« Tiff Macklem, retail competition, flexible IT vs NGDPLT | Main | Collateral and the money supply »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I think a helpful addition to this would be to separate out the Health and Social transfers to see what's been happening with that. The shift to equal per capita versions of these has and will mean some changes which I'd be interested in seeing. Equalization is in a somewhat different category.

Wait, Minnesota gets federal transfer payments?!

Just kidding, but seriously, why do you use non-standard province codes for Manitoba and Quebec in your graph?

I don't think that looking at the multi-year trend is directly relevant for judgement. The 14-15 transfer payments reflect a deliberate change of policy from the historical trend, so we should interpret the one-year change separately, not as part of a many-year trend.

Eyeballing Figure 1, PEI, New Brunswick, Québec, and Alberta benefit relative to the previous trend. Newfoundland & Labrador, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan have transfer payments in line with the previous trend (with the caveat that NL had a shock of its own in the 2012 year). Ontario and potentially British Columbia (with flat payments) are the only provinces to lose out compared to the previous trend.

Regardless of the multi-year change, the new Federal policy regime has a differentially beneficial effect on PEI, NB, QC, and AB, with a detrimental effect to ON and to a lesser extent BC. Since the policy is actively changed (rather than the result of straightforward application of long-term-established formulas), it's reasonable to ask the Federal Finance Minister for the justification.

Maybe that justification *is* "Ontario benefited too much from 2010-2013," (i.e. the prior trend was unjust) but that's still worthwhile to have explicitly said.

Oops. "MN" should be "MB" and "QE" should be "QC".

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this site

  • Google

Blog powered by Typepad