Elbows up: Keeping Canadian companies in Canadian hands | Policy Options

During the Blue Jays’ historic and, subsequently, gut-wrenching run, apparel sales for the team soared across Canada as fans flocked to shell out cash to show their support. Maybe you were one of them.

Maybe you went one step further. Maybe the sole Canadian team’s domination of America’s pastime made you feel a little national pride and, before you headed out to get that new jersey, you pulled on your Roots sweatpants and stopped at Tim Hortons for a double-double on your way to the store.

Indeed, in recent years, many of Canada’s most famous companies and most iconic brands have quietly, but steadily, been purchased by foreign entities. Beyond just superficial wounds to our national pride, the outsourcing of corporate decision-making authority over Canadian companies has been a disaster for workers and consumers.

Policymakers should do more to keep Canadian companies in Canadian hands by, among other things, providing more support to expand financing opportunities and awareness of untraditional ownership models, and beefing up Canada’s net-benefit review requirements.

Declining quality, brand reputation

According to a 2018 Ipsos poll, a whopping 75 per cent of Canadians agreed that the government should do more to stop the sale of Canadian companies to foreign investors.

This should come as no surprise because, after a Canadian brand is purchased by a foreign entity, many consumers notice major declines in quality. Following the sale of Tim Hortons in 2014 to Restaurant Brands International, a firm owned in part by Brazil’s 3G Capital, consumers noticed a deterioration in product quality and the company suffered a steep fall in brand reputation.

Unsurprisingly, as decision-making authority over corporate strategy moves further away from the consumer, brands are less able to respond to the demands of their customers.

Put more bluntly, should anyone be surprised that Tim Hortons hasn’t been able to figure out what Canadians want on their coffee break since being acquired in part by a private equity firm founded by Brazilian investment bankers?

The quiet sale of many Canadian brands has also led to major frustrations for consumers looking to support Canadian-owned businesses.

Trump’s tariffs have caused an uptick in demand for Canadian brands and strengthened desire to support the local economy. However, after further investigation into a brand, many consumers note that behind advertising leaning heavily on Canadian identity and a complex network of corporate holding companies, lies a foreign entity as the true owner.

Workers lose out with distant ownership

Workers are also feeling the impacts as Canadian companies are sold to foreign investors because, as corporate leadership moves further away from the community, so too does accountability, exposing local workers to the demands of foreign executives.

In a recent example, British spirits company Diageo announced the closure of the Crown Royal bottling plant in Amherstburg, Ont., putting 200 jobs at risk and drawing fierce criticism from Premier Doug Ford. Though Canadians might have been outraged, Diageo interim CEO, U.K.-based Nik Jhangiani, didn’t have to look any of the employees in the eye on his way into the office the next day.

And though foreign control of Canadian companies has had damaging impacts on consumers and workers, there is no end in sight.

Instead, foreign buyouts of Canadian companies continue to be a major driver of merger and acquisition activity. In the 2025 second quarter, 25 per cent of mergers and acquisitions involving Canadian target companies were by foreign buyers.

While Premier Ford’s hat might say “Canada is not for sale,” it seems our companies sure are.

Boosting employee ownership

In an era where, for the first time, Canada faces serious economic threats from the United States, one could be forgiven for thinking that now is not the time to restrict investment or foreign access to our economy. But if it means ceding control from Canadian consumers and workers, perhaps Canadians should think twice.

Especially as Canada is facing a major business succession problem; 76 per cent of small and medium-sized business owners plan to exit their business in the next decade.

To ensure these businesses stay Canadian owned, policymakers should be looking at strengthening paths toward employee ownership. Particularly as tax incentives for business owners selling to employee ownership trusts (EOTs) are set to expire in 2026.

Beyond simple tax incentives for business owners, policymakers should look at providing more support to expand financing opportunities and awareness surrounding untraditional ownership models, like co-operatives and EOTs.

While co-operatives and EOTs have proven to be successful in protecting jobs, driving productivity and building wealth for local employees, a chronic lack of awareness holds these models back, preventing more inclusive ownership of Canada’s economy.

For larger companies, the review threshold at which most acquisitions by foreign investors are scrutinized should be lowered, ensuring more foreign takeovers are reviewed before a deal is signed.

What’s in it for us?

The net-benefit-to-Canada criteria should also be broadened to ensure more consideration is placed on local employment and benefits to local consumers.

More stringent regulation should be placed on private equity firms, particularly as their presence expands across the Canadian economy, often by leveraging aggressive tactics to buy up Canadian businesses, such as saddling companies with debt or by consolidating fragmented industries.

Too many iconic Canadian companies have already been sold to foreign investors and Canadians are worse off because of it.  More needs to be done to keep Canadian companies just that – Canadian.