# Market Basket Measure 2018-base Report on the second comprehensive review of the Market Basket Measure

by Samir Djidel, Burton Gustajtis, Andrew Heisz, Keith Lam, Isabelle Marchand and Sarah McDermott

Release date: February 24, 2020

Text begins

## The second comprehensive review of the Market Basket Measure of low income

Statistics Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) have been conducting a comprehensive review of the Market Basket Measure (MBM) to ensure that the basket continues to reflect a modest, basic standard of living, that the costs of the contents of the basket in different geographical regions are estimated as precisely as possible, and that the income available to families to purchase the basket is appropriately defined and measured. The re-based MBM – referred to as the “2018-base MBM” – updates the existing 2008-base MBM developed between 2008 and 2010. This discussion paper is the final in a series of four papers which report on the progress of the review.

The purpose of this paper is to foster engagement with users, to explain what has been done as part of the review and to provide users with preliminary estimates of the impacts of the proposed changes to the MBM. This gives users the opportunity to ask questions, provide feedback and make suggestions for future work.

This discussion paper describes the proposed changes to be made to the MBM as part of the current review, as well as identifying research to be conducted in preparation for the next comprehensive review. The paper presents the preliminary 2018-base thresholds and poverty rates for reference years 2015 to 2018, and compares these to the 2008-base results.

Release of this discussion paper will be followed by a period during which Statistics Canada and ESDC will engage experts, stakeholders, federal, provincial and territorial officials, and other interested parties to validate the results. Transition to the MBM 2018-base will take effect at the end of June 2020.

## Introduction

On August 21, 2018, the Government of Canada released Opportunity for All – Canada’s First Poverty Reduction Strategy (Employment and Social Development Canada, 2018), which contained long-term commitments to guide current and future government actions and investments to reduce poverty, including:

• Establishing the MBM as Canada’s Official Poverty Line
• Introducing poverty reduction targets using a baseline of 2015
• Reduce the rate of poverty by 20% by 2020, and
• Reduce the rate of poverty by 50% by 2030 (aligned with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals)
• Creating a National Advisory Council on Poverty
• A Data and Measurement Plan, which includes ongoing funding to develop and improve data to measure poverty and to inform policy decisions.

The Poverty Reduction Act received Royal Assent in June 2019 and legislates commitments made in the Strategy including entrenching the MBM as Canada’s Official Poverty Line.

The Poverty Reduction Act mandates Statistics Canada to review the MBM on a regular basis “to ensure that it reflects the up-to-date cost of a basket of goods and services representing a modest, basic standard of living in Canada.” In 2018, Statistics Canada launched a comprehensive review of the MBM, which will be completed in 2020.

To date, the comprehensive review has consisted of several related activities. From September 2018 through April 2019, Statistics Canada with the participation of Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) conducted broad consultations with Canadians, poverty experts, other stakeholders and officials from provincial, territorial and federal governments, which were summarised in An update on the Market Basket Measure comprehensive review (Heisz, 2019).

Next, in the spring of 2019, Statistics Canada and ESDC prepared a work plan to test various methodological changes to the MBM arising from the comments received during the consultations. This work went through the summer and fall of 2019. The process has been collaborative, with Statistics Canada responsible for launching and conducting the comprehensive review and for the statistical methodology of the MBM, and with ESDC responsible for setting the scope of the comprehensive review and for the policy direction of the MBM.

Currently, the MBM offers poverty thresholds for 50 regions across the provinces: 19 specific communities (referred to as urban MBM regions) and 31 population centre size and province combinations. Proposed changes to the MBM methodology have been presented in two discussion papers released in December 2019. The MBM basket was the subject of Towards an update of the Market Basket Measure (Djidel et al., 2019a) discussion paper and the disposable income concept was the subject of the Defining disposable income in the Market Basket Measure (Djidel et al., 2019b) discussion paper.

As indicated in An update on the Market Basket Measure comprehensive review, Statistics Canada is also working with the Northwest Territories, Yukon and Nunavut to develop territory-specific MBM thresholds for these regions. In addition, Opportunity for All announced a commitment to consult with Indigenous peoples to identify and co-develop indicators of poverty and well-being, including non-income-based measures of poverty, that reflect the multiple dimensions of poverty and well-being experienced by First Nations, Inuit and Métis. That discussion is proceeding independently from this comprehensive review.

This document is the final in the series of four discussion papers describing the progress of the MBM review. It reports on the quantitative impacts of the proposed changes outlined in the previous discussion papers, and presents the updated thresholds and related poverty statistics for the 2015 to 2018 period as measured using the proposed 2018-base MBM. As mentioned previously, the purpose of this paper is to foster engagement with users, to explain what is being proposed to update the MBM measure, and to provide users with preliminary estimates of the impacts of the proposed changes. This gives users the opportunity to ask questions, provide feedback and make suggestions for future work. Release of this discussion paper will be followed by a period during which Statistics Canada and ESDC will engage experts, stakeholders, and federal, provincial and territorial officials and other interested parties to validate the results. Transition to the new MBM will be effective at the end of June 2020.

While this paper focusses on results, the three preceding discussion papers provided additional detail, rationale, background and context for the various proposals to update the MBM methodology. Therefore, it is recommended that readers refer to the previous three discussion papers along with this document for a more complete understanding of the comprehensive review.

## Discussion papers reporting on the comprehensive review

This study represents the last of four discussion papers which were released as part of the comprehensive review. Other papers in the series include:

### July 2019: An update on the Market Basket Measure comprehensive review

From September 2018 through April 2019, Statistics Canada conducted a broad consultation on the Market Basket Measure. The consultation objectives were to gather input on the development of an update to the Market Basket Measure. This discussion paper describes the consultations that took place, gives highlights of what Statistics Canada heard, and describes next steps.

### December 2019: Towards an update of the Market Basket

The Market Basket Measure basket is comprised of five major components: food, clothing, transportation, shelter and other necessities. This discussion paper describes considerations for updating these five components and the changes to the methodology for calculating these five components.

### December 2019: Defining disposable income in the Market Basket Measure

According to the MBM, a family is in low income if its disposable income is less than the Market Basket Measure threshold for a family of its size in its region. This discussion paper describes some of the considerations for updating the disposable income concept for the new MBM.

In the tables and analysis which follow, the current MBM methodology, which was last updated between 2008 and 2010 is referred to as the “2008-base MBM”, while the new, proposed methodology is referred to as the “2018-base MBM”.

This discussion paper will proceed as follows:

• Summarize proposed changes to the MBM;
• Compare the 2008-base MBM thresholds and poverty rates to preliminary estimates of thresholds and poverty rates derived using the 2018-base MBM, and;
• Discuss the forward-looking research agenda.

Additional analysis and background tables using the provisional 2018-base MBM estimates can be found in the appendices.

## Summary of proposed changes to the MBM

The MBM establishes poverty thresholds based on the cost of a basket of food, clothing, shelter, transportation and other necessities. Families with disposable income less than the applicable thresholds, given family size and region of residence, are deemed to be in poverty. The following are the proposed changes to the MBM methodology as part of the 2018-base MBM. More detail on these proposals is provided in the previous discussion papers as well as in the appendices.

### Proposed changes to the MBM basket components (described in Towards an update of the Market Basket)

#### MBM regions

Population growth announced in the 2016 Census would result in the following three new population centre size regions: Newfoundland and Labrador - 30,000 to 99,999; Ontario - 500,000+; and Manitoba - 30,000 to 99,999. The addition of these three regions would bring the total number of MBM regions to 53.

#### Shelter component

The MBM shelter component of the proposed 2018-base MBM would be based upon the rental of a 3-bedroom dwelling, rather than a 2- or 3-bedroom dwelling as was the case with the 2008-base MBM. In addition, the rental prices for a dwelling would be updated using the results of the 2016 Census.

#### Clothing component

The clothing component would be updated to reflect the Social Planning Council of Winnipeg and Winnipeg Harvest Acceptable Living Level (ALL) 2012 clothing basket for a family of four.

#### Food component

The food component would be updated to use Heath Canada’s 2019 National Nutritious Food Basket (NNFB).

#### Transportation component

The transportation methodology would be changed to better reflect transportation consumption patterns and needs of people living in cities, especially those who require private transportation to get to work. According to the 2016 Census, some lower-earning families drive to work while others use public transit. The proposed 2018-base MBM would recognize this reality by accounting for both modes of transportation in the pricing of the transportation component in cities.

#### Other component

An amount would be added to the “other expenses” component to reflect the widespread need for cellular telephone services.

### Proposed changes to the MBM disposable income component (described in Defining disposable income in the Market Basket Measure)

To recognize the lower shelter costs faced by homeowners without a mortgage, the 2008-base MBM made an adjustment to disposable income, which was called the Mortgage-Free Advantage (MFA). The MFA added the difference between the cost of the shelter component of the MBM basket (based on renters) and the typical shelter costs for mortgage-free homeowners, to the disposable income of mortgage free homeowners, placing homeowners without a mortgage on a more equal footing with renters in regards to their shelter costs, when evaluating their poverty status.

