Performing arts groups have been lobbying the government to create a new live performance tax credit. Let’s hope the finance minister mentions this proposal in his economic statement because it truly is an investment for all, not just one gender or one region.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 27, 2026.

OTTAWA—A little-known study published last year by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce laid to rest the myth that cultural spending is a drain on federal finances.

On the contrary, the report, entitled Artworks: The Economic and Social Dividends from Canada’s Arts and Culture Sector, reported that, in 2024, the arts and culture sector contributed $65-billion in direct gross domestic product to the Canadian economy.

Conducted by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce’s Business Data Lab, and commissioned by Business/Arts along with the Canada Council for the Arts, Artworks also pointed out that, from 2022 to 2025, spending in arts and culture increased at a rate almost double the general Canadian sectoral growth.

On the international scene, this country sold almost $25-billion in goods and services globally.

According to the report, since 2011, arts-sector spending growth has outpaced all other sectors, including oil and gas, construction, wholesale and retail trade and manufacturing.

Most important for the Department of Finance is that the sector generates $17-billion in federal and provincial taxes.

So why is it, that when the conversation turns to the economy, our attention is focused not on this growth sector, but on other sectors like fossil fuels, auto, and construction?

Principal economist for the Canadian Chamber of Commerce Andrew DiCapua had this to say about government investment in the sector: “The arts and culture sector generates $29 in economic activity for every dollar in federal investment—that’s an extraordinary return in addition to the social benefits that the sector generates. Yet, we’re seeing concerning trends in both public and private funding. If we want to maintain Canada’s cultural competitiveness and harness this sector’s full economic potential, we need sustained, strategic investment.”

Prime Minister Mark Carney has a chance to advance cultural investment in the economic update that his government will be tabling this week.

The Build Communities Strong funding is definitely intended to boost jobs and grow the economy in infrastructure projects with a budget of $27.8-billion over the next decade. Those jobs will primarily go to men.

These investments tie in with Canada Strong, which was the government’s mantra until a new logo was launched at the recent Liberal national convention in Montreal.

The new mantra is Canada for All. This vision ties in beautifully with the Chamber of Commerce call for more investment in arts and culture.

Unlike other investments, government spending in arts and culture reaches out to almost every community in the country.

Festivals and Major Events Canada, the national organization representing everyone from Carnaval de Quebec to the Calgary Stampede, represents more than 500 festivals in communities across the country. That doesn’t include live theatre and music performances that multiply across the country during the summer season.

A coalition of performing arts organizations have been lobbying the government to create a new live performance tax credit. The credit is modelled after the wildly successful Canadian Film or Video Tax Credit which was launched by the government of Jean Chrétien back in 1995.

That 25-per-cent credit on the hiring of Canadian talent was the first of its kind in the world. It has been so successful that similar models have been launched in more than 40 countries around the world. It generates $3.40 in revenue for every dollar spent by the government.

A similar performing arts credit would generate $23 in local economic impact, so its accelerator value is huge. Why? Because when people attend performances, they often spend money in the community, with dinner or drinks before or after.

The government price-ticket on this live performance accelerator tax credit is $100-million annually over three years.

Government officials at multiple levels have been reviewing the proposal, but say it is too rich.

In comparison, the government uptick in military spending to meet NATO targets is $81-billion over five years.

A price tag of $300-million over three years is modest in comparison to the jobs and spending impact it will have on every community in the country.

Canada for All should mean that jobs are not happening only be in male-dominated sectors like the military and infrastructure construction.

A modest arts investment would reach out to every region and every community, with jobs for youth and women who are underrepresented in Canada Strong investments.

In the 10 years of conservative economic statements, the word ‘culture’ rarely appeared.

Let’s hope the finance minister mentions this modest tax credit proposal in his economic statement because it truly is an investment for all, not just one gender or one region.

If the Canadian Chamber of Commerce is promoting cultural investment, the government should be listening.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Artists who are out on the streets once again because of COVID lockdowns are lobbying furiously for a return to a full Canadian Emergency Response Benefit for their sector.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on January 6, 2022.

OTTAWA—Musical blockbuster Come From Away has already been seen by a million Canadians.

But if you missed the Canadian performance in Toronto, you won’t be able to see it in this country again.

The story of how the people of Newfoundland opened their hearts to passengers stranded by the downing of the World Trade Centre is reverberating around the world.

It is the most successful Canadian musical ever produced and has prompted a domestic theatre renaissance that has already spawned more live theatre offerings for the globe.

The numbers published by David Mirvish when he announced the shuttering over the Christmas week were indeed impressive.

The press release cited box office sales of $115-million, including over $15-million in HST.

Mirvish estimated the economic impact on the Toronto economy at $920-million.

Mirvish pointed a finger directly at government, “in other parts of the world, the government has stepped up to support the commercial theatre sector by offering a financial safety net for the sector to reopen and play during the pandemic, thus protecting the tens of thousands of good jobs the sector creates. That is the case in the U.S., the U.K., and Australia—where productions of Come From Away continue.”

But in Canada there is no such government support.

Mirvish’s holiday announcement provoked shock waves in Canada’s artistic community.

New Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has been working feverishly to find a solution to the dilemma.

And artists who are out on the streets once again because of COVID lockdowns are lobbying furiously for a return to a full Canadian Emergency Response Benefit for their sector.

With all the theatres shuttered, it is impossible for the thousands of people who depend on live performance for their livelihoods to even feed their families.

Canada Council for the Arts CEO Simon Brault has emerged as a champion for those artists.

