The Gordie Howe Bridge under construction on May 22. The economics of the $6.4-billion project, entirely funded by Canada, began crumbling long before Trump put the squeeze on Ottawa, writes Rita Trichur.Paul Sancya/The Associated Press
The Gordie Howe International Bridge risks becoming a financial sinkhole for Canadian taxpayers.
Although the current uproar over Canada’s side deal with the United States is renewing public focus on the bridge’s finances, the fiscal hazards of the 2.5-kilometre span connecting Windsor, Ont., and Detroit, Mich., involve more than just that pact.
Indeed, the economics of the $6.4-billion project, entirely funded by Canada, began crumbling long before U.S. President Donald Trump put the squeeze on Ottawa to fork over half of the bridge’s net revenues for its first 15 years of operation.
Details in the fine print of public documents suggest that Canadian taxpayers may not recoup their investment in the border crossing – at least not in a reasonable period of time.
Gordie Howe bridge deal appears to contradict Carney’s description of pact with U.S.
Neither the responsible federal department nor the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority, or WDBA, the Crown corporation in charge of the project, have answered The Globe and Mail’s queries.
But, hey, opacity is the Canadian way.
Obviously, infrastructure investments, such as bridges and roads, are not corporate ventures. They serve larger social and economic purposes and aren’t generally built to turn a profit.
The primary purpose of the Gordie Howe bridge is to facilitate more cross-border trade and economic growth for decades. And it will do just that once it finally opens to traffic on Monday, despite Mr. Trump’s shenanigans.
So, if you’re wondering why taxpayers should expect to be repaid for this particular piece of infrastructure, it’s because Ottawa has promised Canadians that they will get their money back.
“The Gordie Howe International Bridge will operate under a user-pay model to ensure the long-term sustainability of the crossing, including recovery of Canada’s investment and funding ongoing operations and maintenance,” Caleb Spassov, a spokesperson for Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada, told The Globe in December.
What to know so far about the Gordie Howe bridge deal
“This framework is central to ensuring that the bridge operates efficiently without increased costs to Canadian taxpayers.”
The government declined to say this week if it stands by that statement.
That’s a problem because Ottawa has framed this bridge as a recoverable investment. What’s more, public disclosures about the project raise questions about whether government outlays will be recouped down the road.
As previously stated, the Canadian government was the bridge’s sole funder, and the WDBA plans to reimburse Ottawa through future toll revenues.
The project debt that must be repaid to the government – in other words, the Canadian public – was more than $6.3-billion on March 31, 2025, according to the WDBA’s annual report.
Of course, the document uses jargon to make this disclosure, describing it as “total unrecouped Canadian contributions.”
The interest on this debt, the “imputed cost of unrecouped Canadian contributions,” was nearly $272-million in 2025 alone, according to the report.
Interest accrues annually at a rate equal to the Government of Canada benchmark long-term bond yield on the last business day of the previous fiscal year-end, plus 100 basis points. That suggests that the interest rate was 4.34 per cent for 2025.
But the interest of nearly $272-million recorded in 2025 appears to be an accounting entry rather than a cash payment. There’s no impatient private lender to the WDBA; instead, the federal government has let the interest obligations pile up to nearly $840-million as of March 31, 2025.
Additionally, the project debt of more than $6.3-billion is not recorded as a liability, or money owed, on the WDBA’s balance sheet. (Perhaps this debt is rolled up at the federal level since the WDBA is a Crown corporation. But the government’s annual financial report does not provide those details.)
The failure to list the project debt as a liability is not necessarily a problem. Taken together with another disclosure in the report, however, they raise the question of whether the government will recover its money.
A footnote states that WDBA is a “related party” of the federal government and all its departments. But it goes on to declare that: “WDBA has no contractual commitments or contingent liabilities with its related parties.”
That seems inconceivable if there is a multibillion-dollar project debt. Is this a real financial obligation for the WDBA or not?
There are other reasons to worry about the WDBA’s ability to repay the government.
In addition to the project debt and interest, there are also annual expenses that are forecast to change from year to year.
The Gordie Howe International Bridge’s toll rates for cars and commercial vehicles, meanwhile, are too low compared with those of the Ambassador Bridge. For example, cars will pay $8 to cross it compared with $14 for the Ambassador Bridge.
Commercial traffic has also declined in recent years.
More than 2.2 million trucks used the Ambassador Bridge in 2024, down 34.58 per cent from 2020, according to the Bridge and Tunnel Operators Association.
To me, these numbers suggest the very real possibility that the government will forgive the WDBA’s multibillion-dollar obligation in the future, likely blaming Mr. Trump for mucking up the project’s economics with his punitive trade policies.
In the meantime, Canadians deserve transparency about Ottawa’s core assumptions for this bridge, including its traffic forecasts, projected toll revenues and, importantly, whether it actually expects to recoup the project’s debt – not the shifting explanations provided by Prime Minister Mark Carney in recent weeks.
After the government’s tall talk, taxpayers deserve more than a pinky swear of repayment.