For the 2018-base MBM, it is proposed that the MFA concept be extended to homeowners with a mortgage and subsidized renters; thereby, putting all families’ shelter costs on a more equal footing when determining poverty estimates, regardless of their tenure type. This new concept would be referred to as the Tenure Type Adjustment (TTA).

#### Medical expenses

The amounts used to account for out-of-pocket medical expenses, when no tax information is available, would be updated to use more recent survey data.

### Capital Gains

The 2008-base MBM does not include the values of capital gains or losses in disposable income, but it does deduct out of disposable income the taxes paid on capital gains. To address this inconsistency, capital gains taxes would no longer be deducted from pre-tax income in the proposed 2018-base MBM. This would prevent families with large capital gains (and therefore large capital gains taxes) from appearing to be in poverty.

## 2018-base MBM thresholds and poverty rates compared to 2008-base MBM thresholds and poverty rates

In this section we describe the effect that adopting this set of proposed changes would have on the measures of poverty. To reiterate, the rebased poverty measure is referred to as the “2018-base MBM”, while the existing measure is referred to as the “2008-base MBM”. Also, as previously mentioned in this discussion paper, because the comprehensive review is not yet complete, these results should be treated as preliminary.

Table 1 shows the MBM thresholds for a four-person family for each MBM region under the 2008-base MBM and 2018-base MBM methodologies for reference year 2018. As expected, the overall threshold would be higher under the 2018-base than the 2008-base for all MBM regions. For example, for Vancouver, the MBM threshold for a family of four under the 2008-base methodology was $40,644, while under the 2018-base MBM methodology it would be$48,677 according to our preliminary estimates in Table 1. This would be an increase of $8,033. The increases from the 2008-base methodology to the 2018-base methodology differ from MBM region to MBM region. Roughly 2 in 5 MBM regions would change by less than$4,000, while another 2 in 5 would change by more than $5,000. The smaller changes tend to be concentrated in rural areas while the larger changes tend to be concentrated in urban areas. All five components that comprise the overall MBM threshold would be rebased in the 2018-base MBM. However, the largest contributor to the increase in the 2018-base MBM threshold compared to the 2008-base MBM would be the change in the shelter component. For example, for Vancouver in reference year 2018, the shelter component would increase from$13,671 under the 2008-base MBM to $19,125 under the 2018-base MBM, an increase of$5,454. The other major contributors to the increase in the threshold for Vancouver would be the proposed changes to the transportation component (an increase of $1,281) and to the other necessities component (an increase of$1,197). See Appendix A tables for results by MBM component.

﻿
Table 1
Differences between 2008-base and 2018-base MBM thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Differences between 2008-base and 2018-base MBM thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars, 2008-base, 2018-base and Difference, calculated using dollars and percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2008-base 2018-base Difference
dollars percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 39,802 42,539 2,737 6.9
< 30,000Table 1 Note 1 40,375 42,926 2,551 6.3
30,000 to 99,999Table 1 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 44,167 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
St. John's 38,536 44,808 6,272 16.3
Prince Edward Island rural 38,338 41,520 3,183 8.3
< 30,000 39,184 42,283 3,099 7.9
Charlottetown 37,591 43,205 5,614 14.9
Nova Scotia rural 38,741 41,588 2,847 7.3
< 30,000 38,927 42,494 3,567 9.2
30,000 to 99,999 36,607 42,800 6,193 16.9
Halifax 37,816 45,197 7,381 19.5
Cape Breton 35,524 41,533 6,009 16.9
New Brunswick rural 38,713 40,766 2,053 5.3
< 30,000 39,297 42,284 2,987 7.6
30,000 to 99,999 38,707 42,058 3,351 8.7
Fredericton 39,675 43,906 4,231 10.7
Saint John 37,302 41,700 4,397 11.8
Moncton 36,212 42,026 5,814 16.1
Quebec rural 35,096 37,804 2,708 7.7
< 30,000 35,186 37,397 2,211 6.3
30,000 to 99,999 33,115 37,442 4,326 13.1
100,000 to 499,999 34,163 37,940 3,777 11.1
Québec 34,835 39,601 4,765 13.7
Montréal 35,640 40,160 4,520 12.7
Ontario rural 38,057 40,576 2,519 6.6
< 30,000 37,847 41,250 3,403 9.0
30,000 to 99,999 34,932 40,769 5,838 16.7
100,000 to 499,999Table 1 Note 1 37,800 42,933 5,133 13.6
500,000+Table 1 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 44,851 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Ottawa 41,546 47,233 5,688 13.7
Hamilton/Burlington 38,337 43,517 5,180 13.5
Toronto 42,101 48,142 6,041 14.3
Manitoba rural 36,091 38,954 2,863 7.9
< 30,000Table 1 Note 1 37,528 40,780 3,252 8.7
30,000 to 99,999Table 1 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 40,842 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Brandon 35,121 40,404 5,284 15.0
Winnipeg 37,510 44,030 6,521 17.4
Saskatchewan rural 37,533 40,280 2,747 7.3
< 30,000 38,634 42,003 3,369 8.7
30,000 to 99,999 35,791 42,208 6,418 17.9
Regina 37,873 44,833 6,959 18.4
Alberta rural 40,183 45,047 4,864 12.1
< 30,000 41,598 46,158 4,560 11.0
30,000 to 99,999 40,371 44,874 4,504 11.2
100,000 to 499,999 38,630 45,468 6,838 17.7
Edmonton 38,584 47,869 9,285 24.1
Calgary 40,452 48,349 7,897 19.5
British Columbia rural 38,527 41,463 2,936 7.6
< 30,000 38,543 42,608 4,065 10.5
30,000 to 99,999 35,795 42,829 7,034 19.6
100,000 to 499,999 39,846 47,111 7,266 18.2
Vancouver 40,644 48,677 8,033 19.8

Table 2 shows the effect of the proposed changes on the poverty rate for 2018. As expected, the increases in the MBM thresholds would translate to an increase in the poverty rate. At the Canada level, the 2008-base poverty rate was 8.7% in 2018, while the 2018-base poverty rate would be 11.0% in the same year, an increase of 2.3 percentage points.

By way of reference, the last time the MBM poverty rate was updated, during the comprehensive review that took place between 2008 and 2010, the 2008-base MBM yielded a poverty rate that was 2.2 percentage points higher than the previous 2000-base MBM for reference year 2008. This is frequently the case for poverty lines like the MBM when they are updated to reflect more contemporary norms – poverty thresholds increase and therefore measured poverty levels increase (Statistics Canada, 2019).

As shown in Table 2, poverty rates as measured using the proposed 2018-base MBM increase relative to the 2008-base poverty rates for all provinces, age groups and family types.

﻿
Percentage of persons in poverty Number of persons in poverty 2008-base 2018-base Difference 2008-base 8.7 11.0 2.3 3,173 3,983 810 9.7 11.2 1.5 50 58 8 9.1 11.9 2.8 14 18 4 10.3 13.3 3.0 96 124 28 7.9 10.0 2.1 58 74 16 7.9 9.7 1.8 655 812 157 9.5 11.6 2.1 1,351 1,658 307 9.3 10.9 1.6 117 137 20 8.8 11.2 2.4 96 122 26 7.3 9.4 2.1 316 403 87 8.9 12.1 3.2 421 577 156 8.2 10.8 2.6 566 748 182 10.3 12.5 2.2 2,392 2,883 491 3.5 5.6 2.1 216 352 136 5.8 7.6 1.8 1,759 2,313 554 24.6 29.0 4.4 1,414 1,670 256 5.4 7.5 2.1 691 953 262 21.7 26.3 4.6 345 417 72 p.p. percentage point Note: Estimates based on the 2018-base MBM thresholds are preliminary. Source: Statistics Canada. Custom tabulation.

Table 3 shows 2008-base poverty rates and preliminary estimates of 2018-base poverty rates for the 2015 to 2018 period. According to the 2008-base MBM, the poverty rate fell from 12.1% in 2015 to 8.7% in 2018, a decline of 3.4 percentage points. According to the proposed 2018-base MBM, the poverty rate fell from 14.5% in 2015 to 11.0% in 2018, a decline of 3.5 percentage points.

Table 4 shows results for the number of people in poverty according to the two measures. According to the 2008-base MBM, the numbers of people in poverty fell from 4.238 million in 2015 to 3.173 million in 2018, a decline of 1.065 million. According to the proposed 2018-base MBM, the numbers of people in poverty fell from 5.074 million in 2015 to 3.983 million in 2018, a decline of 1.091 million.

The changes proposed in the rebasing would result in a “parallel shift” upwards in measured poverty rates, with no significant change in the measured trend in poverty over time.

Similar results are observed for different provinces and age groups.

