Quebec is poised to become the second province in Canada in recent weeks to roll back provincial sales taxes on food-related items, reinforcing a broader truth governments increasingly struggle to defend: taxing food has always been a flawed way to shape consumer behaviour.
Unlike Manitoba, however, Quebec is taking a broader and arguably more pragmatic approach by extending relief to healthier ready-to-eat products and convenience foods.
Quebec is poised to become the second province in Canada in recent weeks to eliminate provincial sales taxes on food-related items. Unlike Manitoba, however, Quebec is taking a broader and arguably more pragmatic approach by extending relief to healthier, ready-to-eat products and convenience foods. That distinction matters. Too often, public policy assumes that only “junk food” is taxed, when in reality many prepared and nutritious options remain subject to provincial sales taxes simply because they are convenient. Quebec’s new measure, expected to cost more than $100 million annually, acknowledges an important reality of modern food consumption: Convenience is no longer a luxury. For many Canadians, it is a necessity.
Short of hoping that Doug Ford would manage to buy himself another luxury vehicle before the Ontario legislature breaks for summer, Opposition Leader Marit Stiles and team have been presumably casting about for an issue that could score them some points during the final stretch of what has been a rocky few weeks for the premier.
She might have just landed on something.
Hunger is being increasingly exploited as a weapon of war with more than 20,000 documented incidents of “food-related violence” in the past eight years, new analysis reveals.
Attacks include 1,261 strikes on markets used by families for daily groceries and 863 incidents in which food distribution systems were targeted and workers killed.
The analysis looked at the period since UN resolution 2417 unanimously condemned the deliberate starvation of civilians in 2018. It found starvation is being increasingly weaponised with the supply of food routinely targeted in Gaza, Sudan, Lebanon and Haiti among others.
Most consumers have heard of shrinkflation. Less quantity, same price. It is highly visible and easy to notice, especially now that everyone carries a smartphone, takes pictures, and collectively compares products online. Consumers have become far more vigilant.
Shrinkflation has long been perceived as a legal, yet deceptive, way to protect margins while quietly reducing value.
But another phenomenon has been unfolding more discreetly, and most consumers barely notice it. It is called “skimpflation.”
For the first time in months, Canadians received a small piece of encouraging news at the grocery store. Food inflation eased in April to 3.5%, down from 4.0% the previous month. Grocery prices specifically, food purchased from stores, rose 3.8% year-over-year, still significantly above Canada’s general inflation rate. More importantly, food inflation has now outpaced overall inflation every single month since March 2025. So while the pace of increase may be slowing, food affordability remains one of the country’s biggest economic frustrations, and consumers know it.
Confusion over best before dates is causing billions of dollars-worth of safe, edible food to be wasted every year in Canada, according to a recent report.
The report from food rescue organization Second Harvest shows $12.3 billion worth of food doesn’t make it to the grocery store shelves or is pulled prematurely due to “arbitrary best before dates.”
“Nobody produces food or makes food or buys food to throw it away, so let’s stop doing that,” said Second Harvest CEO Lori Nikkel.
Does seem more scam than sense.
If there has been an observable trend in recent decades, it is surely that of excessive intervention and a growing willingness of governments to try to replace markets. We have another fine example of this with the latest fashionable idea from the world of municipal politics, notably in Toronto and New York and taken up by the federal NDP: The creation of public grocery stores.
Something very few people are talking about right now is how recycling policy is quietly adding pressure to food inflation in Canada.
For years, Canadians have tried to understand why food inflation has become such a persistent problem. We’ve debated carbon taxes, labour shortages, transportation costs, supply management, exchange rates, climate events, and corporate concentration. All of these factors matter. But another growing source of inflationary pressure has received remarkably little attention: recycling policy.
For years, Canadians were told that catastrophic climate scenarios justified virtually any policy imposed in the name of emissions reductions. In agriculture and food, this translated into mounting costs across the supply chain, escalating industrial carbon pricing, and a policy environment increasingly disconnected from affordability and competitiveness.
Now, quietly, the scientific conversation is evolving.
For years, the food industry assumed Canada’s protein future would be shaped by a dramatic shift toward veganism and strict plant-based eating. That future never arrived. Instead, Canadians have chosen something far more pragmatic and far more disruptive to the market: Flexibility.
The latest Canadian Food Sentiment Index from Dalhousie University’s Agri-Food Analytics Lab, supported by Caddle, shows a remarkable transformation in dietary behaviour among Canadian adults. Omnivorous diets, meaning consumers with no specific dietary restrictions, fell from 67.6% in fall 2024 to 55% in spring 2026.
Canada’s restaurant industry is often treated as a symbol of resilience. Through inflation, lockdowns, labour shortages, and supply chain disruptions, restaurateurs have somehow kept the lights on. But beneath the surface of the latest sales numbers lies a much darker reality: The economics of operating a restaurant in Canada are becoming increasingly untenable.
The R-word looms over the Canadian economy in 2026.
That’s resilience, not recession. Businesses have slogged through trade war uncertainty for more than a year, and the Iran war has generated big increases in fuel costs. Yet the latest numbers tell us the economy delivered modest growth for four straight months, overall inflation remains subdued and the jobless rate has been steady.
Rob Carrick, a columnist for the Globe and Mail, supports the idea of opening government-owned grocery stores on the premise that “we’ve tried everything else and it didn’t work.”
Well, have we?
Interprovincial trade barriers are still there. Supply management is still there.…
— The Food Professor (@FoodProfessor) May 5, 2026
When Health Canada introduced its front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling system — marked by a simple magnifying glass icon highlighting high levels of sodium, sugar or saturated fat— it did so with a clear objective: to empower consumers to make healthier choices quickly, at a glance. But as with most public health interventions, the real question is not intent — it is impact.
The Canadian Cattle Association has launched a petition urging Ottawa to restrict beef imports as trade negotiations with Mercosur — Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay — move forward. These countries are among the world’s lowest-cost beef producers, and a deal could increase the volume of cheaper beef entering Canada.
The concern from producers is understandable. Canadian ranchers are operating in a high-cost environment, facing rising input costs, regulatory pressures, and a tight cattle supply. But the reaction also reveals a deeper issue: Canada’s beef affordability problem is not primarily about imports — it is about structural constraints at home.
