BECOME A MEMBER

Monthly Annual

Rebel News +

Our most popular subscription

• View RebelNews.com without ads
• Includes 1 free week of RebelNews+
• Access all RebelNews+ shows
• Access Comments and RN+ features

$8

Per month CAD

Join RebelNews+ Now

Producers Club

Our top supporters

• View RebelNews.com without ads
• Includes 1 free week of RebelNews+
• Access all RebelNews+ shows
• Access Comments and RN+ features
• Invites to producers club only events
• Special discount at RebelNewsStore.com
• Free gifts for members, like signed books

$22

Per month CAD

Join Producers Club Now

---

Article by Rebel News staff.

Go Ad Free

The Federal Court of Appeal has ruled that a Trudeau-appointed panel can decide Rebel News isn't journalism. Three judges, unanimous. Appeal dismissed, with costs.

The case was never about money. In 2019, the Trudeau government created the Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization, a government licence for the media. Get approved and you get the goodies: a labour tax credit covering 35 per cent of a reporter's salary, up to $29,750 per reporter, per year. For five years, it also came with a tax credit for your readers' subscriptions. Postmedia gets it. Torstar gets it. The Globe gets it. Even the Western Standard takes it.

Rebel News never wanted the cheque. It applied in 2021 to find out one thing: would a government panel actually claim the power to decide who is and isn't a journalist in Canada?

Now there's an answer.

The CRA's so-called Independent Advisory Board on Eligibility for Journalism Tax Measures looked at three weeks of Rebel's reporting, 423 stories in all. It approved 10. Two per cent.

Which three weeks? January and February 2022, the Freedom Convoy. Hours of livestreams a day. The only camera on Wellington Street at two in the morning when police moved in with batons and horses. That's the coverage the government's journalism experts looked at and said: not news.

Their reasons are worth reading in their own words. Rebel had "taken on an activist role." Its stories "frequently failed to identify the author." And in 58 items, Rebel had crowdfunded on the subject it was covering. In other words, it asked viewers to pay for the reporting instead of asking the government, and that counted against it.

Then the court took Rebel's own mission statement, telling the other side of the story, and treated it as evidence that Rebel's content "focuses on a single perspective." In Canada in 2026, telling the other side of the story is proof you're not a journalist.

To be clear, the judges did not say Rebel isn't journalism. They said something narrower, and in a way worse: it isn't the court's job to decide. As long as the government's reasoning hangs together, the court won't touch it. That's called judicial deference, and it hands the question of who counts as a journalist to the CRA and whatever panel Ottawa appoints.

But to win, the government had to concede something. The Attorney General told the court that "the perspective expressed in the content of an organization applying for QCJO designation is irrelevant." The judgment repeats that three times. After seven years, it's now in a binding ruling: being conservative should not be disqualifying. Remember that the next time a Liberal minister says otherwise.

The court also left the bigger question open. It never decided whether the whole QCJO scheme offends freedom of the press "by enabling the government to regulate journalism through the selective distribution of tax benefits." Not rejected. Not decided.

And this isn't Rebel's first time in that building. In 2019 and again in 2021, the Federal Court ordered the Leaders' Debates Commission to let Rebel reporters in. In 2023, environment minister Steven Guilbeault was ordered to unblock Ezra Levant on X. In 2024, Ya'ara Saks, Marci Ien and Karina Gould were ordered to do the same. Cabinet ministers. Two debate commissions. And now one loss, on a tax credit Rebel never wanted to cash.

Meanwhile, Ottawa spends more than $1.7 billion a year on the media, counting the CBC. Canadian Heritage has also quietly opened a review of every journalism subsidy it runs. So turn the ruling around. If Rebel News fails the government's test, think about who passes it. Every outlet with the QCJO stamp has been reviewed by a government panel and found acceptable. That's not a press gallery. That's a government payroll.

How does a reporter ask Mark Carney a hard question when the licence to be a journalist was handed out by a panel Ottawa appointed? They don't.

Rebel News is one of a handful of outlets in Canada that has never taken the money. Not the labour credit, not the Local Journalism Initiative, not the Periodical Fund. The only people who pay for Rebel are its viewers. That's why the government calls it activist.

Rebel's lawyers are reviewing the decision, and an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada is on the table. But the fight has already moved to new fronts:

• Bill C-9, which deleted the religious-text defence from the hate-speech law.
• Bill C-22, the lawful access bill now in the Senate.
• Bill C-34, Marc Miller's online harms bill under a friendlier name.

Five years. Two courts. More than $105,000 in fees to Rebel's current law firm on this one case, plus a share of the government's costs. Every dollar came from voluntary donations, not a tax credit. To help cover the costs and prepare for the next round, go to LetUsReport.com.