Many Canadians view digital services with a sense of entitlement, often unaware of the value these platforms provide. Simultaneously, there’s a growing perception in Canada that digital services are intrusive or exploitative, especially among those who aren’t entrepreneurial or who don’t engage with these platforms as tools of economic empowerment.
This widespread disconnect becomes problematic when the Canadian government, backed by a population largely unfamiliar with digital economics, imposes a Digital Services Tax (DST). Canadians benefit from these platforms—social media, search engines, digital marketplaces—yet there is little consideration that these are privately owned services. When taxed unfairly, they can be limited, withdrawn, or even blocked entirely.
Facebook’s Exit from Canadian Media
A perfect case study is Meta’s decision to stop displaying Canadian news content on Facebook after the government introduced a revenue-sharing mandate. The intent was to force foreign digital companies to subsidize Canada’s media ecosystem, but it backfired. Google has thus far complied, but questions remain about the sustainability of that decision as similar tensions escalate globally.
This pattern isn’t new. The European Union and Canada have long implemented policies that extract value from U.S. tech giants without contributing meaningfully to innovation themselves. Most disruptive digital innovation has come from the United States and China, with the U.S. leading in sector-creating breakthroughs—think MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, and now TikTok.
Targeting Trump’s Digital Base
It’s important to remember that Donald Trump is closely tied to the Truth Social platform through his company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). Any digital tax Canada imposes on U.S. platforms now has political implications, especially when tied to ongoing trade negotiations with a Trump administration.
U.S. digital lobbying groups, already fed up with excessive global taxation and IP theft from countries like China, now see Canada as yet another jurisdiction unfairly targeting U.S. innovation—despite the fact that Canadians voluntarily use these platforms. This is equivalent to punishing a free service provider for offering value without charging.
Unintended Consequences: Access Denied
Some websites already geo-block access to users from certain countries due to legal or financial risks. If Canada continues this trajectory, there could be widespread blocks on digital platforms for Canadian users. It’s not far-fetched to imagine a scenario where Canadians wake up and find themselves cut off from Facebook, Instagram, or other major platforms. What then?
Moreover, the DST in question is price-sensitive, targeting companies with more than $3 billion in global revenues. Critics argue that it forces American companies to disclose internal financial information to Canadian authorities—a move many see as an infringement on corporate sovereignty and property rights.
Imagine if the U.S. government told a Canadian business: “You made too much money here, so we want to audit your books and take a cut.” It would be seen as an outrageous overreach.
Mark Carney’s Quiet Exit
It’s worth noting that Brookfield Asset Management, the firm formerly associated with Mark Carney, relocated some of its operations outside Canada before Carney entered the political arena. Why? Because businesses have a fiduciary duty to protect investor capital—and remaining in Canada under a potentially hostile policy regime would have violated that duty.
This isn’t speculation—it’s standard business logic. Carney, or at least his board, likely knew what policy shifts were coming. Now, Canada is pursuing tax schemes that even Carney’s former firm sought to avoid.
The Global Pushback Has Already Begun
Even if Donald Trump loses the next election, the Democratic Party is equally interested in ensuring that revenue from digital innovation stays within the U.S. They too are unlikely to let Canada or the EU continue taxing American companies without reciprocal action. Countries like Hungary and Turkey use DSTs ranging from 1.5% to 7.5%—in some cases clearly weaponized for censorship purposes.
In China, most U.S. digital services are outright banned. Ironically, Brookfield—Carney’s former firm—is indebted to Chinese lenders to the tune of billions. This raises further questions about whose interests are being served under Canada’s emerging digital policy regime.
Final Thoughts
Canada’s approach to taxing digital services reflects a broader disrespect for property rights and innovation. The assumption that services should remain available, regardless of taxation or regulation, is naïve. In the worst-case scenario, Canadians could find themselves isolated from the global digital economy—and it would be entirely self-inflicted.
Consider making Jesus Christ your Lord and Savior today.