Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (Rural Community Immigration): SOR/2026-217

Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 160, Number 22

Registration
SOR/2026-217 October 22, 2026

IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE PROTECTION ACT

P.C. 2026-1001 October 22, 2026

Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (Rural Community Immigration) under subsection 5(1) and sections 14footnote a and 92footnote b of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act footnote c.

Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (Rural Community Immigration)

Amendments

1 Section 25.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations footnote 1 is amended by adding the following after subsection (5):

Rural community immigration candidate

(5.1) For the purposes of determining whether a child is a dependent child, the lock-in date for the age of a child of a person who is referred to in section 87.4 and who makes an application under Division 6 of Part 5 is the date on which an application for a certificate of recommendation is made to an economic development organization with respect to the person.

2 Paragraph 70(2)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

3 (1) The portion of subsection 74(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Criteria

74 (1) For the purposes of paragraphs 75(2)(d), 79(3)(a), 87.1(2)(d) and (e), 87.2(3)(a), 87.3(2)(f) and 87.4(2)(f), the Minister shall fix, by class prescribed by these Regulations or by occupation, and make available to the public, minimum language proficiency thresholds on the basis of

(2) Paragraph 74(1)(c) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(3) Subsection 74(7) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Conclusive evidence

(7) The results of an evaluation of language proficiency by a designated organization or institution using an approved language test are conclusive evidence of an applicant’s language proficiency in respect of the federal skilled worker class, the Canadian experience class, the federal skilled trades class, the Atlantic immigration class or the rural community immigration class.

4 The Regulations are amended by adding the following after section 87.3:

Rural Community Immigration Class

Class

87.4 (1) For the purposes of subsection 12(2) of the Act, the rural community immigration class is prescribed as a class of persons who may become permanent residents on the basis of their ability to become economically established in Canada.

Member of class

(2) A foreign national is a member of the rural community immigration class if they demonstrate that they meet all of the following requirements from the date on which they apply for permanent resident status until they obtain that status:

Designation of community

87.41 (1) The Minister may designate a community outside of Quebec if it is rural, taking into consideration demographic, geographic and other factors.

Factors

(2) The factors the Minister may consider when deciding whether to designate a rural community include

Public notice

(3) The Minister must make the names of communities that are designated available on the Department’s website.

Economic development organizations

87.42 (1) The Minister may designate economic development organizations for the purpose of making recommendations with respect to foreign nationals who wish to apply for the rural community immigration class with respect to a designated community.

Clarification

(2) For greater certainty, the designation does not make an organization an agent of His Majesty or a Crown corporation, as defined in section 2 of the Financial Administration Act, and does not make its officers and employees members of the federal public administration.

Priority sectors and occupations

(3) An economic development organization ceases to be designated if it does not establish a list of priority sectors and occupations that, in its opinion, will best contribute to economic development in the designated community and review and submit that list to the Minister annually.

Charging fees prohibited

(4) To maintain its designation, an economic development organization must not charge fees for

Designation of employer

87.43 (1) An economic development organization must designate an employer as eligible to participate in the rural community immigration program if the employer applies to be designated and meets all of the following criteria:

Revocation of designation

(2) An economic development organization may revoke the designation of an employer if

Definition of worker protection laws

(3) In this section, worker protection laws means any federal or provincial laws that protect human rights or regulate the employment or recruitment of employees in a province in which the employer carries on business.

Certificate of recommendation

87.44 (1) An economic development organization may issue a certificate of recommendation to a foreign national if a designated employer applies for a certificate with respect to the foreign national and the economic development organization is satisfied that the foreign national

Prioritizing applications

(2) When issuing a certificate of recommendation, an economic development organization may prioritize applications in order to maximize economic development in a community with respect to which it is designated and to meet the needs of the local labour market. This prioritization may be based on a foreign national’s occupation, wage, work experience, language proficiency in English or French, education and connection to that community.

