For many Canadians, inflation doesn’t feel temporary — it’s a permanent part of life. That goes to say that Canada isn’t “expensive” by accident, but by design. With average Canadians expressing grocery bill shocks and expensive airfare, while students must pick between food, rent and textbooks, it has become clear that oligopolies are one of the biggest issues in Canada’s market.
For starters, an oligopoly market is one that has a small number of companies dominating it, giving them the ability and power to set prices, limit competition and shape consumer choices. These companies can do this because of factors like barriers to entry, control over key resources and simply a lack of competition.
The question is, when did all of this start?
From the 1900s to the 1940s, railways and banks were dominated by a few players due to small populations spreading over huge geography, high infrastructure costs and levels of government giving preference to “nation champions.” At the time, this was often justified as necessary. Fast-forward to the 50s and 70s, during post-war industrial growth, the government created regulations to protect incumbents and limit foreign competition. For example, banks were concentrated to the “Big Five,” telecom was dominated by regional players and airlines were heavily regulated. During this time, the goal was stability, not competition.
By the 2000s, oligopolies weren’t formed; they were entrenched. What kept them dominating was their control over industry and resources, barriers to entry and regulatory capture. When new players enter the market, big firms often buy them out, push them out or force them into niche roles to keep their operations going.
It is safe to say that Canada’s oligopolies didn’t emerge overnight. They were built over decades through policy choices that prioritized stability and national champions over competition — and Canadians are still paying the price.
Many industries are oligopolies in the Canadian market today, including banking and finance, grocery chains, the auto sector, transportation, telecoms and much more.
Starting off with grocery chains, Loblaws Companies, Empire Company, Metro Inc., Costco Wholesale and Walmart Canada effectively own over 80 per cent of grocery sales nationwide. These players in the market cause a vertical integration where they own suppliers, distributors, private labels and retail. Vertical integration forces farmers, small suppliers and independent stores out of the picture, costing the average Canadian thousands of dollars every year on groceries, instead of giving them the opportunity to save, invest or reserve funds for other necessities.
Canada’s auto sector is often presented as competitive, but in reality, it also functions as a tightly controlled oligopoly.
Vehicle manufacturing in Canada has long been dominated by a small number of multinational firms, such as General Motors, Ford Motor Company and Stellantis, with extremely high capital costs making meaningful entry nearly impossible.
This concentration is reinforced upstream by large parts suppliers like Magna International and Linamar, which serve multiple automakers and further entrench market power. At the consumer level, provincial franchise laws protect dealership networks, limiting direct-to-consumer sales and reducing price transparency.
The result is a system where competition is restricted at every stage, leaving Canadians with higher vehicle prices, fewer real choices, and little bargaining power, costs that ripple through the economy by increasing transportation expenses for households and businesses alike.
Market concentration in sectors like groceries and autos has real consequences for everyday Canadians, especially students and young workers. When a small number of firms control essential goods and services, prices remain high even when broader inflation cools, leaving households with little room to adjust.
For students, this often means choosing between groceries, rent, or transportation, while relying on cars that are increasingly expensive to purchase, insure, and maintain. For average Canadians, higher vehicle prices raise commuting costs, which then feed into the price of everything from food to services. Wages have not kept pace with these rising costs and the lack of meaningful competition leaves consumers with fewer choices and little bargaining power. What emerges is not a temporary affordability issue, but a structural problem where concentrated markets quietly transfer costs from corporations to households.
Addressing Canada’s affordability crisis requires taking competition policy seriously rather than treating it as an afterthought. Stronger enforcement of the Competition Act, tighter scrutiny of mergers and meaningful penalties for anti-competitive behaviour would begin to rebalance power toward consumers.
In sectors like autos and telecom, reducing barriers to entry and modernizing regulations, such as reassessing dealership protections or foreign ownership limits, could introduce genuine price pressure. For students and young Canadians, these reforms matter because competition lowers everyday costs without cutting services or wages. A more competitive economy does not mean destabilizing industries; it means ensuring that affordability, innovation and consumer welfare are treated as policy priorities rather than side effects. Until that shift happens, Canadians will continue paying high prices in markets designed to protect incumbents, not the public.
So, no, you do not have holes in your pockets. Things are expensive in Canada, and while there are many reasons that add on to the current cost of living crisis, having oligopolies and dominant players in the market does not help the average Canadian.