﻿
2008-base 2018-base 2015 2016 2017 2018 2015 2016 12.1 10.6 9.5 8.7 14.5 12.8 11.7 11.0 12.1 10.8 9.7 9.7 13.1 12.4 11.4 11.2 14.0 11.3 10.1 9.1 14.8 11.8 13.3 11.9 13.8 12.9 12.8 10.3 17.0 16.2 15.0 13.3 14.0 11.8 9.7 7.9 16.1 13.6 12.1 10.0 10.9 8.6 9.0 7.9 13.7 10.9 10.8 9.7 12.9 11.8 10.2 9.5 15.1 13.6 12.2 11.6 12.0 9.4 8.7 9.3 14.0 12.3 11.0 10.9 10.7 9.2 9.5 8.8 12.7 11.5 12.2 11.2 8.2 8.6 6.8 7.3 10.0 10.8 9.0 9.4 14.8 12.0 10.3 8.9 17.8 15.3 13.6 12.1 13.3 11.0 9.0 8.2 16.4 14.0 11.6 10.8 13.4 11.9 11.1 10.3 15.7 14.0 13.2 12.5 5.1 4.9 3.9 3.5 7.0 7.0 6.0 5.6 Note: Estimates based on the 2018-base MBM thresholds are preliminary. Source: Statistics Canada. Custom tabulation.
﻿
2008-base 2018-base 2015 2016 2017 2018 2015 2016 4,238 3,739 3,413 3,173 5,074 4,543 4,188 3,983 63 56 50 50 68 64 59 58 20 17 15 14 21 17 20 18 127 119 118 96 156 149 139 124 102 86 71 58 117 99 89 74 890 706 744 655 1,118 896 888 812 1,757 1,624 1,436 1,351 2,062 1,883 1,706 1,658 146 115 108 117 169 151 137 137 114 98 103 96 135 123 133 122 341 362 286 316 415 453 379 403 678 557 481 421 812 707 638 577 900 755 622 566 1,115 958 803 748 3,049 2,701 2,553 2,392 3,565 3,180 3,026 2,883 289 284 238 216 394 405 360 352 Note: Estimates based on the 2018-base MBM thresholds are preliminary. Source: Statistics Canada. Custom tabulation.

The thresholds presented in Table 1 are developed for the reference family of four (two adults and two children). To arrive at thresholds for different family sizes, the MBM-methodology uses a square root equivalence scale, which is a very commonly used method to adjust incomes for family size, and is recommended for use in poverty measures (UNECE, 2011). To compute threshold values for different family sizes, values from Table 5 can be used.

﻿
Table 5
Square-root equivalence scale
Table summary
This table displays the results of Square-root equivalence scale. The information is grouped by Family size (appearing as row headers), Square root
scale and Multiply the
threshold value by (appearing as column headers).
Family size Square root
scale
Multiply the
threshold value by
1 1.0 0.5
2 1.4 0.7
3 1.7 0.9
4 2.0 1.0
5 2.2 1.1
6 2.4 1.2
x $\sqrt{X}$ $\sqrt{X}/2$

This method of equivalizing thresholds for different family sizes should only be applied to the total threshold value and should not be applied to individual threshold components.Note The next section of this discussion paper describes areas for future research, including research into alternative ways to compare thresholds and incomes of families of different sizes and types.

Finally, while Table 1 presented threshold values for 2018, values for 2015 to 2017 are presented in Appendix E. These threshold values were obtained by adjusting the 2018-base components’ thresholds using the methodology described for each component in Appendix A.

## A forward looking research agenda

During the consultations for this MBM review, as well as during the analysis leading to the four discussion papers, certain topics were identified as requiring further study in preparation for the next MBM rebasing exercise.

Communications technology. Statistics Canada will look at how a separate “communications” component could best be added to the MBM. Presently, this need for communication goods and services is reflected in the “other” component.

Child care expenses. Currently, child care costs are represented in the MBM as a direct deduction from disposable income. This way, a family’s needs are compared to an income measure that reflects their available resources. Experts have asked Statistics Canada if this is the best way to deal with child care expenses in the MBM. Could child care costs instead be treated as a basket item?

Remoteness. Statistics Canada will research whether adjustments should be made to the MBM to account for –higher costs faced by families living in remote regions and communities to derive (for example) better estimates for the northern parts of provinces.

Different family sizes. Currently, Statistics Canada estimates MBM thresholds for a family of four, and then uses the square root equivalization scale to derive thresholds for families of different sizes. Does this method lead to the best possible thresholds for smaller families and unattached individuals? Additional study could also be conducted on whether it might be appropriate to construct separate basket values for families of the same size but with different compositions (e.g., lone parent family with three children versus a couple with two children) or other characteristics (e.g., age of family members).

The other component. The “other necessities” component is meant to represent the costs of goods and services other than food, shelter, transportation and clothing. The list of items that could potentially be included in the other component is large and could vary depending on the structure, age, location or other circumstances of a family. Ongoing research on the methodology underpinning the other component could verify whether the current method for setting the value of the other component is adequate or needs to be improved.

Poverty reduction index. Anchoring the MBM to specific base years, yet updating it regularly to reflect changes in the standards of living to ensure it remains relevant is an underlying strength of the MBM. However, periodically rebasing the MBM leads to the creation of various poverty lines which can make it difficult to track poverty trends over longer time periods. To improve transparency and to help track poverty trends over longer time periods, the implementation of a poverty reduction index will be considered.

## Conclusion

This paper is the final discussion paper documenting the second MBM comprehensive review, which started in 2018 and will conclude in 2020. It has presented proposed new 2018-base MBM thresholds and compared these to the existing 2008-base thresholds which are currently in use.

The paper has also presented a forward looking research agenda, outlining topics that Statistics Canada and ESDC could study in preparation of the next comprehensive review.

The purpose of this paper is to foster engagement with users, to explain the changes to the MBM that have been proposed, and to provide users with preliminary estimates of the likely impacts of these proposed changes. We encourage users to ask questions, provide feedback and make suggestions for future work.

Following the release of this paper, there will be a period during which Statistics Canada and ESDC will engage experts, stakeholders, and federal, provincial and territorial officials to validate the results. The review period is expected to end by June 2020. Users are welcome to ask questions or share their feedback. Persons interested in contacting us are encouraged to do so by sending an email to: statcan.market.basket.measure-mesure.du.panier.de.consommation.statcan@canada.ca.

## Appendix A: Proposed changes to the MBM components and disposable income

### Proposed changes to the MBM components

The MBM basket consists of five components: clothing, food, shelter, transportation and other expenses. There are proposed changes to each of these components for the 2018-base MBM.

#### Clothing component

The 2008-base MBM clothing component is based on the 2001 Social Planning Council of Winnipeg and Winnipeg Harvest Acceptable Living Level (ALL) Basket. The basket contains goods specifically for a reference family of two adults and two children and provides clothing and footwear for most common work, school and social occasions.

The 2018-base MBM clothing component would adopt the most recently available 2012 ALL clothing basket schedule of items (Appendix B). The basket is more contemporary and responds to some concerns regarding the datedness and gender-stereotypes found in the previous basket, such as including the same quantity of runners for men and women. It features a list and replacement schedule that is similar to the one found in the previous (2001) basket. Overall, the number of clothing items in the 2012 ALL basket is similar to the 2001 ALL basket, but some quantities have changed; for example, there is an increase in the quantity of socks and a decrease in the quantity of women’s nylons.

Prices are collected from outlets annually in one representative city in each province,Note and the arithmetic average of the three lowest price observations in each city is calculated for each item in the basket. In addition, a three-year average of item prices is taken to ensure that item price volatility is minimized. These prices, combined with specified quantities and a replacement schedule result in the cost of the clothing component. The pricing methods for the 2018-base MBM are similar to the 2008-base MBM.

For the 2008-base MBM, direct pricing of clothing items was conducted in each year, and the clothing component was updated accordingly. For the 2018-base MBM, after directly pricing clothing items for the 2018 base year, the clothing component thresholds would be updated to other years using the provincial Consumer Price Index (CPI) for “clothing and footwear”. It is proposed that price indexation replace the annual direct pricing method, since the latter was deemed to add an undesirable amount of variability to the thresholds. In addition, indexing the thresholds will also make the year-over-year movements more transparent and predictable, while reviewing the MBM basket regularly will ensure the basket continues to represent contemporary norms.