Revocation — criteria not met

(3) The economic development organization must revoke a certificate of recommendation if it becomes aware that the foreign national did not meet the criteria set out in subsection (1) at the time the certificate was issued or no longer meets those criteria at any time before they obtain permanent resident status.

Amendment

(4) If a foreign national obtains a new eligible offer of employment in accordance with subsection 87.46(3), the economic development organization may amend a certificate of recommendation to be based on the new eligible offer of employment.

Revocation — employer no longer designated

(5) The economic development organization must revoke a certificate of recommendation if it is based on an eligible offer of employment from an employer whose designation has been revoked.

Validity period

(6) A certificate of recommendation is valid until the earlier of

Work experience

87.45 (1) A foreign national meets the work experience requirement if they have work experience that satisfies the criteria set out in subsection (2) in one of the following occupations:

Work experience criteria

(2) The work experience must

Exception — eligible credential

(3) The work experience requirement does not apply to a foreign national who obtained an eligible credential from a post-secondary program and who meets all of the following requirements:

Definition of eligible credential

(4) In subsection (3), eligible credential means a degree, diploma, certificate, trade credential or apprenticeship credential from a Canadian public post-secondary institution in the designated community where the offered employment is located, but does not include a credential obtained in a study or training program

Eligible offer of employment

87.46 (1) An offer of employment is eligible if

Ministerial decision

(2) The Minister may conclude that an offer of employment is not eligible if the designated employer is found to have contravened worker protection laws, as defined in subsection 87.43(3).

New offer

(3) The eligible offer of employment that was first submitted with a foreign national’s application for permanent resident status must be used to evaluate the application, unless the foreign national receives a new eligible offer of employment from a different designated employer, in the following circumstances:

Transitional Provision

5 A certificate of recommendation referred to in section 4 of the Ministerial Instructions with Respect to the Rural Community Immigration Class, published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on December 14, 2024, cannot be used to satisfy the requirement of paragraph 87.4(2)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

Coming into Force

6 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues: Rural communities across Canada are experiencing economic and demographic challenges, including aging populations, low birth rates, limited immigration, and higher out-migration. Since 1998, efforts have been made through the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) to spread the benefits of immigration across the country. To date, these efforts have resulted in an increase in newcomers settling outside of Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia, from 11% in 1998 to 30% in 2025. While these regional immigration programs have made progress in better distributing newcomers across Canada, most newcomers still tend to concentrate in major urban areas. This results in an uneven distribution of economic immigrants across Canada, leading to persistent regional labour market shortages, employers having difficulties filling key jobs, and ongoing challenges for local economic development.

Description: The Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (the Regulations) will support the creation of a permanent economic immigration program by establishing a new rural community immigration economic class. The Regulations set the eligibility requirements for permanent residency through the Rural Community Immigration (RCI) Program, as well as the responsibilities and requirements for participating communities in the program. The Minister may also designate new communities based on factors set out in the Regulations.

Rationale: The Amendments are expected to result in costs to the Government of Canada, provincial governments, Economic Development Organizations (EDOs), and employers who utilize the RCI Program. These costs are estimated at $60.8 million in present value (PV) over 10 periods of 12 months. The benefits of the Amendments consist of ongoing cost savings for Canadian provinces, employers, and RCI Program applicants, and total $50.3 million PV over 10 periods of 12 months. Therefore, the Amendments will result in a net cost of $10.5 million PV. However, there are also many qualitative benefits to employers, RCI applicants, and EDOs, such as; ensuring that immigration is aligned with local economic development needs, increased employee satisfaction, and strengthened workforce stability, which are expected to result in an overall net benefit for Canadians.

Issues

Canada’s ability to support balanced regional growth is being challenged by persistent disparities in where newcomers settle. In 2021, more than 78% of newcomers settled in Canada’s 10 largest cities, which currently hold approximately 56% of the Canadian population. Recent adjustments to Canada’s immigration system, including reductions to permanent resident admissions growth and new limits on temporary resident arrivals beginning in 2024, have affected labour supply differently across regions.

