Modelled on a $12M USD limited series, 55% Canadian labour, 35% goods & services, no regional days. Change any of it in the calculator.
Rates primary-sourced 2026-07-29 (docs/tax) · simplified model · estimates only, never tax advice.
QPSTC 25% all-spend (Budget 2024); +16% VFX/animation labour
NSFPIF Stream I 26% all-spend; +2% rural
| QC | NS | |
|---|---|---|
| Programme | QPSTC 25% all-spend (Budget 2024) | NSFPIF Stream I 26% all-spend |
| Credit base | All qualifying spend | All qualifying spend |
| Headline rate | 25.0% | 26.0% |
| Regional bonus | — | +2% |
| Crew depth (1–5) | ▓▓▓░░ 3 | ▓▓░░░ 2 |
| Flight from LA | 5h 20m direct | 7h+ via YYZ |
That gap is real, but it is not the whole decision. Quebec has the deeper crew base of the two, which can be worth more than the rate gap on a tight schedule.
Both numbers assume you can wait 12–24 months for a refundable credit. If you cannot, see Canada vs. Georgia — a transferable credit behaves completely differently on cash flow, and for some financings that matters more than the headline rate.
Canadian credits are refundable rather than transferable, which is better value overall — but it does mean waiting for assessment, commonly 12 to 24 months after wrap. You can borrow against the receivable, but you cannot sell it the way a Georgia credit can be sold, and that borrowing has a real cost.
When a market saturates, department heads get scarce, permit lists run deep, and rates climb above scale. The premium you pay to staff up in a tight market can absorb a meaningful share of the credit you came for — and the schedule risk usually matters more than the money.
Same production, same stack, but your labour split and schedule decide which one actually pays more.