Browse regulations

This regulation establishes a list of specific chemical products (Corexit® EC9500A and Corexit® EC9580A) as the defined 'spill-treating agents' under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act, effectively limiting legal recognition to these two products.

Restricts competition and innovation by legally recognizing only two specific products as spill-treating agents, creating a barrier to entry for alternative products that may be more effective or affordable. This product-specific listing increases costs, reduces choice, and embodies regulatory capture, contrary to free-market principles.

Regulation establishes a fire safety standard requiring cigarettes to self-extinguish, limiting burn length to no more than 25% of the cigarette when tested according to ISO standard 12863 on 10 layers of filter paper. Applies to all cigarette brands with exemptions for research and laboratory testing.

Fire protection is a legitimate core government function. Cigarette-ignited fires cause substantial property damage and loss of life; the regulation addresses this externality efficiently through a technical standard. Private alternatives (insurance, market incentives) would be less effective given dispersed victims and information asymmetries. The cost is minimal (testing compliance) and the benefit is preventing fires that harm non-smokers and property. Removing it would impose uncompensated risks on third parties.

All provisions have been repealed (SI/2016-34, s. 22.01; section 9.07 earlier by SI/94-102, s. 4). The regulation no longer has any legal effect.

Obsolete repeal adds no cost to society. Maintaining repealed statutes creates confusion, legal uncertainty, and wastes regulatory space. Deleting it streamlines the statute book without affecting any rights or obligations.

This document lists multiple regulations that have been revoked (repealed) as recorded in Canada Gazette Part I, Volume 151, page 1507. No active regulatory text is present—only revocation notices.

The regulation is already repealed/obsolete. It no longer has any legal effect, so reviewing its merits is an empty exercise. Maintaining such dead letter references in the codex wastes administrative resources and creates confusion; full deletion from active registers is appropriate.

This bilateral social security agreement between Canada and China coordinates pension program coverage for workers who move between the two countries. It specifies which country's social security legislation applies to employed persons, self-employed persons, detached employees, and government workers to prevent double coverage and gaps. It establishes information sharing, document exemptions, and dispute resolution mechanisms between Canadian and Chinese authorities.

This agreement expands bureaucratic coordination between states, treating citizens as subjects of government systems rather than free individuals. It institutionalizes cross-border mandatory pension contributions and information sharing, reducing personal autonomy and future policy flexibility. The desired coordination could be achieved through private contracts, portability options in pension plans, or voluntary bilateral agreements between insurers without state intervention. The administrative burden and data sharing requirements represent a cost to liberty that outweighs any marginal coordination benefits.

Annual report requirement for Canada Revenue Agency to inform Parliament about its administration of tax laws, finances, and performance

Transparency and accountability mechanisms are essential for a powerful tax-collecting agency; deleting this would reduce Parliamentary and public oversight with minimal cost savings from the reporting itself

Regulation mandating specific industry standards and compliance processes for licensure, including mandatory training hours, facility inspections, and documentation requirements.

Restricts market entry through compliance burdens that disproportionately favor established firms, stifles competition by increasing operational costs, and creates artificial barriers to entrepreneurship. The stated goal of consumer safety could be achieved more efficiently through voluntary certification markets and insurance mechanisms without regulatory mandates.

Bilateral tax treaty between Canada and Spain updating double taxation rules, reducing withholding tax rates, expanding definitions, and adding information exchange provisions

Tax treaties facilitate cross-border trade and investment by preventing double taxation. This agreement reduces withholding taxes, clarifies definitions, and establishes mutual assistance mechanisms that benefit Canadian businesses and citizens engaging with Spain. Deleting it would harm international commerce and increase tax compliance costs.

A bilateral tax treaty between Canada and New Zealand that establishes rules to avoid double taxation on cross-border income and prevent fiscal evasion. It defines tax residency, permanent establishment criteria, and allocates taxing rights over various income types (business profits, dividends, interest, royalties) between the two countries, generally allowing taxation only in the source state or residence state with limited withholding tax rates.

Deletion would subject cross-border economic activity to double taxation, harming Canadian businesses and investors operating in New Zealand and vice versa. This treaty reduces tax-induced distortions in international capital and service flows, providing certainty that encourages trade and investment. While complex, these coordination rules are hard to replicate unilaterally—without them, Canadians face higher effective tax burdens on foreign income and potential disputes with multiple taxing authorities, reducing competitiveness and prosperity.

Procedural rules governing criminal proceedings in Manitoba's Court of Queen's Bench, covering filing requirements, service of documents, pre-trial conferences, case management, and court administration with specific formatting, timing, and confidentiality provisions.

Without these rules, Manitoba's criminal justice system would descend into chaos—unpredictable procedures, endless delays, and prohibitive costs. They provide the essential framework for fair, efficient, and accessible justice, protecting due process while minimizing unnecessary expense, precisely aligning with the principle that liberty depends on an orderly, functional rule of law.

Remission order for unauthorized payments to Canadian Forces members and related parties, totaling $147,487,513 including interest, covering various expenses from 1999-2011 including separation expenses, travel, lodging, and special allowances

Creates moral hazard by retroactively approving unauthorized payments, undermining fiscal discipline and accountability in military compensation. The regulation effectively rewards accounting errors and prevents proper oversight of public funds, setting a dangerous precedent for future unauthorized expenditures.

Procedural regulation governing Court of Québec operations, including filing formats, office hours, record-keeping, hearing decorum, dress codes, technology use, and case management. Establishes detailed administrative requirements for parties, lawyers, and judges to ensure efficient administration of justice.

Deletion would undermine the court's ability to function predictably and efficiently, causing chaos, delays, and higher litigation costs. The regulation provides essential standardization that protects access to justice, maintains decorum, safeguards confidential information, and ensures fair procedures. While it imposes some compliance burdens, these are outweighed by the systemic benefits of a well-ordered judiciary. The built-in judicial discretion to modify rules allows needed flexibility, making this framework indispensable for a functioning justice system that upholds property rights and contracts—foundations of liberty and prosperity.

This regulation document consists of sections 1-4 that have been repealed by Statutory Instrument SI/2016-29, section 5. The original content and purpose of these sections is no longer in effect.

The regulation has already been repealed (SI/2016-29, s. 5), making it legally irrelevant and obsolete. Maintaining repealed regulations in the active regulatory framework creates confusion, wastes administrative resources, and violates principles of regulatory clarity and efficiency.

The document contains only references to repealed sections (SOR/2016-192, s. 9), with no active regulatory provisions.

Already repealed; no current regulatory burden or relevance.

All sections of this regulation were repealed in 2016 and are not in effect.

Keeping repealed regulations in the books creates legal confusion, imposes unnecessary compliance costs on businesses who must verify their status, and wastes government resources maintaining obsolete text.