Finance Committee on Oct. 1st, 2025

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

This represents 0% of a deficit of approximately $100 billion.

Is that correct?

[Isabelle Demers]

You're the accountant.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

No, I am not an accountant.

[Isabelle Demers]

You're the economist.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

My wife is an accountant, and I have nothing against her or accountants in general.

[Isabelle Demers]

Thank you.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Earlier, you mentioned the advantages of existing homes. Often, the location is chosen first, and then renovation becomes necessary. The fact that some homes have undergone very little renovation sometimes leads to decay and, ultimately, to the loss of rental housing. We are familiar with this dynamic.

However, there is also a need for new supply, which means that construction is necessary to maintain or restore affordability.

In your opinion, what are the main federal barriers to accessing new homes and increasing supply in Quebec?

[Isabelle Demers]

If there were a single answer and a single solution to the housing crisis, we would know it, of course. The problem is multifactorial.

I would say that there are four aspects that need to be addressed.

First, programs need to be improved to make them easier to use and more consistent, both at the federal level and in the provinces, particularly in Quebec.

Second, access to home ownership needs to be promoted through tax and financial measures. The GST rebate is one solution, and the Tax-Free Savings Account for First-Time Home Buyers, or TFSA-FTHB, could also be part of the solution. I also mentioned relaxing the stress test rules and improving the CMHC criteria.

We also need to boost the supply of housing, which may also require that measures be taken. In fact, the announcement regarding the creation of Build Canada Homes is certainly interesting, and this deserves to be explored. It is brand new, but it will allow, for example, for great advances to be made or for more housing to be built.

However, it is not enough to simply build more housing; we must also build better and in a sustainable manner. This means adapting the construction industry to energy efficiency measures. Otherwise, we will be building using techniques or approaches that will soon be obsolete, which will essentially lead to problems in the future.

[The Vice-Chair (Jasraj Hallan), Conservative, Jasraj Singh Hallan]

Thank you. That's time.

We're now on to our second round—a five-minute round.

We'll start with Ms. Cobena.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My questions are for Mr. Moody, given his extensive work on taxation, and are about different groups of Canadians and the impact of the tax cut on them.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer reported that a single senior earning roughly $27,000 will only save about $50 in 2025-26 from this tax cut. Do you agree with that?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

At a high level, yes, because a lot of low-income earners do not pay any tax. At $27,000, they're paying a bit of tax but not a lot, so at a high level, yes.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Do you believe that the $50, which works out to roughly a dollar a week, will have a material impact on a senior citizen who is struggling with affordability?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

Absolutely not. I alluded to that in my opening remarks. Even if you're generous at $400, which is the maximum amount, that's immaterial to most Canadians, frankly.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Now I'll ask about a different group. A single parent earning roughly $50,000 is expected to save about $140 from the tax cut. Do you agree with that?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

At a high level, yes. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but that sounds roughly right.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

The $140 per year works out to roughly three dollars per week. Do you think that this income tax cut would change the life circumstances of that single parent?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

No, obviously not. That's why I think that this is good politics but poor policy.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you.

A senior couple with an income of roughly of $63,000 would then save $150 from the tax cut, which is, again, roughly three dollars per week. Do you think that this amount will meaningfully ease the financial pressures for the senior couple?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

No. Obviously, it will not.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

A family of four who, we learned, spend roughly $17,000 on groceries—which is about $800 more than last year—would save maybe $360 because of this income tax cut.

Do you believe they would be better off because of the income tax cut?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

It's by $360, which is not material.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Offset against the $800 more that they spent over last year, they're actually out $440.

[Kim G. C. Moody]

There are other inflationary measures as well, right?

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

That's right.

Given that this is the signature legislation that the government is putting forward—we've talked about seniors not benefiting meaningfully, as well as single parents, potentially students and unemployed people—what do you think would really be the benefit of this key Liberal affordability plan?

[Kim G. C. Moody]

There's nothing. Frankly, it's an embarrassment if this is their key signature tax policy. It's embarrassing to Canada, and it should be an embarrassment to anybody who understands tax. Unfortunately, not many do.