Quebec’s Office of Consumer Protection Fines Canadian Tire $1.3M for False Advertising
Blog Consumer Markets Perspectives

On February 6, 2026, Canadian Tire was ordered to pay just under $1.3 million after pleading guilty to 74 counts of violating Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act in connection with misleading reference prices on selected products.

This enforcement action stems from a six-month investigation conducted in 2021 by the Office of Consumer Protection (OPC), which reviewed pricing practices in flyers, on Canadian Tire’s website, and in three Montreal stores. The OPC concluded that the retailer used artificially inflated “regular prices” to make discounts appear larger than they truly were. According to the OPC, the so-called regular prices were rarely or never charged during the review period.

The investigation originally covered seven household and hardware products, with Canadian Tire ultimately admitting liability for five of them. In a public statement issued after the ruling, Canadian Tire underscored that no consumers were overcharged, and that the charges relate to a small number of products over a limited six-month window.

Section 225(b) of the Quebec Consumer Protection Act prohibits merchants from falsely indicating a regular price or other reference price for goods. When a retailer advertises an item as being “on sale” the higher “regular” price must correspond to a real selling price charged for a meaningful period. The OPC’s analysis in this case found that the advertised regular prices did not align with the actual commercial practices observed during the investigation period.

In Quebec, violations of reference-pricing rules can result in penal charges; in this case, the fines ranged from $15,625 to $18,150 for each of the 74 infractions. It’s worth noting that, as Canadian Tire emphasized, no consumers were technically overcharged as a result of these practices - however, the OPC proceeded to escalate the matter based solely on the misleading nature of the reference prices, highlighting the importance of transparency and integrity.

As a reminder, when businesses advertise sales or promotions, they need to be able to substantiate their regular prices to comply with the Competition Act. Under the Act, discounts must reflect real, historical pricing - not inflated prices used to create the appearance of a deal.

The Competition Bureau has been clear that pricing practices are an ongoing enforcement focus. For example, the Bureau imposed a $3.25 million penalty on the Dufresne Group after concluding that certain regular prices had been increased before being advertised at deep discounts.

Similar to Quebec, the Bureau does not need to show that consumers were actually misled for a pricing practice to raise compliance concerns; the focus is on the practice itself, not its impact on any particular customer.

This enforcement action by the OPC serves as a timely reminder for businesses operating in Quebec - presenting reference prices during sales that do not reflect actual selling history can lead to scrutiny and significant enforcement action by the OPC, leading to financial and reputational risks.

This case is particularly noteworthy because consumer‑protection disputes in Quebec are most often seen in the context of consumer‑driven class actions, rather than regulator‑led prosecutions. In contrast, the matter here was initiated, investigated, and escalated directly by the OPC, which ultimately referred the file for penal prosecution. This represents a departure from the OPC’s more typical reliance on administrative warnings or lower‑value infraction notices. The regulator’s willingness to pursue a full penal process signals a more assertive enforcement posture, and sends a clear message to industry that it is prepared to show its teeth where necessary. As enforcement activity increases at both the federal and provincial levels, proactive review of advertising and sales strategies is critical to mitigate exposure to costly penalties and reputational harm.