Labour market data consistently shows that many rural and remote regions experience structurally tight labour markets, characterized by lower unemployment rates (under 5% as of June 2026), limited local labour mobility, and a smaller working-age population than urban areas. These conditions are compounded by an aging population; people aged 65 and older make up 23.2% of the rural population, compared to 18.2% in urban centres. Rural areas are also experiencing a departure of skilled workers from key sectors such as health care, trades, agriculture, natural resources, and manufacturing, as many young workers seek out additional opportunities in larger urban centres.

Background

The Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot (RNIP) was launched in 2019 through Ministerial Instructions issued under section 14.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This section allows the Minister to issue instructions to establish classes of permanent residents as part of the economic class for a limited duration of five years. The RNIP was established with the objective of testing a community-led model for economic immigrant attraction and retention in rural and northern communities by partnering directly with communities represented by local economic development organizations (EDOs). The primary goals of this pilot were to support local economic development and facilitate long-term retention within participating communities. Program results indicated that the RNIP pilot was successful, as demonstrated by the following results:

The success of the RNIP has generated significant stakeholder support for continued immigration programming in rural communities. Participating communities have consistently indicated that the pilot has helped them address persistent labour shortages, supported local economic development, and improved newcomer retention outcomes through its community-driven design. Community partners and employers have emphasized that the RNIP model enables better alignment between immigration selection and local labour market needs, while also strengthening settlement and integration supports at the local level.

In December 2024, Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC or the Department) launched the Rural Community Immigration Pilot (RCI Pilot) as an interim measure to bridge the service gap following the conclusion of the Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot (RNIP), while work continued to design a permanent community-based immigration program (as noted in the public announcement of the pilot in January 2025). The RCI Pilot ensured continued access to a dedicated regional economic immigration pathway for rural communities, including small and remote communities facing persistent labour shortages, while avoiding disruption for employers and communities that would have been unable to fill key labour market gaps without the pilot.

The launch of the RCI Pilot also provided IRCC with an opportunity to apply lessons learned from the implementation of the RNIP, as well as from other successful regional economic initiatives, such as the Atlantic Immigration Program (AIP). Drawing on program evaluations, operational experience, and stakeholder feedback, the Department introduced a series of targeted program refinements aimed at strengthening integrity, improving consistency across communities, and enhancing overall operational efficiency, while preserving the RCI Pilot’s core objective of supporting newcomer attraction and retention in small, rural, and remote areas.

Currently, 14 rural and remote communitiesfootnote 2 are participating in the RCI Pilot, with early evidence indicating strong first-year results across key indicators, including employer participation, alignment with local labour market needs, and community capacity to support newcomer settlement. These results reinforce earlier findings from the RNIP that community-driven, place-based immigration approaches can effectively support economic growth and retention in rural and remote regions.

Objective

The primary objective of this program is to support sustained economic development in rural communities, including small and remote communities, by providing a permanent immigration pathway that responds directly to local and regional labour market needs. By enabling communities to identify priority sectors and occupations and attract skilled workers aligned with those needs, the Rural Community Immigration Program (RCI Program) is intended to help employers address persistent labour shortages, support business growth, and strengthen the economic resilience of smaller communities over time.

A second core objective is to support long-term demographic sustainability in participating communities through the successful settlement and retention of newcomers and their families. Many rural and remote regions face population decline and accelerated aging, which undermines the availability of workers and the long-term viability of local services and infrastructure. By combining employment opportunities with coordinated settlement and integration supports, the program aims to encourage permanent settlement, strengthen community attachment, and support population growth in areas that have historically struggled to attract and retain newcomers.

