Northern Economist 2.0
Thursday, 23 January 2025
Sorting Out Thunder Bay's 2025 Municipal Budget
Sunday, 19 January 2025
Trump, Tariffs, The Economy and (Northern Ontario)
If tomorrow indeed brings the onset of US President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Canadian exports, there will be an impact on Canada’s, Ontario ‘s as well as northern Ontario’s economy. Ontario’s trade and investment profile shows that it exports hundreds of billions of dollars accounting for 36 percent of Canadian exports and of those the lion’s share – 85 percent go to the United States. The largest exports are motor vehicles and gold with the two in 2021 representing 20 percent of Ontario’s exports. Indeed, resource-based goods as a share of Ontario exports have grown over the last twenty years and account for about ten percent of Ontario’s exports.
Lumber, pulp paper and allied products are of course well-known traditional regional exports and the remains of the industry that weathered the forest sector crisis continues to export much of its output to the United States. Approximately two-thirds of Canada’s lumber is exported and of that, over 80 percent goes to the United states. Gold, along with nickel, palladium and nickel are mined in northern Ontario with major markets in the United States also. The United States imports about half of Canada’s nickel production and Ontario accounts for nearly 40 percent of Canada’s nickel production. And aside from the large resource producers, an array of northern Ontario business in general also export to the United States. At least one somewhat dated survey of northern Ontario businesses found that half of business sales were outside northern Ontario. Of those sales, half in turn were to the rest of Ontario while about 12 percent of sales (or just over 20 percent of exports outside the region) were to the United States.
It stands to reason that a broad-based tariff on those exports will have an impact on resource production and activity in the region. For Canada as a whole, there are any number of alarming estimates. For example, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce has estimated that a 25 percent tariff across the board on all US imports could “push Canada’s economy into recession” by shrinking GDP 2.6 percent. Scotiabank has estimated that:
“U.S. GDP could decline by roughly 0.2% for each 5% increase in tariffs, while Canada could see sharper declines of up to 1.1% with full retaliation or 0.8% with no retaliation. These losses of economic activity are higher the higher the tariffs are. Under 25% tariffs, albeit we don’t think this a plausible scenario, the loss of U.S. GDP could increase to up to 0.9%, and up to 5.6% in Canada with full retaliation or 3.8% without.” (Perrault et al., Rules of Thumb for Estimating the Impact of U.S. Tariffs on Canada, Scotiabank Nov 28, 2024).
However, the extent of employment and income impacts from a fall in our exports depends on the size of the tariffs, the sectors affected, the effects on the value of the Canadian dollar (a depreciation would counter the tariffs effect on exports but also make our imports from the US more expensive) and most importantly, just how vital those exports are to the United States in terms of their elasticity of demand. If the tariffs are across the board, then all US imports will rise in price given that cheaper substitutes will not be immediately available. If the goal is to favour domestic US producers, it will take time to ramp up their production capacity and in the case of resource products, if they are importing half of their oil from Canada and large proportions of their other mineral and energy requirements, it is because they are unable to meet their own needs. And of course, there is the possible political push back from US consumers if the price they pay on goods with a large Canadian export content goes up dramatically.
In the case of northern Ontario, the short-term effects will be mitigated by public sector activity. For example, in major urban centres like Thunder Bay and Sudbury, a lot of employment is already either directly public sector or is based on economic activity from government contracts. For example, Thunder Bay is in the midst of a construction boom driven by government housing money and a new provincial jail, and its transit car manufacturing just received another government funding boost. The long-term is another matter if the country and province go into recession.
So, we will have to wait and see what the ultimate impact will be. The more curious question is why President Trump is so set on such tariffs given the damage they will inevitably inflict on the economy of America’s closest ally and trading partner as well as the American consumer in general. My guess is he is gambling that Canadian exporters may lower their prices to maintain competitiveness and market share in the face of American tariffs thereby sparing American consumers much hard ship. Combined with this will be the inevitable further depreciation of our dollar that will also make our exports to the United States cheaper. The tariff revenue is probably expected to compensate for the drop in income tax revenues given that Trump wants to implement income tax cuts. And, inevitably with tariffs, more companies will relocate their operations from Canada and Mexico back to the United States thereby creating jobs for Americans.
Is this indeed Trump's master plan? We shall see.
Wednesday, 15 January 2025
Housing Starts: Sudbury and Thunder Bay
Housing availability and affordability remain amongst the most pressing issues in current public policy and the north's major urban centers are no exception given the rise in the average price of housing as well as rents. In response to provincial and federal incentives, both Greater Sudbury and Thunder Bay have seen a ramping up of housing activity. By late 2024, Thunder Bay had issued 310 building permits and 241 shovel ready housing starts were in progress and as a result had exceeded the housing targets set for 2024. Greater Sudbury has also seen an increase in housing activity with 2023 the strongest year in a five year period and by late 2024 had seen 610 housing starts of which nearly two thirds were rental units.