﻿
Table A.1
Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM clothing and footwear thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM clothing and footwear thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars, 2008-base, 2018-base and Difference, calculated using dollars and percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2008-base 2018-base Difference
dollars percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 2,234 2,160 -74 -3.3
< 30,000Table A.1 Note 1 2,234 2,160 -74 -3.3
30,000 to 99,999Table A.1 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 2,160 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
St. John's 2,234 2,160 -74 -3.3
Prince Edward Island rural 2,104 2,227 123 5.8
< 30,000 2,104 2,227 123 5.8
Charlottetown 2,104 2,227 123 5.8
Nova Scotia rural 2,188 2,207 19 0.9
< 30,000 2,188 2,207 19 0.9
30,000 to 99,999 2,188 2,207 19 0.9
Halifax 2,188 2,207 19 0.9
Cape Breton 2,188 2,207 19 0.9
New Brunswick rural 2,561 2,422 -139 -5.4
< 30,000 2,561 2,422 -139 -5.4
30,000 to 99,999 2,561 2,422 -139 -5.4
Fredericton 2,561 2,422 -139 -5.4
Saint John 2,561 2,422 -139 -5.4
Moncton 2,561 2,422 -139 -5.4
Quebec rural 2,079 2,226 146 7.0
< 30,000 2,079 2,226 146 7.0
30,000 to 99,999 2,079 2,226 146 7.0
100,000 to 499,999 2,079 2,226 146 7.0
Québec 2,079 2,226 146 7.0
Montréal 2,079 2,226 146 7.0
Ontario rural 2,145 2,157 12 0.6
< 30,000 2,145 2,157 12 0.6
30,000 to 99,999 2,145 2,157 12 0.6
100,000 to 499,999Table A.1 Note 1 2,145 2,157 12 0.6
500,000+Table A.1 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 2,157 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Ottawa 2,145 2,157 12 0.6
Hamilton/Burlington 2,145 2,157 12 0.6
Toronto 1,750 1,846 96 5.5
Manitoba rural 2,050 2,042 -8 -0.4
< 30,000Table A.1 Note 1 2,050 2,042 -8 -0.4
30,000 to 99,999Table A.1 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 2,042 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Brandon 2,050 2,042 -8 -0.4
Winnipeg 2,050 2,042 -8 -0.4
Saskatchewan rural 2,314 2,236 -78 -3.4
< 30,000 2,314 2,236 -78 -3.4
30,000 to 99,999 2,314 2,236 -78 -3.4
Regina 2,314 2,236 -78 -3.4
Alberta rural 1,834 1,858 24 1.3
< 30,000 1,834 1,858 24 1.3
30,000 to 99,999 1,834 1,858 24 1.3
100,000 to 499,999 1,834 1,858 24 1.3
Edmonton 1,834 1,858 24 1.3
Calgary 1,834 1,858 24 1.3
British Columbia rural 1,907 2,074 167 8.7
< 30,000 1,907 2,074 167 8.7
30,000 to 99,999 1,907 2,074 167 8.7
100,000 to 499,999 1,907 2,074 167 8.7
Vancouver 1,907 2,074 167 8.7

#### Food component

In the 2008-base MBM, the food component is based on the 2008 National Nutritious Food Basket, developed by Health Canada. Food prices are collected from 38 cities in order to provide the annual cost of purchasing the basket in the 50 regions. For some items, prices are collected for more than one product to enable pricing of both a branded and a generic item. Prices are collected from selected stores in each city and the geometric mean of each item is calculated for each city.

The 2018-base MBM would use the 2019 National Nutritious Food Basket (NNFB, Appendix C) to calculate the cost of the food component. The foods in the updated NNFB are consistent with the new Canada’s Food Guide and are commonly consumed nutritious foods that Canadians reported consuming in the 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition, the most recently available survey of food consumption. The 2019 NNFB includes fresh, frozen and canned food formats to balance considerations of cost, access and availability. As for the 2008 NNFB, 5% is added to the total cost of the 2019 basket for miscellaneous foods and beverages such as coffee, tea, herbs, spices and condiments.Note

Food prices will still be collected by Statistics Canada in 38 cities across Canada. However, given the recent release of the new NNFB, some provisional prices have been used for the food component, and Statistics Canada will evaluate whether a revision to these figures is required during the coming months. As with the clothing component, annual direct pricing of the food basket would be replaced by the provincial CPI food price index to determine the change in the price of the food basket over time for the 2018-base MBM.

﻿
Table A.2
Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM food thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM food thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars, 2008-base, 2018-base and Difference, calculated using dollars and percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2008-base 2018-base Difference
dollars percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 12,972 13,141 169 1.3
< 30,000Table A.2 Note 1 12,972 13,141 169 1.3
30,000 to 99,999Table A.2 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 13,141 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
St. John's 12,441 12,521 80 0.6
Prince Edward Island rural 12,476 12,470 -6 0.0
< 30,000 12,476 12,470 -6 0.0
Charlottetown 12,476 12,470 -6 0.0
Nova Scotia rural 12,117 12,528 411 3.4
< 30,000 12,117 12,528 411 3.4
30,000 to 99,999 12,117 12,528 411 3.4
Halifax 11,558 12,001 443 3.8
Cape Breton 11,816 11,750 -66 -0.6
New Brunswick rural 12,496 12,563 67 0.5
< 30,000 12,496 12,563 67 0.5
30,000 to 99,999 12,496 12,563 67 0.5
Fredericton 12,498 12,499 1 0.0
Saint John 12,413 12,198 -215 -1.7
Moncton 11,349 11,757 408 3.6
Quebec rural 11,248 11,322 74 0.7
< 30,000 11,248 11,322 74 0.7
30,000 to 99,999 11,248 11,322 74 0.7
100,000 to 499,999 11,248 11,322 74 0.7
Québec 11,154 11,476 322 2.9
Montréal 11,344 11,578 234 2.1
Ontario rural 10,518 10,560 42 0.4
< 30,000 10,518 10,560 42 0.4
30,000 to 99,999 10,518 10,560 42 0.4
100,000 to 499,999Table A.2 Note 1 11,045 10,994 -51 -0.5
500,000+Table A.2 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 10,994 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Ottawa 11,390 11,399 9 0.1
Hamilton/Burlington 10,821 10,738 -83 -0.8
Toronto 10,903 10,803 -100 -0.9
Manitoba rural 11,037 10,983 -54 -0.5
< 30,000Table A.2 Note 1 11,037 10,983 -54 -0.5
30,000 to 99,999Table A.2 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 10,983 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Brandon 11,037 10,983 -54 -0.5
Winnipeg 11,318 11,377 59 0.5
Saskatchewan rural 11,023 11,101 78 0.7
< 30,000 11,023 11,101 78 0.7
30,000 to 99,999 11,023 11,101 78 0.7
Regina 10,880 11,204 324 3.0
Alberta rural 12,354 12,255 -100 -0.8
< 30,000 12,354 12,255 -100 -0.8
30,000 to 99,999 12,354 12,255 -100 -0.8
100,000 to 499,999 12,354 12,255 -100 -0.8
Edmonton 11,080 11,410 330 3.0
Calgary 11,390 11,510 120 1.1
British Columbia rural 11,256 11,380 124 1.1
< 30,000 11,256 11,380 124 1.1
30,000 to 99,999 11,256 11,380 124 1.1
100,000 to 499,999 12,155 12,112 -43 -0.4
Vancouver 11,652 11,586 -66 -0.6

#### Shelter component

The MBM derives shelter costs for rental units from the Census. The Census is chosen to provide rental values because its large sample size allows for precise estimation of rental costs and covers all types of rental units.

In the 2008-base MBM, the shelter cost was estimated using the 2006 Census based upon the median rent for 2- and 3-bedroom units. To get estimates for subsequent years, rental price data was inflated using the provincial CPI index for rented accommodations. In addition to the allowance for the rental of the dwelling, an amount had been added to reflect the fact that some households would have to provide their own appliances, such as a refrigerator, stove, washer and dryer.

The 2018-base MBM shelter component would be updated to use 2016 Census values. The new MBM base proposes to also adopt the National Occupancy Standard for the reference family of one male and one female adult with two children (a girl aged 9 and a boy aged 13), and thus bases shelter costs for the reference family on the cost of a 3-bedroom rental unit. To determine the typical cost of a 3-bedroom rental unit by MBM region, we estimate the median cost of 3-bedroom rental units occupied by households in the second income decile. In addition to the supplement for appliances, an amount for tenant's insurance is now included.

Finally, in the 2018-base MBM, it is proposed that the provincial all-items indexes of the CPI, instead of the rental accommodation index of the CPI, be used to update the value of the shelter component. Statistics Canada will continue its research on the shelter component, and monitor and report on this component annually.

﻿
Table A.3
Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM shelter thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM shelter thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars, 2008-base, 2018-base and Difference, calculated using dollars and percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2008-base 2018-base Difference
dollars percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 7,801 10,282 2,482 31.8
< 30,000Table A.3 Note 1 8,373 10,669 2,296 27.4
30,000 to 99,999Table A.3 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 12,480 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
St. John's 9,994 14,041 4,048 40.5
Prince Edward Island rural 7,848 10,436 2,587 33.0
< 30,000 8,695 11,199 2,503 28.8
Charlottetown 9,607 12,687 3,080 32.1
Nova Scotia rural 8,291 9,842 1,551 18.7
< 30,000 8,477 10,747 2,271 26.8
30,000 to 99,999 8,727 11,516 2,789 32.0
Halifax 10,857 15,312 4,454 41.0
Cape Breton 8,401 11,764 3,364 40.0
New Brunswick rural 7,046 9,019 1,973 28.0
< 30,000 7,630 10,537 2,906 38.1
30,000 to 99,999 7,040 10,311 3,271 46.5
Fredericton 10,401 12,845 2,444 23.5
Saint John 8,116 11,151 3,035 37.4
Moncton 9,409 12,368 2,959 31.5
Quebec rural 6,744 8,843 2,099 31.1
< 30,000 6,834 8,436 1,602 23.4
30,000 to 99,999 7,419 8,991 1,572 21.2
100,000 to 499,999 7,829 9,385 1,556 19.9
Québec 8,525 10,864 2,339 27.4
Montréal 9,189 11,333 2,144 23.3
Ontario rural 10,068 12,139 2,071 20.6
< 30,000 9,859 12,814 2,955 30.0
30,000 to 99,999 10,211 13,176 2,965 29.0
100,000 to 499,999Table A.3 Note 1 11,386 14,263 2,876 25.3
500,000+Table A.3 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 16,099 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Ottawa 13,646 17,822 4,176 30.6
Hamilton/Burlington 11,877 14,950 3,073 25.9
Toronto 14,710 19,259 4,549 30.9
Manitoba rural 7,371 10,271 2,899 39.3
< 30,000Table A.3 Note 1 8,808 12,096 3,288 37.3
30,000 to 99,999Table A.3 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 12,159 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Brandon 9,330 12,396 3,067 32.9
Winnipeg 10,569 15,147 4,579 43.3
Saskatchewan rural 8,512 10,906 2,394 28.1
< 30,000 9,613 12,629 3,016 31.4
30,000 to 99,999 9,980 13,502 3,523 35.3
Regina 11,420 15,774 4,354 38.1
Alberta rural 10,103 14,587 4,484 44.4
< 30,000 11,518 15,698 4,180 36.3
30,000 to 99,999 13,130 15,111 1,982 15.1
100,000 to 499,999 10,857 15,498 4,641 42.8
Edmonton 12,465 19,055 6,589 52.9
Calgary 13,648 19,367 5,718 41.9
British Columbia rural 9,699 11,837 2,137 22.0
< 30,000 9,716 12,982 3,266 33.6
30,000 to 99,999 10,526 13,914 3,387 32.2
100,000 to 499,999 12,625 16,922 4,297 34.0
Vancouver 13,671 19,125 5,454 39.9

