Summary#
Bill 50, the No Free Ride for Fossil Fuels Act, 2025, would amend Ontario’s Municipal Act, 2001 and City of Toronto Act, 2006. Its stated aim, reflected in its title, is to let municipalities charge certain gas-related businesses for services, costs or use of municipal property; the bill does not require them to charge fees.
- Municipalities and local boards, including Toronto and its local boards, would have the power to charge producers, gas distributors, gas transmitters and storage companies. These terms are defined in the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998.
- The fees or charges could relate to services or activities, costs payable, or use of property involving listed infrastructure—such as pipes, wires, equipment or machinery—located or planned for a municipal highway and used in the company’s business.
- Provincial regulations could not set conditions or limits on this particular municipal fee power.
- The bill does not set fee amounts, require a municipality to impose fees, or directly charge households.
What it means for you#
- Municipalities and local boards: They would have an expressly stated power to impose the described fees or charges. The bill does not require them to use it.
- The named businesses: A business in one of the listed categories may have to pay if a municipality or local board imposes a fee or charge that applies to it.
- Residents and gas customers: The bill does not directly create a household fee or change gas rates. Whether a business might pass on costs is not addressed in the bill.
- Government: This is a change to municipal fee powers, not a new front-line service or a new independent agency.
Money#
No cost or revenue estimate is in the supplied material.
- The bill allows municipalities and local boards to impose fees, but does not require them to do so or estimate how much they might collect.
- It does not provide an estimate of municipal administrative costs or business costs.
What is unclear#
- The parent Acts were not supplied, so the current scope of municipal fee powers and any existing conditions or limits could not be verified against current law.
- The bill does not set fee amounts or explain how they would be calculated.
- It does not set a process for deciding who pays, giving notice, challenging a charge or resolving disputes.
- It is unclear how the new power would interact with existing rules or fees.
- The bill does not say whether or how companies might pass costs on to customers.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the bill is that municipalities could charge businesses for services, costs or use of municipal property connected to infrastructure on municipal highways.
- Giving municipalities this power could let local governments decide whether such charges are appropriate in their area.
- The bill prevents provincial regulations from placing conditions or limits on this specific fee power, leaving that decision to municipalities and local boards.
Case against#
- The bill does not set fee standards or amounts. Without those details, charges could vary between municipalities.
- The bill bars regulations from limiting this particular power, but does not explain what other safeguards would apply.
- It is unclear whether companies would pass some costs on to customers, or how disputes over charges would be handled.