For both communities, 2024 marks a departure from recent performance given that Statistics Canada data suggests that for 2023, total housing starts were 263 in Greater Sudbury and 193 in Thunder Bay. However, as impressive as the current ramping up may be, a glance at historical performance suggests that there is still a ways to go if current construction efforts are able to match those of yesteryear. Figure 1 plots annual total housing starts from Statistics Canada (Series v42127460 andv42127445) for Greater Sudbury and Thunder Bay from 1972 to 2023 and for both communities recent housing start total are nowhere near the peaks achieved in either the 1970s or 1980s. Over the 1972 to 2023 period, Thunder Bay's peak was 1,620 housing starts in 1977 while Sudbury's best year was 1991 when it saw 1,758 housing starts.
The period since 2000 is particularly flat for Thunder Bay with the best year being 2012 which saw 380 housing starts while Greater Sudbury peaked in 2011 at 595 starts. And while the 1980s and 1990s were marked by stagnant population growth rates, the period since 2000 has seen some population growth (See Figure 2, Data source: Statistics Canada). Between 2001 and 2023, Greater Sudbury grew from 165,532 people to 185,230 - an increase of nearly 12 percent. Thunder Bay has not done as well on the population growth front but nevertheless still grew by 3 percent of the last period. A larger population but lower housing starts relative to the past means that population adjusted housing starts remain lackluster relative to even the recent past since 2000. In 2012, for example, Thunder Bay managed 300 starts per 100,000 population while in 2011, Greater Sudbury was at just over 350 starts per 100,000. By comparison, 2023 saw both communities at just under 150 starts per 100,000 population. While 2024 was better even on a population adjusted basis, it remains that neither community appears able to construct at rates approaching those of the 1970s and 1980s.
This is of course not just a northern Ontario affliction. In Canada as a whole but Ontario in particular, the last 50 years have seen an increase in assorted regulations and requirements that make rapid project approvals and construction harder to do. And, new homes built today - with the exception of apartment and condo units - at least anecdotally, often seem to be larger than they were in the past which all things given could also take more time. Combined with higher land prices, it is understandable that construction today is likely not to approach the rates of the 1970s. Then there is the fact that populations were much younger in the 1970s and 1980s meaning that labour was more abundant compared to shortages today especially in areas like skilled trades. The result is a definite slowdown in our ability to meet both demand and need.
Friday, 20 December 2024
Federal Finances in Review
The last week has been a chaotic one in Ottawa given the resignation of the finance minister on the eve of the Federal Economic and Fiscal Statement (FES), the turmoil over the Prime Minister’s leadership and the ongoing verbal assaults of President-elect Trump on Canadian sovereignty. Nonetheless, lost in all of this is that after a considerable delay, there has finally been an update to Canada’s Fiscal Reference Tables (FRT) and Figures 1-4 here provide an overview of both the past (1966-67 to 2023-24) as laid out in the FRT and the future (2024-25 to 2028-29) such as it is laid out in the FES.
Figure 1 provides a nice snapshot of the federal fiscal footprint – the federal spending to GDP ratio. Over the period of this chart, the federal footprint reached a maximum of 25.6 percent in 2020-21 during the pandemic. This was of a course an outlier year and if one takes this out, one nevertheless notices that from a low of 13.9 percent in 2013-14, the federal fiscal footprint has gradually drifted upwards notwithstanding the pandemic and in 2022-24 stood at 17 percent. While not at the level of the 1980s when it exceeded 20 percent, it remains that the federal fiscal footprint both in 2023-24 and going forward to 2028-29 is the largest it has been since the late 1990s and marks a calculated expansion of federal public sector size relative to GDP.
Part of this rising expenditure has been financed via borrowing and in 2023-24 the deficit stood at nearly $62 billion. From 2023-24 to 2028-29, Canada is forecast to accumulate another $242 billion dollars in deficits bringing the national net debt to $1.549 trillion by 2028-29. Figure 2 plots the deficit to GDP ratio, and it stands at nearly 2 percent for 2023-24 and is forecast to drop to 0.7 percent by 2028-29 – assuming of course that given the deficits projected, nominal GDP growth proceeds at 4 percent annually. Given the slowdown in the economy that appears to be underway and the likely imposition of US tariffs in 2025, this would appear to be an exceptionally rosy GDP growth forecast.
Figure 3 plots the net debt to GDP ratio, and it began to take a definite upward path starting in 2019-20 when it went to 37 percent from 33 percent the year previous. It peaked at just over 44 percent in 2022-23 and is only going to come down slowly to about 42 percent by 2028-29. Now, while up by recent standards, it is nowhere near where it was during the federal fiscal crisis of the 1990s. Yet, the debt is mounting, and interest rates are higher than they were during the debt and spending spiral of the pandemic and so debt service costs have gone up.
