CRA’s consultant conundrum is another bureaucratic blunder
The Canada Revenue Agency, despite being the largest government bureaucracy relentlessly pursuing taxpayer dollars, wastes millions on vaguely defined consultant contracts that foster inappropriate employer-employee relationships.

The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) is demonstrating its staggering ineptitude with an alarming over-reliance on private consultants that blur the lines between contractor and employee, Blacklock’s reports.
Audit @CanRevAgency warns managers to stop thinking of consultants as part of the team; Agency paid $58M last year for consultants' advice though it has 55,000 employees. https://t.co/381ueQwR7t #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/SgY5jLWeLx
— Blacklock's Reporter (@mindingottawa) July 31, 2025
An internal audit revealed that managers have fostered an “employer-employee relationship” with consultants, despite the agency being the largest government bureaucracy with over 55,000 employees.
CRA spent millions on these advisors last year, revealing a troubling pattern of mismanagement and a symptom of a bloated, inefficient agency that prioritizes outsourcing over building internal expertise.
Last year, the CRA shelled out $58 million on consultants for vaguely defined “professional services,” despite its massive workforce. The audit paints a damning picture: no clear requirements to track long-term consultants, no mandates to ensure knowledge transfer from contractors to staff, and insufficient documentation to justify this spending spree.
The result is a bureaucratic behemoth that can’t even articulate what it’s buying, let alone prove it’s necessary. The audit warns that this murky relationship with consultants risks “legal, financial, or tax liabilities” for the CRA or the contractors themselves. Yet, there’s no evidence managers have taken meaningful steps to curb this dependency.
BREAKING: Mark Carney has refused to accredit Rebel News to the G7, so we’re suing. We hope to be in court tomorrow.
— Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 (@ezralevant) June 12, 2025
Trudeau tried this with us, and twice the Federal Court ruled these bans are illegal.
Link to the lawsuit documents in the replies.
pic.twitter.com/7g0T8ea0y4
Instead, the agency sends feeble emails to “guide” interactions between employees and consultants—hardly a robust solution for an organization with the resources to do better.
This systemic failure to prioritize taxpayer value only serve to undermine due diligence, increasing the risk of over-reliance on external resources while neglecting the CRA’s capacity to develop in-house expertise.
With 55,234 employees on the payroll, one would expect the agency to have the talent to handle its own affairs. Instead, it’s outsourcing at an obscene cost, with little accountability.
Meanwhile, the 2023 federal budget, A Made In Canada Plan, promised to “reduce spending on consulting” across government departments. With no specific targets set, the Procurement Ombudsman reports that consultant spend averages a jaw-dropping $25 billion annually.
Former Treasury Board President Anita Anand called these spending reviews “extremely important,” but her vague directive to “refocus” expenditures lacks the grit to actually change course. It’s the kind of empty rhetoric Canadians have come to expect from a government allergic to fiscal discipline.
It’s a microcosm of a larger problem: a government bureaucracy so entrenched it can’t function without propping itself up with expensive external crutches.
The CRA will relentlessly pursue taxpayers for every cent owed, yet it irresponsibly squanders millions on consultants, as though taxpayers are an endless cash machine.
COMMENTS
-
Robin Naismith commented 2025-08-01 14:11:05 -0400With so much corruption and idiot peoples inside of the CRA, I say that the CRA be Dismantled and Disbanded FOREVER -
Bruce Atchison commented 2025-07-31 19:39:00 -0400No wonder I never rose through the ranks, I have the gift of common sense. Governments are about the only place where people without scruples automatically rise through the ranks.
-
Robert Pariseau commented 2025-07-31 17:15:54 -0400For Pete’s sake, can you stop calling it a blunder?