Ben Eisen

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Ben Eisen is a Senior Fellow in Fiscal and Provincial Prosperity Studies and former Director of Provincial Prosperity Studies at the Fraser Institute. He holds a BA from the University of Toronto and an MPP from the University of Toronto’s School of Public Policy and Governance. Prior to joining the Fraser Institute Mr. Eisen was the Director of Research and Programmes at the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies in Halifax.  He also worked for the Citizens Budget Commission in New York City, and in Winnipeg as the Assistant Research Director for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. Mr. Eisen has published influential studies on several policy topics, including intergovernmental relations, public finance, and higher education policy. He has been widely quoted in major newspapers including the National Post, Chronicle Herald, Winnipeg Free Press and Calgary Herald.

Recent Research by Ben Eisen

— Sep 17, 2020
Printer-friendly version
How Much Could a Guaranteed Annual Income Cost?

How Much Could A Guaranteed Annual Income Cost? finds that if the federal government introduces a Guaranteed Annual Income program, it could cost taxpayers between $131.9 billion and $464.5 billion a year. This study estimates the potential costs of four different potential GAI programs including different options for reducing program costs by “phasing out’ the benefit as an individual’s income rises.

— Sep 17, 2020
Printer-friendly version
Illustrating the Tax Implications of a Guaranteed Annual Income

Illustrating the Tax Implications of a Guaranteed Annual Income finds that the federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) would have to increase from the current five per cent to between 26.25 and 105.35 per cent in order to cover the cost of potential Guaranteed Annual Income programs.

— Aug 25, 2020
Printer-friendly version
Measuring the Equalization Clawback on Natural Resource Revenue in Have-Not Provinces

Measuring the Equalization Clawback on Natural Resource Revenue in Have-Not Provinces finds that Canada’s equalization program discourages natural resource development in “have-not” provinces, including all three Maritime provinces. As a province receives more revenue from natural resource developments, it receives less money from the federal government in equalization transfers, and consequently, governments in have-not provinces that receive equalization are discouraged by the clawbacks from developing natural resources.