I’m always confused by these criticisms, do I misunderstand how they work?
Reading this article, this 1.7million is an interest free loan, so taxpayers are only covering the lost potential of that money being used elsewhere, unless something happens whichs exempts them paying back.
For the various EV related plants, the majority of the subsidies are tax rebates. Which means the company needs to setup and actively operating in Canada such that they are making enough revenue in Canada that their paying enough taxes to be able to untalize any rebate. As Canadian taxpayers the tax revenue were missing is purely net-new revenue that wouldn’t exist if the company didn’t setup here. It’s not like we’re writing a blank check, we’re just saying that if they setup here and start making money, they can pay us less money for the first while.
Neither of those feel like obvious bad deals for Canadians. Am I missing something?