He has been working with unions representing the arts community trying to figure out the best solutions for support in these trying times.

But the question begs. If the city of Toronto garners almost a billion dollars in economic benefits from live performances, why are the arts treated like an afterthought in Canada’s COVID business support model?

For some reason, if you are manufacturing autos or pumping oil, your jobs are worth the full attention of governments.

If you are artists, bringing joy, perspective and global reach to the Canadian story, you are left picking up the scraps.

And it was always thus.

For some bizarre reason, commercial success in cultural industries has generally disqualified creators from government support.

There are government incentives and subsidies for book publishers, media content creators and community not-for-profit operations. But live commercial productions are generally left to their own devices as they are profit-making enterprises. However, governments help lots of industries in the name of economic development. Why exclude the cultural industries?

On the Hill, there is much discussion about how to turn this around. Not much is happening at Queens’s Park either even though the provincial capital is by far the largest beneficiary of commercial entertainment investment.

Some are discussing possible tax credits, which kickstarted a robust growth in Canadian film opportunities back in the nineties.

The tax credit introduced then has been replicated around the world, and it has been one of the best models for media content creation on the globe.

That credit was introduced by the Department of Finance, in tandem with Heritage, which begs the question. Where is Toronto-based Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland in this picture?

The cut to the CERB may have made some debt hawks on Bay Street happy. But it has devastated the creative sector, who continue to lobby for direct support for unemployed artists locked out of their places of employment by pandemic fiats.

Where, too, is the Department of Industry in this quest for solutions?

Francois-Philippe Champagne’s ministerial title is minister of innovation, science and industry. Surely the world of entertainment is built on innovation.

Before Come From Away, there was no real hope of developing a domestic theatre industry equivalent to London’s west end or Broadway.

But this magical story got Canada’s foot in the door for the creation of a whole new innovative industry, live theatre that actually makes money and entertains.

The brains behind innovation in Canada need to get together and find a solution to this gaping hole in public policy. All hands need to be on deck, including the prime minister’s office.

Come From Away should not have Gone Away.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Published on Monday, January 30, 2017 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—Donald Trump’s only venture into theatre was a bust.

So it stands to reason that one of his first acts as president could be to cut all funding to the only two federal agencies with a mandate for arts and culture. Last week The Hill, a congressional news source, reported on a plan to eliminate all funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).

The NEA, established by an Act of Congress back in 1964, currently receives only $150-million in federal government funds. That represents a pittance of the $10.5-trillion in cuts proposed by the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing organization providing the blueprint for administration budget direction. As for the CPB, its total annual funding from public coffers is less than $450-million.

Both sums are chump change. By contrast, the Canada Council for the Arts is currently funded at a rate of $220-million Canadian dollars annually, almost $20-million more than the congressional allocation for the NEA, in a country with one-tenth the population. The last federal budget boosted the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation budget by $675-million over five years.
 
But it is obvious that Trump’s political agenda is not about simply balancing the country’s books. He is preparing to use an extraordinarily powerful bully pulpit to promote the Trump legacy as a blue-collar billionaire. What better way to drain the swamp than hitting out at left-wing media and cultural elites.

It may also be payback time for ancient grievances.

According to The New York Times, back in 1970, a 23-year-old Trump wanted to make his mark on Broadway. He offered to co-produce a play with David Black in return for equal billing and a chance to learn the ropes in New York’s theatre world.

The play Paris Is Out! was a dud and Trump lost all his money and, apparently, his Broadway interest. He subsequently reneged on a published promise to partner with Black in another show the following year. That turned out to be a wise withdrawal because W.C., a musical based on the life of comedian W.C. Fields, closed even before it made Broadway, notwithstanding the presence of Mickey Rooney and Bernadette Peters in lead roles.

More than 30 years later, Trump explored producing his own story on Broadway, entitled Trump. News reports quoted producer Barry Weissler announcing the proposed musical based on The Apprentice television series, and scheduled to open in the spring of 2006. “Donald Trump is a larger than life character and the Broadway musical stage may be the only medium large enough for him. We know Broadway audiences will embrace the drama and genuine intrigue of The Apprentice just as television audiences have. ”

The show was never launched. Trump obviously has a hate-hate relationship with the powerful world of American entertainment. His much-publicized feud with actress Meryl Streep is just one example of this. Why would a president-elect engage in a Twitter fight on the eve of his inauguration?

Perhaps the media-savvy president is simply changing the channel.

Social media is replete with posts by Trump followers loving the cuts. “They are like the thing in the back of your fridge that is really moldy and stinks but you haven’t wanted to touch to throw away. Well it is time to put on the chest waders and Drain the Swamp. Out! Out!” was a post linked to Breitbart News, the far right web news site of Trump chief strategist and senior counsellor Steve Bannon.
 
Trump believes his talent as a television pitchman was not sufficiently recognized. That was evident during presidential debates when, in the middle of a serious question, he tilted his head to complain that The Apprentice should have received an Emmy.

Snubs from the entertainment industry have rubbed Trump the wrong way. And killing public funding for the NEA and NPR are his way of getting the final word.

A groundswell of opposition is coming from the very people whom Trump loves to hate, the so-called liberal media elites who turned their backs on Trump. Even Sylvester Stallone reportedly spurned his offer to head up the NEA.

In revenge, the first victims of Trump’s promise to drain the swamp are the only two federal agencies with a specific arts and culture mandate.

This is the president’s first salvo in the war against the arts but it certainly won’t be the last. That swamp is just too appealing. Too bad his Broadway debut was such a bust.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien is cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.