#### Transportation component

The objective of the transportation component of the MBM is to recognise the costs necessary to travel to and from work, to do shopping and meet other everyday needs. However, depending on where a person lives and the exact nature of their needs, how these needs are met may vary and, as a result, costs may also vary. In rural areas, most often the only mode of transportation used to do daily tasks and commute to work is a car. Meanwhile, most large urban areas have effective public transit systems to meet the transportation needs of people living in cities. In small and medium sized cities, as well as in the suburbs, public transit may be less effective than in large cities in meeting the transportation needs of the reference family.

For the 2018-base, two proposed changes are being suggested to the transportation component. The first change would be to recognize the widespread use of cars as a means of transportation, even in urban centres that have public transportation systems. In rural MBM regions and MBM regions comprised of population centres with fewer than 30,000 people, it is assumed, as it was in the 2008-base MBM, that families would need their own car to commute to work and to conduct daily activities such as shopping. In larger MBM regions, including the specified CMAs and CAs, a weighted average of the cost of public transit and private transportation would be assumed.

The weight of each component (public and private) would be determined using 2016 Census data, namely the Census question on the mode of commuting to work. Weights for the private and public components, by MBM region, are presented in Appendix D.

The second important change would be to update the costing of private transportation, by taking account of changes – such as the increase in the longevity of vehicles and improved fuel efficiency – that have occurred over the nearly 20 years since the MBM was first introduced. This update would provide for the purchase of an eight-year-old compact car (5-year old in the 2008-base MBM) along with 1,200 litres of gas per year (1,500 in the 2008-base MBM). In addition, the 2018-base MBM would be modified to use a “basket” of 5 compact cars in determining the vehicle price instead of 2008-base MBM method of only using one car, to add stability and representativeness to the estimates.

Public transportation costs allocated to the reference family consist of the cost of monthly public transit passes for two adults and one child and an additional amount sufficient for 12 round trip taxi rides, unchanged from the 2008-base methodology.

Finally, in the 2018-base MBM, it is proposed the provincial level index for private transportation be used to adjust the private transportation basket over time, while the provincial level index for public transportation be used to adjust the public transportation basket.

﻿
Table A.4
Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM transportation thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM transportation thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars, 2008-base, 2018-base and Difference, calculated using dollars and percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2008-base 2018-base Difference
dollars percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 5,335 4,650 -685 -12.8
< 30,000Table A.4 Note 1 5,335 4,650 -685 -12.8
30,000 to 99,999Table A.4 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 4,080 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
St. John's 2,807 4,248 1,441 51.3
Prince Edward Island rural 4,921 4,308 -613 -12.5
< 30,000 4,921 4,308 -613 -12.5
Charlottetown 2,416 3,742 1,326 54.9
Nova Scotia rural 5,364 4,790 -574 -10.7
< 30,000 5,364 4,790 -574 -10.7
30,000 to 99,999 2,793 4,328 1,534 54.9
Halifax 2,853 3,852 1,000 35.0
Cape Breton 2,565 4,176 1,612 62.8
New Brunswick rural 5,261 4,563 -698 -13.3
< 30,000 5,261 4,563 -698 -13.3
30,000 to 99,999 5,261 4,563 -698 -13.3
Fredericton 2,866 3,990 1,123 39.2
Saint John 2,926 4,004 1,078 36.8
Moncton 2,410 3,887 1,477 61.3
Quebec rural 4,980 4,369 -611 -12.3
< 30,000 4,980 4,369 -611 -12.3
30,000 to 99,999 2,324 3,860 1,535 66.0
100,000 to 499,999 2,962 3,963 1,001 33.8
Québec 3,103 3,875 772 24.9
Montréal 2,911 3,787 876 30.1
Ontario rural 5,782 5,034 -747 -12.9
< 30,000 5,782 5,034 -747 -12.9
30,000 to 99,999 2,514 4,192 1,678 66.8
100,000 to 499,999Table A.4 Note 1 3,282 4,508 1,225 37.3
500,000+Table A.4 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 4,590 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Ottawa 4,163 4,538 374 9.0
Hamilton/Burlington 3,722 4,854 1,132 30.4
Toronto 5,201 5,602 400 7.7
Manitoba rural 5,770 4,850 -920 -15.9
< 30,000Table A.4 Note 1 5,770 4,850 -920 -15.9
30,000 to 99,999Table A.4 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 4,850 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Brandon 2,841 4,174 1,333 46.9
Winnipeg 3,498 4,359 861 24.6
Saskatchewan rural 5,632 4,829 -804 -14.3
< 30,000 5,632 4,829 -804 -14.3
30,000 to 99,999 2,423 4,161 1,738 71.7
Regina 3,316 4,333 1,017 30.7
Alberta rural 5,199 4,400 -799 -15.4
< 30,000 5,199 4,400 -799 -15.4
30,000 to 99,999 2,360 3,703 1,343 56.9
100,000 to 499,999 2,893 3,910 1,017 35.2
Edmonton 3,472 4,236 764 22.0
Calgary 3,613 4,228 615 17.0
British Columbia rural 5,744 4,911 -832 -14.5
< 30,000 5,744 4,911 -832 -14.5
30,000 to 99,999 2,185 4,200 2,015 92.2
100,000 to 499,999 2,560 4,191 1,631 63.7
Vancouver 3,194 4,476 1,281 40.1

#### Other component

The MBM has a final component that recognises the needs for necessary other goods and services that are not captured under the shelter, clothing, food and transportation categories (e.g., household items, personal care, reading materials, etc.). The methodology for pricing other goods and services does not utilize the pricing of items as other parts of the MBM does. Doing so would be difficult, as there are a large number of items that would potentially need to be priced, and many of the items could be considered necessities for some families but not for others. Accordingly, the other component is meant to approximate average expenditures on a wide range of other goods and services, using data sourced from Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending (SHS).

In the 2008-base MBM, the value for the other necessities component was established as a fixed percentage (75.4%) of the total cost of the food and clothing components for each MBM region. This fixed percentage is referred to as the “multiplier” and was established based on an analysis of historical spending patterns on a set of selected expenditure categories deemed necessary for a modest, basic standard of living.

For the 2018-base MBM, it is proposed that the level of the other necessities component multiplier be set so that the new 2018-base level for 2018, excluding cell phone services, equals the 2008-base level. An additional amount for cell phone services would then be added to the 2018-base other necessities component.

The value of the other multiplier could be recomputed, but since the food and clothing components are relatively unchanged between the 2008- and 2018-bases, the existing multiplier value is retained. Thus, the other component is calculated as the sum of the food and clothing baskets for an MBM region, multiplied by 0.754, plus the provincial average expenditures on cell phone services observed in the SHS for families in the second decile of income.

Similar to the previously discussed components, the other necessities component would be calculated for the base year and then annually updated by inflating the base year thresholds for each MBM region by the provincial level all-items CPI as the price inflator. This differs from the 2008-base MBM methodology where the multiplier was applied each year. To summarise, in the 2018-base the growth in the other component would be tied to the all-items CPI, while in the 2008-base methodology it was tied to the price movement of food and clothing.