This program seeks to more effectively distribute the benefits of economic immigration across Canada beyond major urban centres. By embedding immigration selection at the community level and aligning admissions with local economic priorities, the RCI Program will help ensure that the economic and social benefits of immigration — such as labour force growth, business development, and community vitality — are shared more equitably across regions. This objective supports broader federal goals related to sustainable rural economic development and inclusive growth, as well as the long-term viability of Canada’s immigration system as a national economic tool.

Description

The Regulations establish the Rural Community Immigration Class, which provides a pathway to permanent residence for skilled foreign workers (and their spouses and/or dependents) who can help address identified local labour market needs and who intend to reside in participating communities. Under the Regulations, the Minister may designate EDOs outside of Quebec, based on geographic and demographic factors, and other factors, including economic and administrative capacity considerations. EDOs will be responsible for making recommendations with respect to foreign nationals who wish to apply for the RCI Program with respect to a designated community and annually establishing a list of priority sectors and occupations that align with local labour market gaps and economic development objectives in their community.

Applicants seeking permanent residence through the program will be required to

EDOs are required to conduct formal employer designation processes to determine which employers are eligible to participate in the program and may refuse to designate or revoke designation from employers found to be ineligible. To be eligible to participate in the RCI Program, designated employers will be required to complete onboarding immigration training, ensuring a clear understanding of program requirements and responsibilities, as well as intercultural competency training to promote inclusive workplaces and strengthen employers’ ability to support newcomers. Designated employers will be required to support the settlement of each foreign national and any accompanying family members, including by facilitating access to settlement and social service support.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Community partners, provinces with participating communities, and regional development agencies representing economic development interests across Canada were consulted on the regulatory amendments in Summer 2026. Provinces and territories without participating communities were not directly consulted. Feedback from community partners was overwhelmingly positive, with communities highlighting that the pilot program’s design has been effective in meeting its stated objectives. In particular, the priority setting exercise was highlighted by multiple communities as an effective tool in meeting local labour market needs. The program design highlighted by communities will be maintained in the Regulations to ensure a smooth transition between the RCI Pilot and RCI Program. Some communities highlighted concerns over access to ongoing funding for positions within their EDO responsible for administering the pilot, which is outside of the scope of the creation of a new rural economic class in the Regulations. Although this is outside of the scope of the Regulations, communities may engage with regional development agencies to support their implementation of the program.

Provinces with participating communities were also engaged on the regulatory amendments. Some provinces highlighted the complementarity of the program to their own Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) streams — particularly in provinces where there is no dedicated rural stream. In provinces where there was a rural stream, stakeholders highlighted that any new designated communities should be done in concert with provinces to ensure that there is no duplication of pathways. While this is outside of the scope of the regulatory amendments, this feedback will continue to inform collaboration between levels of government on rural immigration going forward. Some provinces also highlighted that managing the priorities of many different communities within their jurisdiction through existing channels posed an administrative burden, so the regulatory amendments were welcomed as an opportunity to download the identification of local labour market priorities directly to communities, who have a much better understanding of local labour market needs.

Provinces highlighted the risk of misuse of the program with the possibility of fraudulent employers attempting to access the program, as this is seen in their own PNP/rural PNP streams. This will be addressed through the regulatory amendments as part of the employer designation revocation process that is built into the program requirements, which has been well-managed by communities and is effective at addressing misrepresentation. The employer designation process allows communities to verify the legitimacy of an employer before they are able to access the program, limiting the ability of illegitimate or misrepresentative employers to access the program and apply for recommendations. Provinces also highlighted their concern that there was a limited role for the provinces in setting the direction of this program. While this feedback has been taken into consideration, the goal of the Regulations is to allow communities to have a lead role in setting their economic development goals, which may differ from broader provincial goals. The Regulations reflect the key partnership between communities and IRCC, and provinces have a limited, informal role to play in the actual program delivery. Provinces and territories that do not have participating communities were not consulted on the regulatory amendments, however will be consulted ahead of any new community designations within their jurisdiction.