In 2019-20, debt service costs were $24.4 billion representing about 7 percent of federal revenues that year. For 2024-25 they are anticipated to be more than double at $53.7 billion or 10.8 percent of federal revenues. By 2028-29, it is projected that annual debt service costs will reach $66.3 billion or 11.3 percent of federal revenues. As Figure 4 illustrates, we are again nowhere near the numbers of the federal fiscal crisis when well over 30 percent of federal revenues went to service the debt. At the same time, we appear to have settled at a plateau over 10 percent for the foreseeable future and that is money better spent on programs.
In her resignation letter, the outgoing finance minister appeared to have a fiscal epiphany as she noted the need to keep our fiscal powder dry to face the economic challenges coming down the pipeline. The trends of the last few years suggest that there has been a certain dampness to federal fiscal powder for the last few years that is expected to persist into the future. While there is still fiscal room to manoeuvre, a large recessionary shock will quickly erode that room given the gradual enrichment of long-term federal spending via assorted initiatives over the last decade as illustrated by the federal expenditure to GDP ratio. This suggests that dealing with a major recession will be more challenging that it would have been a decade ago.
Wednesday, 4 December 2024
Thunder Bay’s Economy: The Year Past and the Year Ahead
Well, it is nearly year’s end and for Thunder Bay, time for a retrospective on economic things past as well as a brief look ahead. Thunder Bay has had a particularly good year given that population is growing, construction is up, and the Port is doing the best it has in years. The really big driver in Thunder Bay this past year would have to be the construction sector given the continuing construction of the new more than one-billion-dollar provincial prison as well as substantial rental accommodation construction. In the case of the jail, as the Conference Board noted in its November 2024 Metropolitan Report on Thunder Bay’s economy: “Work on the jail really helps.” Think about it, Thunder Bay’s GDP is just shy of $6 billion. A project the size of the jail represents a massive distortionary shock to the local economy.
There are many workers who are commuting to Thunder Bay for the construction work or commuting through Thunder Bay to work at the mines and this has helped buoy demand for accommodation and services this year. Indeed, local employment is up as well having grown from about 61,200 workers in 2021 to 63,700 by 2024 and is projected to reach nearly 65,000 in 2025 as current activity continues. And our CMA population is indeed up also and now expected to be well over 130,000. However, 65,000 seems to be the upper end of our new “post forest sector crisis employment range.” Prior to the forest sector crisis in the early 2000s, our employment used to fluctuate between 65,000 and 70,000. There has been a permanent downsizing of local employment. Even the Conference Board has noted that: “Despite the run-up, employment remains below the 2003 all-time summit of 65,500 workers.”
Given the reliance on construction, the real concern is moving into 2026 to 2027 when the provincial jail construction winds up given the massive scale of the project. The projection for housing starts coming from the Conference Board suggest an annual flow of less than 200 new starts a year for the foreseeable future. While the Art Gallery and the proposed Turf Facility may take up some of the construction slack as the jail project winds down, neither of those projects are of comparable scale to the jail project. If there is a silver lining to this, it is that local homeowners might finally be able to get a hold of a local tradesman to do their repairs and renovations.
By the end of next year, the full impact of changes to international student visas will also have emerged which will more fully affect the local post-secondary sector as well as local retailers that rely on international student labour. Should the currently lagging lithium and critical mineral projects finally emerge by this period, then they will likely help take up the economic slack. Unfortunately, at present with the sales of electric vehicles slowing, it appears that demands for regional lithium development may have stalled for the time being. As well, the demand for forest sector products remains weak. Indeed, when it comes to GDP growth, the Conference Board notes that: “Thunder Bay’s real GDP has essentially stagnated against this sombre backdrop. It is on tap to ease by 0.2 per cent in 2024, after rising only 0.1 per cent in 2023. We expect 2.0 per cent growth in 2025. Local GDP growth will ease to 1.2 per cent in 2026 and 0.7 per cent in 2027, then return to 1.2 per cent in 2028”.
And then there is of course what the impact of President Trump and the proposed tariffs may be on the local economy. It is of course unclear what the impact of tariffs might be unless they are also applied to regional natural resource products. There are industries in our area that ship to the U.S. including wood and paper products, and minerals and a slowdown here may also impact the Port of Thunder Bay. However, the incoming US President is more of a known quantity this time around and the evidence is that he is quite transactional with much of his behaviour designed to stake out bargaining positions. Canadians should be prepared to wheel and deal. It will be a tumultuous year to be sure with President Trump sending out assorted signals about how he feels about Canada.