Browse regulations

Governs replenishment of a debt reserve fund for First Nations Fiscal Management Authority borrowing members when defaults occur, requiring non-defaulting members to contribute based on their share of total unpaid loans to cover shortfalls attributable to defaulters.

Creates moral hazard by forcing non-defaulting members to subsidize defaults, undermining market discipline and individual responsibility; the cross-subsidization scheme distorts incentives, increases costs, and represents an involuntary redistribution that violates free market principles.

Regulation mandates that the commissioner under subsection 20(3) of the First Nations Fiscal Management Act must be appointed by the Indigenous Law Centre at the University of Saskatchewan, and comes into force upon registration.

It prescribes a specific appointing entity rather than setting performance standards, creating a government monopoly that stifles competition and innovation. This design-based regulation adds bureaucratic rigidity without clear benefit, preventing more efficient or higher-quality appointment mechanisms from emerging through market or decentralized processes.

This is the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation's application by-law, setting forth exhaustive documentation, disclosure, and approval requirements for financial institutions seeking deposit insurance coverage. It mandates extensive information about ownership structure, directors/officers backgrounds, financial statements, business plans, capital, litigation, governance practices, and numerous consents for information sharing with regulators and the Bank of Canada.

This regulation imposes prohibitive barriers to entry that protect incumbent banks from competition, stifling innovation and entrepreneurial entry into financial services. The extensive documentation, 3-year business plan forecasts, and centralized approval process substitute bureaucratic judgment for market discipline, creating a licensing system that determines who may participate in banking. Worse, it reinforces the government-guaranteed deposit insurance system that generates moral hazard—encouraging risky behavior because deposits are protected. The unseen costs include reduced competition, higher fees, less financial diversity, and delayed or blocked access to better services for Canadians. True stability comes from transparent private arrangements and market-based risk pricing, not central planning of who may serve depositors.

This regulation prescribes季度 interest rates for various tax-related transactions under the Excise Tax Act. It defines a 'basic rate' based on 3-month Treasury Bill yields and adds premiums: +4% for amounts payable to/from the Receiver General, +2% for amounts payable to individuals, and no premium for corporations. Sections 3 and 4 are already repealed. The regulation is retroactive to July 1, 2003.

This technical schedule imposes unnecessary regulatory complexity for mechanical interest rate calculations that could be handled more efficiently through primary legislation or administrative discretion. The differential treatment—paying corporations only the basic rate while adding 2% for individuals—appears arbitrary and potentially distortionary. The unseen cost is perpetuating a rigid, specialized formula rather than allowing market-based rates to apply uniformly or enabling simpler, more transparent adjustments. Repealing it would reduce regulatory clutter without compromising fiscal administration, as interest calculations could be managed through standard financial management frameworks or judicial determination where disputes arise.

This regulation sets prescribed interest rates for payments to/from the Receiver General under the Excise Act, 2001, based on Treasury Bill yields plus fixed percentages, with different rates for government vs. taxpayer payments and corporate vs. individual recipients.

Canadians would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it ensures fair, market-based interest rates for tax payments and refunds, preventing arbitrary government-set rates that could disadvantage taxpayers or reduce government revenue predictability.

The regulation document indicates all sections (1-3) have been repealed by SOR/2009-230. No current operative provisions exist; original purpose is unknown from this excerpt.

Keeping repealed text creates costs: confusion, potential legal misinterpretation, and unnecessary administrative burden. The repeal itself signals prior recognition of the regulation's flaws or obsolescence.

Temporary one-year exemption from Species at Risk Act protections for white sturgeon in four river populations, allowing continued recreational fishing, Indigenous food/social/ceremonial fishing, and habitat disruption authorizations under the Fisheries Act.

The exemption permits habitat destruction and overharvesting of a species at risk, risking irreversible population collapse, loss of biodiversity, and setting a precedent for weakening species protections. Short-term economic gains are outweighed by long-term ecological and economic costs, including ecosystem degradation and future recovery expenses.

These regulations have been repealed and are no longer in effect. The repeal occurred in 2012 under SOR/2012-286, section 65.