Some provinces also emphasized that the PNP should remain the primary regional economic immigration pathway, with the proposed RCI Program serving as a complementary program rather than a substitute. IRCC reaffirmed that this aligns with the proposal’s intended design. The RCI Program is deliberately modest in scale and focused on supporting the unique labour market needs of rural communities. A key feature of the RCI Program is its reliance on local partnerships and community-led efforts to support the settlement and integration of newcomers. IRCC noted that significantly expanding the program could risk diluting this community-driven approach, which is central to its success.

Regional development agencies, including Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA), Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency (CanNor), Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev Ontario), Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario (FedNor), Prairies Economic Development Canada (PrairiesCan), and Pacific Economic Development Canada (PacifiCan), were also engaged on the regulatory amendments. The feedback received across all regional development agencies was extremely positive, with all agencies supportive of the amendment. Northern stakeholders highlighted the RCI Program as a valuable opportunity to strengthen workforce development efforts and help address persistent labour shortages across Northern and territorial communities. Stakeholders noted that increased access to skilled workers could support local employers, enhance economic resilience, and contribute to the long-term sustainability of Northern communities, should there be an opportunity for those communities to participate in the future. Several agencies also pointed to upcoming major federal projects in their regions that may benefit from enhanced access to skilled talent in rural and remote areas. Agencies also emphasized their support for ongoing engagement and collaboration with provincial and territorial counterparts to ensure alignment and complementarity between immigration pathways.

The consultations reflected stakeholder support of the regulatory amendments and the ongoing commitment by all partners to a collaborative approach to rural immigration. Many of the successful features of the existing pilot that stakeholders highlighted are being maintained through the Regulations in the new program. Concerns that fall outside of the scope of the regulatory amendments, including funding arrangements for local delivery partners and broader program administration and implementation matters, will continue to be addressed through ongoing collaboration with participating communities.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

As required by the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an assessment of modern treaty implications was conducted on the proposal. The assessment examined the geographical scope and subject matter of the Regulations in relation to modern treaties in effect and did not identify any modern treaty implications or obligations. The RCI Program will not operate within any jurisdictions with a modern treaty or self-government agreement and no expansion that would overlap with modern treaty/self-governing areas is planned.

Instrument choice

The authority to create a new class of permanent residents is prescribed by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations is the most appropriate way to create a new permanent economic immigration class. The authority to create an immigration class through Ministerial Instructions is limited, both in time and scope, while an amendment to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations allows the created class to be established permanently.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

The Regulations would have significant cost implications for IRCC, provincial governments, Economic Development Organizations (EDOs), and employers who utilize the RCI Program, estimated at $60.8 million Present Value (PV) over 10 periods of 12 months. Total monetized benefits are estimated at $50.3 million PV, resulting in a net cost of $10.5 million PV over 10 years. However, there are many qualitative benefits of the proposal, which are expected to result in an overall positive net benefit for Canadians.

An important first step in developing a cost-benefit methodology is establishing a baseline scenario against which options may be measured. For this analysis, the baseline scenario is one where the RCI Program does not exist; therefore, foreign nationals must apply to work in Canada through different immigration programs. Following engagement with subject matter experts, the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) was used as the baseline scenario, as it was identified as the most likely alternative program to be utilized by proposed RCI Program candidates.

