Bill C-19 · 45th Parliament · Mark Carney
Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit Act
An Act to amend the Income Tax Act
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedJan. 28, 2026
- Debated in principleFeb. 2, 2026
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberFeb. 4, 2026
- Passed the second chamberFeb. 12, 2026
- Became lawFeb. 12, 2026
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Mark CarneyPrime Minister
- Kevin LamoureuxDefends the bill as assistance for those needing help with grocery costs.
- Jean-Denis GaronStates that the Bloc supports the bill because times are hard and food inflation is real.
- François-Philippe ChampagneDefends the bill as addressing both immediate family needs and long-term economic resilience.
- Guillaume Deschênes-ThériaultDescribes the bill as an important measure providing immediate assistance that should receive unanimous support.
- Arielle KayabagaExplicitly voices support for the bill and urges quick passage.
- Angelo IaconoExplicitly states support for the bill as a tangible way to cope with the cost of living.
- Steeve LavoieStates the measure will be adopted for Canadians and emphasizes its benefits.
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
What it set out to do
The Library of Parliament does not prepare Legislative Summaries for self-explanatory measures. The following is a short summary: On 28 January 2026, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue introduced Bill C-19, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit Act) in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-19 amends the Income Tax Act in order to increase the maximum annual Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax credit (GSTC) amounts by 50% for the 2025-2026 benefit year. It also amends that Act to increase the maximum annual GSTC amounts by 25% as of the 2026-2027 benefit year for a period of five years.
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
For it 22
Voted for it, or spoke in support
Challenging it 17
Support only with changes, or serious objections raised in debate
Against it 17
Voted against it and argued against it
How it changed on the way
11% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (2,290 words introduced, 2,283 passed).
minor changeintent kept
The bill passed with only minor punctuation and spacing fixes in lists of Income Tax Act subsections. The core GST credit increases for 2025-2026 and the following five years remained unchanged.
- Removed space before comma in subsection list.
Before: “122.5(3) to (3.005) , 122.51(2)”
After: “122.5(3) to (3.005), 122.51(2)”
- Removed space before comma in subsection list.
Before: “122.5(3) to (3.005) , 122.51(2)”
After: “122.5(3) to (3.005), 122.51(2)”
How precisely it is written
preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard
The bill sets exact dollar amounts, percentages, dates and formulas for GST credit top-ups with no subjective language. Eligibility and payment calculations rest on objective income thresholds and family definitions already in the Income Tax Act.
Clear-cut
“the months specified in subsection (3.005) are July 2026, October 2026, January 2027, April 2027, July 2027, October 2027, January 2028, April 2028, July 2028, October 2028, January 2029, April 2029, July 2029, October 2029, January 2030, April 2030, July 2030, October 2030, January 2031 and April 2031”
Lists every payment month by calendar date rather than using open-ended language.“A is the total of (a) $445, (b) $445 for the qualified relation”
Fixes every component of the benefit formula in specific dollar figures.“B is 5% of the amount, if any, by which the individual's adjusted income for the taxation year in relation to the specified month exceeds $46,432”
Uses a precise percentage and exact income threshold instead of a discretionary test.
Discretion. Virtually none; all calculations, dates and amounts are fixed in the statute with no regulation-making power or ministerial discretion over eligibility or quantum.
Challenging the law itself. The provisions confer benefits through objective arithmetic rules and engage no obvious Charter rights that would support a vagueness or overbreadth claim.
Disputing a charge under it. Any dispute turns on verifiable facts such as income figures, custody status and filing dates rather than subjective standards.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
The evidence has not been searched yet.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.