﻿
Table A.5
Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM other necessities thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Differences between the 2008-base and 2018-base MBM other necessities thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars, 2008-base, 2018-base and Difference, calculated using dollars and percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2008-base 2018-base Difference
dollars percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 11,460 12,305 845 7.4
< 30,000Table A.5 Note 1 11,460 12,305 845 7.4
30,000 to 99,999Table A.5 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 12,305 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
St. John's 11,060 11,838 778 7.0
Prince Edward Island rural 10,988 12,079 1,091 9.9
< 30,000 10,988 12,079 1,091 9.9
Charlottetown 10,988 12,079 1,091 9.9
Nova Scotia rural 10,781 12,221 1,440 13.4
< 30,000 10,781 12,221 1,440 13.4
30,000 to 99,999 10,781 12,221 1,440 13.4
Halifax 10,360 11,824 1,464 14.1
Cape Breton 10,554 11,635 1,081 10.2
New Brunswick rural 11,348 12,199 851 7.5
< 30,000 11,348 12,199 851 7.5
30,000 to 99,999 11,348 12,199 851 7.5
Fredericton 11,349 12,151 801 7.1
Saint John 11,285 11,924 638 5.7
Moncton 10,483 11,591 1,108 10.6
Quebec rural 10,044 11,043 999 9.9
< 30,000 10,044 11,043 999 9.9
30,000 to 99,999 10,044 11,043 999 9.9
100,000 to 499,999 10,044 11,043 999 9.9
Québec 9,973 11,159 1,186 11.9
Montréal 10,116 11,236 1,120 11.1
Ontario rural 9,544 10,684 1,141 12.0
< 30,000 9,544 10,684 1,141 12.0
30,000 to 99,999 9,544 10,684 1,141 12.0
100,000 to 499,999Table A.5 Note 1 9,941 11,011 1,071 10.8
500,000+Table A.5 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 11,011 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Ottawa 10,201 11,317 1,116 10.9
Hamilton/Burlington 9,772 10,818 1,046 10.7
Toronto 9,536 10,633 1,097 11.5
Manitoba rural 9,863 10,809 945 9.6
< 30,000Table A.5 Note 1 9,863 10,809 945 9.6
30,000 to 99,999Table A.5 Note 2 Note ...: not applicable 10,809 Note ...: not applicable Note ...: not applicable
Brandon 9,863 10,809 945 9.6
Winnipeg 10,075 11,106 1,031 10.2
Saskatchewan rural 10,052 11,209 1,157 11.5
< 30,000 10,052 11,209 1,157 11.5
30,000 to 99,999 10,052 11,209 1,157 11.5
Regina 9,944 11,286 1,343 13.5
Alberta rural 10,693 11,947 1,254 11.7
< 30,000 10,693 11,947 1,254 11.7
30,000 to 99,999 10,693 11,947 1,254 11.7
100,000 to 499,999 10,693 11,947 1,254 11.7
Edmonton 9,733 11,311 1,578 16.2
Calgary 9,966 11,386 1,420 14.2
British Columbia rural 9,920 11,261 1,340 13.5
< 30,000 9,920 11,261 1,340 13.5
30,000 to 99,999 9,920 11,261 1,340 13.5
100,000 to 499,999 10,598 11,812 1,214 11.5
Vancouver 10,219 11,416 1,197 11.7

### Proposed changes to disposable income

In the 2008-base MBM, disposable income is defined as total income (including government transfers) after deducting not only income tax, but also several non-discretionary expenses including Canada Pension Plan and Quebec Pension Plan contributions, Employment Insurance and Registered Pension Plan contributions, union dues, child care expenses, spousal support payments paid, public health insurance premiums, and direct medical expenses including private insurance premiums. In the 2008-base MBM methodology, disposable income is also adjusted for homeowners without mortgages to reflect the lower shelter costs faced by families with this type of housing tenure. This adjustment is called the Mortgage Free Advantage (MFA).

For the 2018-base MBM, the proposed changes to disposable income include an update to the estimate of direct medical expenses and replacement of the MFA income adjustment with the Tenure Type Adjustment. In addition, it is proposed that capital gains taxes be removed from the income taxes deducted from total income in deriving disposable income to prevent families from appearing to be in poverty due to capital gains taxes.

In the 2008-base MBM, a new concept had been introduced to put homeowners without a mortgage, who have, on average, lower shelter costs than renters, on a more equal footing with renters with respect to determining their poverty status. Specifically, a value called the Mortgage Free Advantage (MFA) is calculated and added to the disposable income of mortgage free homeowners. The MFA was calculated as the difference between the median shelter costs of homeowners without a mortgage and the median shelter cost of renters. This difference is added to the disposable income of homeowners without a mortgage. Arithmetically, this is very similar to calculating a separate shelter cost threshold for families with this tenure type.

For the 2018-base MBM, it is proposed that the MFA concept be extended to homeowners with a mortgage and subsidized renters; thereby, putting all families’ shelter costs on a more equal footing when determining poverty estimates, regardless of their tenure type. This new concept would be referred to as the “Tenure Type Adjustment (TTA)”.  As with the shelter basket values, the TTA is calculated using data from the 2016 Census except as described below.

##### Summary of the process

The estimation of the TTA for each MBM region and tenure type would be obtained by subtracting the typical shelter costs of a specific tenure type from the shelter cost for renters derived during the construction of the basket. These TTA values are calculated for a three-bedroom unit for a family in the second decile of income for each MBM region.

TTAs are first estimated for a family of four, and then equivalent values for other family sizes are computed using the square-root method. These TTAs are then added to disposable income when evaluating poverty status.

##### Homeowners without mortgages

For homeowners without a mortgage, the shelter costs considered for the MBM consist of property taxes, utility costs, condominium fees, appliance costs and basic home insurance costs. As noted above, these are estimated from 2016 Census data for a three-bedroom unit for a family in the second income decile for each MBM region. For mortgage-free homeowners, the resulting TTA is conceptually similar to the MFA used in the 2008-base MBM.

##### Homeowners with mortgages

For the purpose of the MBM, shelter costs for homeowners with a mortgage would consist of property taxes, utility costs, condominium fees, basic home insurance costs, appliance costs and mortgage interest payments. The key difference, relative to homeowners without a mortgage, is the interest cost component (which is zero for homeowners without a mortgage).

Mortgage interest costs are estimated using data from Survey of Financial Security (SFS). Details on this calculation are offered in Defining disposable income in the Market Basket Measure. The calculation is done for three age groups to reflect the fact that younger homeowners tend to have higher average mortgage balances than older homeowners due to the fact that they are in an earlier phase of the repayment of their loan.Note

##### Subsidized renters

For tenants living in subsidized housing, TTAs are determined by estimating the median cost of a subsidized three-bedroom rental unit for a family in the second decile of income, and then measuring the difference between its cost and corresponding shelter cost in the basket component of the MBM. For subsidised renters, shelter costs consist of the rent paid plus utility costs, appliance costs and relevant insurance costs.

﻿
Table A.6
MBM Mortgage Free advantage (2008-base) and Tenure Type Adjustment (2018-base) in current dollars, by MBM region, four person family, 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of MBM Mortgage Free advantage (2008-base) and Tenure Type Adjustment (2018-base) in current dollars. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), 2008-base, Mortgage Free Advantage (MFA), 2018-base, Tenure Type Adjustment (TTA), Homeowners
without a mortgage, Renters in
subsidised dwellings and Homeowners with a mortgage (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography 2008-base, Mortgage Free Advantage (MFA)Table A.6 Note 1 2018-base, Tenure Type Adjustment (TTA)Table A.6 Note 2
Homeowners
without a mortgage
Renters in
subsidised dwellings
Homeowners with a mortgage Homeowners
without a mortgage
aged less than 40
aged 40-60
aged 61+
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 3,108 2,360 0 859 1,785 4,737
< 30,000Table A.6 Note 3 2,740 4,371 0 892 1,756 4,600
30,000 to 99,999Table A.6 Note 4 Note ...: not applicable 5,408 1,318 2,698 4,264 6,099
St. John's 2,913 7,606 2,347 3,727 4,243 6,236
Prince Edward Island rural 3,504 3,201 235 1,617 3,185 5,230
< 30,000 3,282 4,152 418 1,800 3,368 4,980
Charlottetown 3,795 5,339 1,797 3,180 4,748 6,155
Nova Scotia rural 3,913 2,295 0 1,100 1,682 4,716
< 30,000 2,813 3,225 0 1,224 2,780 4,295
30,000 to 99,999 3,873 3,659 757 2,127 3,684 5,498
Halifax 4,417 6,561 4,240 5,743 6,330 8,524
Cape Breton 2,889 5,619 468 1,839 3,395 5,535
New Brunswick rural 3,289 3,311 0 420 1,650 4,116
< 30,000 2,917 4,152 0 1,268 2,841 4,743
30,000 to 99,999 2,732 4,177 0 1,356 2,929 5,069
Fredericton 5,247 6,171 2,320 3,706 5,279 7,164
Saint John 2,872 4,541 239 1,625 3,198 4,543
Moncton 3,953 5,293 1,592 2,978 4,551 5,734
Quebec rural 2,581 3,759 0 0 1,282 3,595
< 30,000 1,963 3,328 0 0 675 2,621
30,000 to 99,999 2,510 3,808 0 0 1,085 3,472
100,000 to 499,999 2,594 4,289 0 0 1,215 3,472
Québec 3,034 5,657 0 47 2,651 4,741
Montréal 2,871 5,608 0 390 2,503 4,187
Ontario rural 3,772 4,222 0 0 1,375 4,883
< 30,000 3,078 6,832 0 712 2,207 5,620
30,000 to 99,999 3,366 8,206 0 1,178 2,423 6,082
100,000 to 499,999Table A.6 Note 3 3,979 8,781 509 2,161 3,448 7,056
500,000+Table A.6 Note 4 Note ...: not applicable 10,654 1,991 4,101 5,596 8,905
Ottawa 5,389 11,566 3,705 5,242 6,279 9,604
Hamilton/Burlington 3,662 9,243 570 2,500 3,619 7,356
Toronto 5,678 12,928 0 775 2,612 10,703
Manitoba rural 2,742 3,501 0 0 808 5,069
< 30,000Table A.6 Note 3 3,330 5,602 0 1,175 2,743 6,707
30,000 to 99,999Table A.6 Note 4 Note ...: not applicable 4,714 18 1,401 2,969 6,232
Brandon 3,664 5,252 0 1,367 2,936 6,507
Winnipeg 3,804 8,991 2,477 3,283 4,540 8,921
Saskatchewan rural 2,378 2,396 0 0 736 4,969
< 30,000 2,437 4,244 0 1,022 2,587 6,317
30,000 to 99,999 2,567 4,531 350 1,730 3,296 6,917
Saskatoon 2,897 4,606 2,370 3,749 5,314 9,538
Regina 2,909 4,343 2,004 3,383 4,948 8,564
Alberta rural 4,155 6,751 641 1,334 4,086 8,208
< 30,000 4,562 7,600 1,037 2,181 4,904 8,482
30,000 to 99,999 6,637 6,202 201 1,580 3,145 8,857
100,000 to 499,999 3,927 6,801 951 2,330 3,896 8,233
Edmonton 4,713 11,581 3,280 4,450 7,667 11,215
Calgary 5,717 12,779 4,102 4,866 8,249 11,777
British Columbia rural 6,369 2,996 0 1,564 1,771 7,083
< 30,000 5,675 2,958 0 2,093 2,702 7,587
30,000 to 99,999 6,337 4,230 699 2,689 2,967 8,128
100,000 to 499,999 7,834 7,226 2,677 5,512 5,824 10,658
Vancouver 8,035 9,114 3,579 2,139 5,453 11,678

