.

This regulation creates excessive administrative complexity and regulatory burden that likely distorts incentives and reduces effective access to benefits. Detailed eligibility checks, suspension/cancellation clauses, and compliance requirements may inadvertently suppress supply of services and create monopolistic advantages for certain providers, contradicting free-market principles. While supporting veterans is praiseworthy, the regulation's intricate design risks unintended consequences like increased costs, reduced innovation in veteran support services, and procedural barriers that outweigh its intended outcomes.

This regulation extends specific employment provisions (Subsections 132(1) and (2) of the Public Service Employment Act) to all employees in the Crown Corporation Secretariat within the Canada Revenue Agency, which deals with the Royal Canadian Mint and Canada Post Corporation.

It imposes rigid public service employment rules on a specific administrative unit, likely reducing operational flexibility and increasing administrative burden without addressing a clear market failure or protecting fundamental rights. Such staffing constraints distort incentives and increase costs, consistent with the unintended consequences warned of by the referenced economists.

Designates the Musquash Estuary Marine Protected Area in New Brunswick with four zones, prohibiting disturbances to marine life and habitat while permitting specific fishing (including Aboriginal, recreational, commercial), navigation, and limited construction; requires ministerial approval for scientific, educational, or tourism activities.

The hidden costs of this regulation outweigh its benefits: it expropriates property rights without compensation, imposes bureaucratic delays on research and education, displaces fishing pressure to other ecosystems, stifles market-based conservation innovations (e.g., tradable quotas, conservation easements), and substitutes centralized control for local stewardship. These unintended consequences reduce supply, distort incentives, and create economic deadweight loss, while the same conservation outcomes could be achieved more efficiently through existing fisheries and environmental laws.

This regulation document consists entirely of 16 sections, all marked as repealed by SOR/2009-176, section 29. The original content and purpose are not visible in this version; only repeal notations remain.

The regulation is already entirely repealed and therefore obsolete. Maintaining repealed sections in the statute books creates legal uncertainty and administrative burden. The original regulation (whatever its content) has already been lawfully removed, and its continued presence as 'repealed' text serves no useful purpose and may confuse practitioners.

Regulation mandates that publishers provide copies of their publications to the Librarian and Archivist of Canada, including decrypting content, removing access restrictions, and providing necessary software and metadata. Different publication classes have varying requirements (1 copy, 2 copies, or only upon request), with numerous exemptions listed in section 4.

This regulation violates property rights by forcing publishers to surrender copies of their work without compensation. It imposes compliance costs (decryption, software provision, metadata preparation) that burden creators and publishers, especially small operations and digital content producers. Cultural preservation can be achieved through voluntary market transactions or government purchasing using tax revenue, not confiscatory mandates. The regulation stifles innovation by creating disincentives to publish digitally due to technical access requirements.

Document listing sections 1–4 as repealed by SOR/2012‑286, s. 66. Contains no active regulatory provisions.

The regulation is already repealed and has no current effect; maintaining it as an active regulation would create legal uncertainty and waste administrative resources.