Regulations are already repealed and obsolete. Repealed regulations create unnecessary complexity and burden by remaining in legal code, even though they no longer have any effect.

This regulation mandates port authorities to implement licensing systems requiring truck operators to adhere to a 2005 Memorandum of Agreement with the Vancouver Container Truckers' Association, effectively mandating collective bargaining and arbitration processes while exempting these arrangements from Competition Act constraints. It applies to the Port of Vancouver and Port of Fraser River for a 90-day period.

This regulation distorts market competition by forcing port authorities to implement cartel-like licensing systems that mandate union agreements, suppress price competition, and restrict entry for independent truckers. It creates artificial barriers to trade at Canada's major ports, increases shipping costs, and violates principles of free association by compelling businesses to adhere to collective agreements they may not want. The temporary nature and emergency justification suggest it's a short-term political fix rather than sound policy, with lasting negative effects on port efficiency and economic freedom.

A remission order granting customs duty refunds to specific companies for specific products imported for processing during a specified year, with claims required by December 31, 2008.

Keeping this obsolete order imposes administrative costs, distorts competition by granting unwarranted advantages to specific firms, encourages rent-seeking, and violates equal treatment principles. Even if renewed, such targeted subsidies misallocate resources and create perverse incentives.

These are provisions that were repealed under SOR/2011-237, section 15. They are no longer in force.

Already repealed; these provisions are obsolete and have no legal effect.

This regulation establishes the framework for registering, labeling, and controlling pest control products in Canada under the Pest Control Products Act. It defines terms, prescribes what constitutes a pest control product (including devices, treated articles, and active ingredients), provides exemptions (e.g., for certain medical devices, limited personal imports, and products under other Acts), sets safety information requirements for exports, permits specific unregistered activities, designates product classes, and outlines application requirements. The regulation aims to protect health and the environment while enabling commerce through a risk-based licensing system.

The regulation imposes a massive compliance burden that stifles innovation, raises consumer costs, and creates unnecessary barriers to market entry. It requires extensive testing, labeling, and certification for products that could be safely managed through liability law and existing consumer protection frameworks. The exhaustive prescription of what constitutes a 'pest control product' captures trivial items (like treated seed or antimicrobial preservatives) that pose minimal risk, subjecting them to costly registration. The complexity drives skilled workers to the US, increases housing and healthcare costs through reduced supply of effective products, and creates interprovincial trade friction. Many provisions duplicate other regulatory regimes (Food and Drugs Act, Medical Devices Regulations) without adding safety, creating wasteful overlap. The net effect is reduced competitiveness, higher prices, and constrained access to potentially beneficial technologies, all while achieving safety outcomes that private standards and tort law could handle more efficiently.

This Order extends by one year the assessment deadline for three wildlife species under the Species at Risk Act, from June 5, 2006: Lake Erie water snake, Blackfin cisco, and Deepwater sculpin (Great Lakes population). It is a procedural time extension for governmental status evaluations.

This amendment expired in 2007 and has no current legal effect. Keeping expired regulations bloats the statute book, creates confusion, and imposes unnecessary maintenance costs. Repealing obsolete provisions streamlines the regulatory corpus without any practical consequence.

Regulation establishes special employment rules for 11 positions (00025450-00025460) in the Governor General's office, excluding them from the Public Service Employment Act but providing limited dismissal protections, notice requirements, and automatic termination upon change of Governor General.

Creates unnecessary regulatory complexity for a tiny ceremonial office, restricts managerial flexibility, and could perpetuate inefficiency through dismissal constraints. The marginal benefit of special rules for these 11 positions does not justify added bureaucracy and reduced accountability.

Regulates vehicle and pedestrian traffic on the land side of Canadian airports, including parking, speed limits, licensing requirements, and enforcement by airport operators and designated officers, with penalties for violations.

Airports require traffic management for safety and efficiency; without these regulations, chaos would ensue with conflicting local traffic laws, no standardized enforcement, and potential safety hazards from unregulated vehicle and pedestrian movement near aircraft operations.