While continued pilots are a potential option for the baseline, they are not suitable in the long term. Experience shows that pilots are costly to develop and maintain. They are also, by nature, intended to generate evidence, not serve as long term solutions, as they run for a limited amount of time (five years in this case) and then sunset or become a permanent program. Similar to other regulatory amendments IRCC has done previously to make pilots permanent programs (most recently the AIP program in 2022, the baseline is chosen as the most likely alternative existing avenue that candidates would come through, in the absence of the pilot program. Continued pilots are not a reasonable assumption, since by design they are temporary and experimental, intended to test approaches before a decision is made on whether they should be made permanent programs. Continued pilots would likely make employers, provinces and EDOs reluctant to repeatedly invest in pathways they expect will end in a short number of years. Additionally, economic pilots established under the MIs are limited to 2 750 admissions per year, which severely limits any kind of growth under the pilot. Continued pilots can also create instability in immigration planning, create repeated uncertainty for candidates, and the continuously changing eligibility criteria, application processes, reporting requirements, etc., that would all be part of continuous different pilot programs would not be advisable. Furthermore, continued use of pilots to target specific groups could be seen as IRCC seeking to circumvent the reg process and “cheating” the 5-year expiry rule. Pilots can only run for five years, after which they sunset. For a pilot to continue, it must either be transitioned into a permanent program, or change substantially enough to be launched as a new five-year pilot.

Both the RCI Program and PNP are similar in terms of their objectives to fill local labour market needs and distribute the benefits of immigration across Canada by empowering either provincial/territorial, or Economic Development Organizations (EDOs) and employer partners. However, there are some key differences in Program design. First, under the PNP, provinces and territories are required to assess the language, education, and work experience credentials of applicants. Under the RCI Program, these criteria will be initially evaluated by participating EDOs and formally verified against admissibility criteria by the federal government. Second, employers will play a more active role in the RCI Program, and will be required to take mandatory onboarding training, intercultural competency training, and support the settlement and integration of foreign nationals hired under the program. These elements are not required for employers of workers in the PNP.

The baseline scenario is then compared with the regulatory scenario, in which IRCC implements a permanent RCI Program.

Assumptions for the analysis were based on publicly available information, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) datasets, and subject matter expertise. The results are discussed below. For further details regarding methodology, the full cost-benefit analysis is available upon request from IRCC, at IRCC.RCIProgram-ProgrammeICR.IRCC@cic.gc.ca.

The cost-benefit analysis makes assumptions around variables that may be subject to uncertainty. It is important to acknowledge this uncertainty, in particular the presence of uncertainty in variables due to a lack of historical data. For this reason, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine how changes in uncertain variables would impact the cost-benefit analysis results. Sensitivity analysis results are discussed in the relevant section below.

Note that, due to rounding, there are some instances throughout the cost-benefit analysis where components do not exactly sum to totals, in particular when comparing costs in the small business lens to the overarching costs in the main costs and benefits section.

Costs

The Regulations will result in costs for IRCC, provincial governments, employers, and EDOs. No costs to applicants are expected, since there is no fee to apply for recommendation under the RCI program, and the estimated time to complete an application is the same for both the PNP and RCI program.

Costs to IRCC

Incremental costs to IRCC would consist of both transition and ongoing costs. Transition costs would include costs for developing communications products, updates to program delivery instructions and other administrative materials, and costs to issue program guidance to EDOs. These costs will be incurred in the year 2026 and are estimated at approximately $0.24 million.

Ongoing costs to IRCC reflect the additional cost burden of admitting individuals to Canada via the proposed program, rather than through the PNP. Total ongoing costs to IRCC are estimated as $7.0 million PV over 10 years. While these costs primarily stem from costs to coordinate and support communities participating in the program, there are also ongoing costs to conduct data analysis and support employers, including support via the Dedicated Service Channel (DSC).

To estimate costs to IRCC, the expected number of recommendations issued annually between the RCI Pilot and Francophone Community Immigration Pilot was first calculated. This estimate is based on a target of 3000 admissions per year, including Principal Applicants and dependents. A further breakdown of target admissions by pilot program is not available. This assumption is based on IRCC’s Departmental Multi-Year Levels Pan for 2026–2028, the most current approved Plan at the time of this analysis.

Costs to provincial governments

The implementation of a permanent RCI program will present ongoing costs for provincial governments in the form of foregone revenue, estimated as $23.4 million PV over 10 years. Whilst PNP applicants are required to pay a fee to provincial governments when applying for nomination,footnote 3 RCI applicants will not be subject to these fees. The reason for this distinction is that while the PNP is governed by the provinces and territories themselves, the RCI program will be a federal program co-administered with community partners and subject to a different legislative framework.

