Value of Canadian Building Permits Declines 4.1% in March

On Wednesday, Statistics Canada (StatCan) reported that the total value of building permits issued in Canada decreased 4.1% to CA$12.9 billion in March. On a constant dollar basis (2017=100), permit values declined 5.1% but remained 11.1% higher year-over-year.

Residential Permits

Residential construction intentions rose 2.0% to $8.7 billion in March. A $322.5 million increase in multi-family permits to $5.9 billion offset a $155.6 million drop in single-family permits to $2.8 billion.

British Columbia drove the gain in multi-family permits, rising $397.8 million—primarily from the Vancouver census metropolitan area (CMA), which jumped $652.3 million. Meanwhile, the decline in single-family permits was led by Ontario (down $185.7 million) and Quebec (down $26.0 million).

In total, 22,800 multi-family and 4,400 single-family dwellings were authorized in March, a 4.6% increase from February.

Nonresidential Permits

Nonresidential permits dropped 14.5% to $4.2 billion in March. The commercial component led the decline, falling 19.0% (-$474.1 million) to $2.0 billion. Institutional permits fell 14.4% (-$238.5 million), while industrial permits dipped 0.5% (-$3.7 million), continuing a slide that began in October 2024.

Q1 Overview

The total value of building permits rose 2.9% in Q1 to $39.1 billion, marking the fifth straight quarterly gain.

Residential permits increased 5.9% (+$1.5 billion) to $25.9 billion, driven by a record $17.3 billion in multi-family permits (up 9.6%). However, single-family intentions edged down 0.6% (-$55.0 million) to $8.6 billion.

Nonresidential permits fell 2.6% to $13.2 billion, the second consecutive quarterly decline. The industrial (-$884.5 million) and institutional (-$60.7 million) components declined, partially offset by a $591.1 million gain in commercial permits.


FEA compiles the Wood Markets News from various 3rd party sources to provide readers with the latest news impacting forest product markets. Opinions or views expressed in these articles do not necessarily represent those of FEA.