Key takeaways
- Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, introduced on September 21, 2026 and at first reading, would enact the Enabling Digital Trade Act: Canada’s first federal law on electronic trade documents, implementing the 2017 UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records.
- Section 26 would let a federal minister or official disclose any import or export-related information received from a person to any other federal official permitted by law to collect it, with no purpose limitation, consent, notice, or reporting in the bill text. Disclosure may be made despite listed confidentiality rules, and Cabinet could expand that list by order.
- The digital trade provisions are voluntary and conditional: consent can be inferred from conduct, reliability criteria await Cabinet regulations, and the Act would come into force by order in council.
A 232-page bill with a privacy problem
On September 21, 2026, the federal government introduced Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act. Commentary has focused on project approvals and labour relations, where McMillan, Mondaq, and Gowling WLG aimed their analysis.
Buried near the end of the bill, in Part 2, Division 8, is an entirely new statute: the Enabling Digital Trade Act. As Michael Geist noted in his analysis today, it would be Canada’s first federal law on electronic trade documents such as bills of lading. I verified every section below against the first-reading bill text; this is a proposal, not law.
The headline policy is overdue and sound. The Act implements the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (adopted 2017), already enacted in the UK, Singapore, France, and Bahrain. Section 8 sets the conditions: the same information, identifiable as distinguishable from its copies, controllable for its whole life, and protected against unauthorized alteration. Section 13 converts possession into exclusive control, and transfer of possession into transfer of control.
But the fine print defers the hard questions. Consent can be inferred from conduct (s. 18(2)). The criteria for a “reliable method” are left to future Cabinet regulations (s. 21), the Minister can exempt document categories by order (s. 22), and the Act comes into force on a day fixed by order in council (s. 303).
Section 26: the provision privacy teams should read
This is the part that deserves your attention. Section 26(1) lets a federal minister, or an officer or employee of a department or agency of the Government of Canada, disclose any import or export-related information received from a person to another federal minister, officer, or employee permitted by law to collect it.
The bill text imposes no purpose test on that disclosure. Section 26 requires neither that the recipient use the information for its original purpose, nor any consent, notice, or reporting. “Person” covers individuals, partnerships, corporations, trusts, estates, and organizations of any kind: a sole proprietor filing import paperwork, or a traveller caught by an export process.
| Part of the proposed Act | What it would do | What to watch |
|---|---|---|
| Electronic trade documents (ss. 5-22) | Bills of lading can move to electronic form; possession becomes “exclusive control” (s. 13) | Reliability criteria left to regulations (s. 21); consent inferred from conduct (s. 18(2)) |
| Inter-departmental disclosure (s. 26) | Import/export information shared with any federal official permitted by law to collect it | No purpose limitation, consent, notice, or reporting; overrides listed confidentiality provisions; Cabinet can expand the list by order (s. 26(3)) |
The override clause is the sharpest edge. Section 26(2) permits the disclosure despite any Act of Parliament or regulation, or portion of one, listed in the Act’s schedule. Geist’s reading of the schedule names nine statutes’ confidentiality provisions: the Customs Act, the Income Tax Act, the Excise Tax Act, the Special Import Measures Act, the Safe Food for Canadians Act, the Canada Transportation Act, the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, the Pest Control Products Act, and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Section 26(3) lets the Governor in Council amend that schedule by order, without returning to Parliament, and the bill contains no review clause or dedicated oversight. One counterweight exists: section 27(1)(d) lets the Minister switch off subsection 26(1) in circumstances of the Minister’s choosing.
Why this matters now
The timing is the opportunity. Bill C-39 is at first reading, and committee study is where scope questions get asked. Geist calls for real study of provincial coordination, reliability criteria, and limits on the disclosure power. My addition: the committee should also hear about purpose limitation.
Map your trade-data footprint now. If your organization files import or export information with a federal department, its confidentiality currently rests partly on statute-specific protections. Section 26 would let those protections be set aside for sharing inside the federal government. Inventory what you file, with which departments, and what your privacy notices promise. If a notice promises that customs or tax filings stay within the collecting department, that promise may need revisiting.
Actionable takeaway: Read sections 21, 26, and 27 of the Enabling Digital Trade Act (Part 2, Division 8 of Bill C-39) this week, and brief trade-compliance and privacy colleagues together: the former owns the filings, the latter owns the confidentiality promises. If your organization has views on purpose limitation, the committee stage is the moment to put them on the record. Once the schedule can be amended by order, that debate moves behind closed doors.