Costs to employers

The Regulations will also present ongoing costs for employers who choose to utilize the RCI Program, estimated at $24.0 million PV over 10 years. These costs reflect additional requirements for employers to recruit candidates and issue job offers, apply to communities for designation, complete mandatory onboarding and intercultural competency training, evaluate applicants against eligibility requirements, and to connect candidates and their families with settlement services to support their retention and integration.

As the pilot has only been implemented since January 2025, data on the volume of active employers, newly designated employers, and recommendation volumes are limited. Based on the available data, these costs were computed using the assumption of 260 new designated employers each year, and 2 760 recommendations issued each year for all employers actively using the RCI Program.

Since there is uncertainty surrounding the number of employers that will be impacted due to a lack of historical data and how much time they can expect to spend on recruitment, a sensitivity analysis on relevant variables can be found below.

Furthermore, as detailed in the Distributional Analysis in the following section, while the RCI Program is expected to benefit Canada overall by spreading the benefits of immigration to areas where it is most needed via a targeted approach, it is acknowledged that the RCI Program will result in a decrease in immigration volumes to most provinces and territories. While it is possible that this decrease may negatively impact these local economies through a loss in employment, this is not likely, due to the relatively small change in volumes expected relative to the total population of each affected province/territory.

Costs to Economic Development Organizations

The regulatory proposal will also present costs for Economic Development Organizations within each community, estimated at $6.1 million PV annually. These include costs to establish priority industries and determine how best to utilize their community’s allocation to achieve their economic goals. There are also costs for the assessment and evaluation of designated employers, candidate recommendations, and job offers.

Benefits

The anticipated benefits of a permanent RCI Program are informed by the demonstrated outcomes of its predecessor initiatives, including the RNIP and RCI Pilot. These initiatives have provided strong evidence of the program design’s effectiveness in supporting community driven immigration, addressing local labour market needs, and fostering successful newcomer attraction and retention. Building on this experience, similar benefits would be expected to be realized through the establishment of the RCI Pilot as a permanent program.

Expected benefits include ongoing cost savings for Canadian provinces, employers, and RCI Program applicants, and total $50.3 million PV over 10 periods of 12 months. There would also be additional qualitative benefits to employers, candidates, and participating rural communities, which are also discussed below.

Benefits to provincial governments

The Regulations will benefit provincial governments through a reduction in processing costs, estimated at $4.8 million PV over 10 periods of 12 months. Benefits are calculated assuming that the expected volume of applicants who would be assumed to enter Canada each year under the RCI Program, would come through the PNP if the proposed regulatory amendments were not implemented.

While provinces are responsible for processing PNP applications, EDOs will be responsible for processing RCI Program recommendation applications. Specifically, under the RCI Program, provinces will not be required to process nomination applications from employers, assess the legitimacy of job offers against program requirements, or provide candidates with Certificates of Nomination.

Benefits to employers

The Regulations are expected to deliver significant benefits to employers in participating communities through cost savings for PNP-specific activities, which will not be required of employers under the RCI Program. While mandatory for the PNP, under the RCI Program, employers will not be required to contact Provinces to express an interest in the program. They will also not be required to reach out to Provinces for nominations and job offers for candidates. Cost-savings to employers as a result of not completing these activities are estimated as $23.0 million PV over 10 periods.

Further qualitative benefits to employers would be realized, as the RCI Program will provide a reliable, community-driven pathway to address persistent labour shortages. Building on outcomes from the RNIP and the RCI Pilot, the RCI Program will support rural employers in attracting and retaining skilled workers aligned with local labour market needs. While the PNP also provides employers with immigration benefits to address labour market gaps, the RCI Program will concentrate employer benefits within locally defined priority sectors and occupations, thereby ensuring immigration is closely aligned with local economic development priorities and that employers can access talent where shortages are most acute. Therefore, compared to broader provincial immigration pathways like the PNP, the RCI Program will offer a more targeted and responsive mechanism tailored to rural labour market realities.