#### Capital gains taxes

A capital gain or capital loss occurs when an individual disposes of, or transfers, a capital property (e.g., land, buildings, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, etc.). Since these financial settlements are not always foreseeable and for many people constitute an occasional lump sum transaction, the standard is not to include them when calculating income (UNECE, 2011). The current MBM does not include the values of capital gains or losses in disposable income. However, due to the complexity in estimating the taxes on a capital gain (or the reduction in taxes on a capital loss), the taxes on capital gains had not been previously removed from the taxes that are deducted from before-tax income in deriving disposable income.

For the 2018-base MBM, it is proposed that taxes paid on capital gains be estimated, and that disposable income be adjusted accordingly.Note Since the tax implications of capital gains are not directly known from available tax information, they would have to be estimated.

The effective tax rate would be calculated as the ratio of total tax paid divided by the sum of total income and taxable amount of capital gain. This rate would then be multiplied by the taxable amount of the capital gains. The resulting amount would then be added to the disposable income of the economic family.

### Update of medical expenses

Medical expenses are one of the non-discretionary expenses that are deducted from after-tax income to derive disposable income for the MBM.

These medical expenses include out-of-pocket expenses for prescription medicines, eye wear, medical services and health care equipment, and dental services.  They also include health care and dental plan insurance premiums.

The MBM methodology uses medical expenses gathered from tax forms for adultsNote if the medical expense claimed on the tax form is greater than zero.  If the record of a respondent to the Canadian Income Survey is not linked to tax data or if their medical claim for tax purposes is zeroNote , a provincial level imputation value is used. For the 2008-base MBM, this imputed value was derived by taking the three-year average of provincial level expenditure data from the Survey of Household Spending (SHS) for 1997, 1998, and 1999, and then adjusting it by the health care indexNote for other years.

For the 2018-base MBM, medical expenses from tax forms would still be used for adults whose records are linked to tax data and for whom the medical amount claimed is greater than zero. For those not linked to tax data or for whom the claim for tax purposes is zero, values would be imputed using more up-to-date data and a new methodology relative to the 2008-base. Values would be derived from the most recent SHS data available and reflect the provincial average of medical expenses among persons in the second income decile who did not claim an amount on their tax return. This approach would be used only for the base year (2018). Amounts for other years would be estimated by adjusting the 2018 amounts using the health care index.

﻿
Current Dollars 2008-base 136 435 228 587 189 420 173 366 206 266 180 476 192 509 161 553 268 468 193 543 Source: Statistics Canada. Custom tabulation.

## Appendix B

﻿
Table B.1
Revised clothing and footwear component (2018-base) based on the 2012 Social Planning Council of Winnipeg and Winnipeg Harvest Acceptable Living Level (ALL) basket
Table summary
This table displays the results of Revised clothing and footwear component (2018-base) based on the 2012 Social Planning Council of Winnipeg and Winnipeg Harvest Acceptable Living Level (ALL) basket. The information is grouped by Item (appearing as row headers), Quantity and Replacement Schedule (appearing as column headers).
Item Quantity Replacement Schedule
Girls' Bathing Suit 1 Annually
Boys' Bathing Suit 1 Annually
Men's Bathing Suit 1 Every 2 years
Women's Bathing Suit 1 Every 2 years
Men's BathrobeTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Women's BathrobeTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Belt, ChildTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Belt, Teen 1 Every 4 years
Belt, Man 1 Every 4 years
Belt, WomanTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
BlouseTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Blue Jeans, Child 1 Annually
Blue Jeans, Teen 1 Annually
Men's Blue Jeans 1 Annually
Women's Blue JeansTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Bra 3 Annually
Children's CapTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Teen's CapTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Men's CapTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Women's CapTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Girl's Dress Shoes 1 Annually
Boy's Dress Shoes 1 Annually
Men's Dress shoes 1 Every 3 years
Women's Dress Shoes 1 Every 3 years
Girl's Long UnderwearTable B.1 Note 1 3 Annually
Boys' Long UnderwearTable B.1 Note 1 3 Annually
Men's Long Underwear 1 Annually
Women's Long Underwear 1 Annually
Miscellaneous, GirlTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Miscellaneous, BoyTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Miscellaneous, ManTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Miscellaneous, WomanTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Nylons 1 Every 4 years
Girls' Pants 6 Annually
Boys' Pants 6 Annually
Men's PantsTable B.1 Note 1 2 Annually
Women's Pants 2 Annually
Men's Pants (formal) 2 Annually
Women's Pants (formal)Table B.1 Note 1 2 Annually
Purse 1 Every 4 years
Girls' Pyjamas 4 Annually
Boys' Pyjamas 4 Annually
Men’s' PyjamasTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Women's Pyjamas 1 Annually
Girls' Rain Gear 1 Annually
Boys' Rain Gear 1 Annually
Men's Rain Gear 1 Every 4 years
Women's Rain Gear 1 Every 4 years
Girls' Rubber Boots 1 Annually
Boys' Rubber Boots 1 Annually
Men's Rubber Boots 1 Every 3 years
Women's Rubber Boots 1 Every 3 years
Girls' Runners 4 Annually
Boys' Runners 4 Annually
Men's Runners 1 Every 2 years
Women's Runners 1 Every 2 years
Girls' Sandals 1 Annually
Boys' Sandals 1 Annually
Men's Sandals 1 Every 2 years
Women's Sandals 1 Every 2 years
Scarf etc. ,Teen 1 Every 4 years
Scarf etc., Man 1 Every 4 years
Scarf. etc., Woman 1 Every 4 years
Scarf etc. ,Child 1 Every 4 years
Men's Shirt (formal) 2 Annually
Women's Shirt (formal)Table B.1 Note 1 2 Annually
Girl's Shorts 5 Annually
Boy's Shorts 5 Annually
Men's Shorts 2 Annually
Women's Shorts 2 Annually
Women's SlipTable B.1 Note 1 1 Annually
Girls' Socks 20 Annually
Boys' Socks 20 Annually
Men's Socks 5 Annually
Women's SocksTable B.1 Note 1 5 Annually
Girls' Sweater/Sweatshirt 4 Annually
Boys' Sweater/Sweatshirt 4 Annually
Men's Sweater/Sweatshirt 2 Annually
Women's Sweater/Sweatshirt 2 Annually
Girls' T-Shirt/Shirt 5 Annually
Boys' T-Shirt/Shirt 5 Annually
Men's T-Shirt/Shirt 3 Annually
Women's T-Shirt/Shirt 3 Annually
Adult Umbrella 1 Every 4 years
Children's UmbrellaTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Girls' Underwear 12 Annually
Boys' Underwear 12 Annually
Men's Underwear 10 Annually
Women's Underwear 10 Annually
Men's Wallet 1 Every 4 years
Women's WalletTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 4 years
Girls' Winter Boots 1 Annually
Boys' Winter Boots 1 Annually
Men's Winter BootsTable B.1 Note 1 1 Every 3 years
Women's Winter Boots 1 Every 3 years
Girls' Winter Jacket 1 Annually
Boys' Winter Jacket 1 Annually
Men's Winter Jacket 1 Every 4 years
Women's Winter Jacket 1 Every 4 years
Men's Work Boots 1 Every 4 years

