Canadian Tire has agreed to pay nearly $1.3 million after Quebec’s consumer protection authority accused the national retailer of using misleading reference prices that made some advertised discounts appear more significant than they were.
A Montreal court approved the settlement in February 2026 after Canadian Tire pleaded guilty to 74 offences under Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act. The allegations involved promotions examined at three Canadian Tire stores in the greater Montreal area.
Investigators focused on whether certain products were genuinely sold at their stated regular prices before being advertised at lower promotional prices. The advertisements appeared in retail flyers and on the company’s website, with the practices under investigation dating back to 2021.
Key facts
- Canadian Tire pleaded guilty to 74 consumer protection offences.
- Fines and associated costs totalled approximately $1.3 million.
- The investigation involved three stores in the Montreal area.
- Officials examined online advertisements and promotional flyers.
- The questioned pricing practices dated back to 2021.
What investigators examined
The case centred on reference pricing, a common retail practice in which a higher regular price is displayed beside a lower sale price. The comparison is intended to show customers how much they could save by buying during a promotion.
Under consumer protection rules, however, the higher price must represent a genuine selling price rather than an inflated figure used mainly to create the appearance of a bargain.
A price comparison can become misleading when a product is rarely sold at the higher amount, spends most of its time on promotion or is briefly listed at an elevated price before a discount begins.
The Quebec investigation examined sales and advertising information connected to products such as cookware, household goods, knife sets and tools. These categories are regularly featured in flyers with crossed-out prices and percentage-saving claims.
Read More
Why regular-price comparisons matter
Reference prices can strongly shape how a promotion is perceived. An item advertised as reduced from $200 to $100 appears to offer a 50% saving, which may encourage a customer to act quickly because the deal seems unusually valuable or temporary.
The $100 selling price may still be competitive. The concern arises when the product was not normally sold for $200, meaning the advertised saving does not accurately reflect the item’s usual market price.
Authorities can assess how long a product remained at the higher price, how many units were purchased at that amount and whether the supposed sale price was effectively the product’s normal price.
This distinction matters because shoppers often use the size of a discount as a shortcut when judging value. A large percentage reduction can appear more attractive than a smaller discount, even when another retailer offers a lower final price.
How the penalty reached nearly $1.3 million
The total payment reflects the number of offences included in the settlement, along with associated costs. Penalties may accumulate when questioned claims involve several advertisements, products, locations or promotional periods.
Canadian Tire initially contested the allegations before entering guilty pleas that brought the prosecution to an end. The Montreal court then approved the settlement covering all 74 offences.
The case does not mean that every Canadian Tire promotion or regular price was found to be misleading. The proceedings concerned the specific stores, advertisements and products examined by Quebec’s consumer protection authority.
Even with that limited scope, the outcome highlights the responsibility retailers have when using percentage discounts, crossed-out prices and limited-time offers. Advertised savings must be supported by an authentic pricing history.
The wider retail industry is facing pressure from changing consumer habits, operating costs and location-level performance. Those challenges have contributed to developments such as the closure of more than 40 Dairy Queen locations in the United States, showing how individual stores can be affected by broader business conditions.
What shoppers should check before purchasing
Consumers can reduce the risk of being influenced by an overstated discount by comparing the final selling price across several stores. The amount paid at checkout is generally a more useful measure of value than the percentage displayed in an advertisement.
It can also help to confirm the exact model number, package size and product version. Similar-looking items may have different specifications, making direct price comparisons less reliable.
Online price-tracking tools, past flyers and competing retailer websites may provide additional context about whether a promotion represents a meaningful reduction or a price that appears regularly.
Practical takeaway: A large advertised discount does not necessarily mean an item is being offered at its lowest available price. Compare the current price rather than relying only on the claimed saving.
The settlement comes as household budgets remain under pressure and consumers pay closer attention to the cost of tools, cookware and other everyday products. Clear pricing gives customers a better opportunity to judge whether a promotion offers genuine value.
Retail competition is also being reshaped by companies investing in new locations and faster service formats. One example is 7 Brew’s plan to open 27 new coffee stands in July 2026, reflecting continued expansion in parts of the North American food and beverage market.
Details of the court-approved settlement were reported by CityNews Montreal.
Make Swikblog your go-to source on Google for reliable updates, smart insights, and daily trends.