## Appendix C

﻿
Table C.1
Items and weekly quantities used in the MBM food component, 2019 National Nutritious Food Basket (NNFB), based on the MBM reference family
Table summary
This table displays the results of Items and weekly quantities used in the MBM food component. The information is grouped by Item (appearing as row headers), Weekly Quantities
2019 NNFB, calculated using kilograms units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Item Weekly Quantities
2019 NNFB
kilograms
Fats and Oils
Margarine, tub, non-hydrogenated 0.10
Mayonnaise 0.07
Vegetable Oil 0.21
Fruits and Vegetables
Apples 1.37
Bananas 2.95
Broccoli, Frozen 0.63
Cabbage 1.66
Canned peaches, in water 0.56
Canned Pears, in water 0.56
Cantaloupe 1.10
Carrots, fresh 2.12
Celery 1.10
Corn, frozen 0.91
Cucumber 0.94
Frozen unsweetened strawberries 0.28
Grapes 0.29
Green beans, frozen 1.33
Green peas, frozen 1.33
Green peppers 0.77
Lettuce, iceberg 1.25
Lettuce, romaine 1.19
Mixed vegetables, frozen 1.26
Mushrooms 0.14
Onions 1.09
Oranges 1.44
Potatoes, fresh 1.98
Spinach, Frozen 0.63
Sweet potato/Yam 1.15
Tomatoes 0.62
Whole tomatoes, canned (no salt added or low in sodium) 1.82
Winter Squash 1.14
Whole Grain Foods
Cereal, hot, oats, quick, prepared 0.80
Dinner roll, whole wheat 1.54
Flat bread, whole-wheat, chapatti, roti or pita 0.77
Flour, whole wheat 0.67
Rice, Brown 1.17
Shredded wheat cereal, plain 0.14
Toasted Oat O Cereal 0.14
Whole wheat pasta, spaghetti or macaroni 1.30
Protein foods
2% milk 5.15
Beans, black, canned (no salt added, or low in sodium) 0.32
Beans, kidney, canned (no salt added, or low in sodium) 0.32
Beans, white, canned (no salt added, or low in sodium) 0.35
Beef Hip Roast 0.32
Chicken legs, no back 0.62
Chickpeas, canned (no salt added, or low in sodium) 0.32
Dried Lentils 0.13
Fortified soy beverage, (unsweetened or original) 5.15
Frozen fish fillets 0.25
Hummus 0.14
Mozzarella cheese, 16.5% BF 0.28
Peanut butter, natural (nothing added) 0.28
Peanuts, dry roasted, unsalted 0.21
Pork chops, loin 0.40
Salmon, pink, canned (no salt added, or low in sodium) 0.20
Sunflower seeds, unsalted 0.25
Tofu, firm or extra firm 0.56
Tuna, canned in water 0.42
Turkey, all classes, ground 0.51
Yogurt, plain, 1-2% 1.68

## Appendix D

﻿
Table D.1
Private and public transportation weights, by MBM region, 2016
Table summary
This table displays the results of Private and public transportation weights. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Transportation Weight, Private and Public, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Transportation Weight
Private Public
percent
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 73 27
St. John's 60 40
Prince Edward Island rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
Charlottetown 70 30
Nova Scotia rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 77 23
Halifax 51 49
Cape Breton 72 28
New Brunswick rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 100 0
Fredericton 70 30
Saint John 66 34
Moncton 68 32
Quebec rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 75 25
100,000 to 499,999 71 29
Québec 60 40
Montréal 52 48
Ontario rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 66 34
100,000 to 499,999 66 34
500,000+ 65 35
Ottawa 49 51
Hamilton/Burlington 60 40
Toronto 55 45
Manitoba rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 100 0
Brandon 66 34
Winnipeg 60 40
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 72 28
Regina 70 30
Alberta rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 69 31
100,000 to 499,999 69 31
Edmonton 64 36
Calgary 63 37
British Columbia rural 100 0
< 30,000 100 0
30,000 to 99,999 71 29
100,000 to 499,999 64 36
Vancouver 53 47

## Appendix E

﻿
Table E.1
Overall 2018-base MBM thresholds, by MBM region, four person family, 2015 to 2018
Table summary
This table displays the results of Overall 2018-base MBM thresholds. The information is grouped by MBM Geography (appearing as row headers), Current Dollars (appearing as column headers).
MBM Geography Current Dollars
2015 2016 2017 2018
Province Region
Newfoundland and Labrador rural 40,564 41,583 42,089 42,539
< 30,000 40,926 41,955 42,470 42,926
30,000-99,999 42,057 43,098 43,631 44,167
St. John's 42,574 43,631 44,213 44,808
Prince Edward Island rural 40,099 40,644 40,793 41,520
< 30,000 40,823 41,376 41,539 42,283
Charlottetown 41,646 42,226 42,399 43,205
Nova Scotia rural 40,447 40,968 40,917 41,588
< 30,000 41,312 41,844 41,803 42,494
30,000-99,999 41,565 42,108 42,073 42,800
Halifax 43,777 44,350 44,369 45,197
Cape Breton 40,307 40,826 40,811 41,533
New Brunswick rural 38,966 39,683 40,043 40,766
< 30,000 40,386 41,135 41,528 42,284
30,000 to 99,999 40,175 40,919 41,307 42,058
Fredericton 41,851 42,645 43,068 43,906
Saint John 39,754 40,505 40,895 41,700
Moncton 40,049 40,808 41,226 42,026
Quebec rural 36,776 36,975 37,257 37,804
< 30,000 36,383 36,579 36,857 37,397
30,000 to 99,999 36,401 36,619 36,888 37,442
100,000 to 499,999 36,859 37,087 37,363 37,940
Québec 38,443 38,695 38,984 39,601
Montréal 38,979 39,240 39,531 40,160
Ontario rural 38,777 39,325 39,714 40,576
< 30,000 39,414 39,973 40,373 41,250
30,000 to 99,999 38,914 39,492 39,870 40,769
100,000 to 499,999 40,947 41,562 41,970 42,933
500,000+ 42,755 43,401 43,843 44,851
Ottawa 44,943 45,650 46,123 47,233
Hamilton/Burlington 41,449 42,079 42,515 43,517
Toronto 45,708 46,432 46,975 48,142
Manitoba rural 37,466 37,672 38,049 38,954
< 30,000 39,196 39,424 39,829 40,780
30,000 to 99,999 39,255 39,484 39,890 40,842
Brandon 38,772 39,001 39,407 40,404
Winnipeg 42,179 42,449 42,913 44,030
Saskatchewan rural 38,854 39,182 39,600 40,280
< 30,000 40,493 40,838 41,284 42,003
30,000 to 99,999 40,646 41,006 41,460 42,208
Regina 43,107 43,501 44,005 44,833
Alberta rural 43,325 43,704 44,109 45,047
< 30,000 44,381 44,772 45,194 46,158
30,000 to 99,999 43,136 43,520 43,924 44,874
100,000 to 499,999 43,674 44,069 44,487 45,468
Edmonton 45,868 46,299 46,787 47,869
Calgary 46,322 46,759 47,252 48,349
British Columbia rural 39,300 39,969 40,559 41,463
< 30,000 40,373 41,061 41,674 42,608
30,000 to 99,999 40,550 41,244 41,856 42,829
100,000 to 499,999 44,575 45,341 46,024 47,111
Vancouver 45,967 46,765 47,501 48,677

## References

Fréchet, Guy, Pierre Lanctôt, Alexandre Morin and Frédéric Savard (2010), "Échelles d’équivalence : Une validation empirique", Comité de direction du Centre d’étude sur la pauvreté et l’exclusion (CEPE). Catalogue no. 978-2-550-59521-2.

Djidel, Samir, Burton Gustajtis, Andrew Heisz, Keith Lam and Sarah McDermott (2019a), “Towards an update of the Market Basket”. Catalogue no. 75F0002M2019013.

Djidel, Samir, Burton Gustajtis, Andrew Heisz, Keith Lam and Sarah McDermott (2019b), “Defining disposable income in the Market Basket Measure”. Catalogue no. 75F0002M2019014.

Employment and Social Development Canada (2018), “Opportunity for All – Canada’s First Poverty Reduction Strategy”, Catalogue no. SSD-212-08-18E.

Hatfield, Michael, Wendy Pyper and Burton Gustajtis (2010), “First Comprehensive Review of the Market Basket Measure of Low Income”, Applied Research Branch paper, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada.

Heisz, Andrew (2019), “An update on the Market Basket Measure comprehensive review”. Catalogue no.75F0002M2019009.

Statistics Canada (2019). “Methodological changes to the Market Basket Measure in 2019”. Catalogue no.75F0002M2019005.

Statistics Canada (2016), “Low Income Lines: What they are and how they are created”. Catalogue no. 75F0002M2016002.

Statistics Canada (2015), “Low Income Lines, 2013-2014: Update”. Catalogue no. 75F0002M2015002.

UNECE (2011), “Canberra Group Handbook on Household Income Statistics”, Second Edition.

﻿

Is something not working? Is there information outdated? Can't find what you're looking for?