Moreover, RCI Program employers will be required to foster inclusive workplaces and facilitate access to settlement services, while collaborating with EDOs and Settlement Provider Organizations to support newcomer integration and long-term retention. These program elements are not required under the PNP, and will benefit employers by increasing employee satisfaction, reducing turnover, and strengthening workforce stability.

In addition, unlike PNP employers, RCI Program employers will benefit from dedicated federal support through the Dedicated Service Channel (DSC). This includes guidance on program requirements and pathway selection — support that is especially valuable for small and medium-sized employers with limited capacity or experience in immigration. This support will help employers navigate the immigration process more effectively and efficiently.

Compared to the PNP, employers participating in the RCI Program will have a greater role in the candidate experience. Under the PNP, employers have a more limited and often less formalized role, with less structured support in recruiting, welcoming, and integrating newcomers. Access to provincial streams can also be inconsistent, as they open and close based on shifting priorities, and employers are expected to navigate the system more independently. In contrast, the RCI Program will provide consistent access for rural employers and formalize their involvement by way of designation. This will make hiring foreign workers more accessible for employers, particularly for smaller businesses who may lack the time and resources to manage complex processes on their own.

Overall, it is expected that, though the RCI Program will be more costly for businesses to utilize than the PNP, they will still choose the RCI Program due to the anticipated benefits of improved employee retention, the fact that they will be better equipped to address their labour needs, and the support they will receive from the Dedicated Service Channel. By combining employer leadership, community coordination, and federal support, the RCI Program will enhance employers’ ability to fill critical positions, improve workforce continuity, and support long-term business growth.

Benefits to RCI Program applicants

Implementing the RCI Program as a permanent program will provide many benefits to program candidates. First, candidates will benefit by not having to pay an application (nomination) fee to provincial governments when applying to the RCI Program, while they would if applying to the PNP. Since the RCI Program is a federal program, there is no legislative authority under which candidates can be charged application fees. The total savings benefit to candidates is estimated at $22.5 million PV over 10 years. Note that only the savings to in-Canada applicants are considered in-scope for the purposes of this cost-benefit analysis.

There will also be many qualitative benefits to applicants. The RCI Program will provide a higher level of candidate support than the PNP via stronger employer involvement. Under the RCI Program, employers will be required to take at least one concrete action to foster a welcoming workplace and/or support candidates and their accompanying family members as they settle into the community. Eligible actions include helping candidates secure housing, assisting candidates with transportation (information on public transit, picking up the candidate from the port-of-entry, helping the candidate travel to work or to a local Service Provider Organization (SPO) or essential service), referring candidates to key services in the community (e.g. health card and school registration), and connecting candidates with local groups of interest. This level of engagement is not required under the PNP, where candidates are expected to take greater initiative in their own settlement and integration.

Furthermore, the RCI Program will require that all participating employers be formally designated and vetted by their community. This is not required under the PNP. Designated employers will need to demonstrate an established local presence, provide proof of compliance with employment and occupational health and safety standards, and operate within priority sectors identified through community-led economic planning. They will also be required to complete onboarding and intercultural competency training and commit to supporting newcomer settlement. As a result, candidates will benefit from greater confidence in the stability of their employment, its alignment with local labour market needs, and the employer’s readiness to support a diverse workforce.

Benefits to participating rural communities

The regulatory proposal will also offer significant benefits to participating communities by directly integrating immigration into community-led economic development. The RCI Program will place local labour market needs at the centre of program design, with Economic Development Organizations leading implementation in partnership with IRCC.

Canada as a whole experiences demographic pressures related to an ageing population, low fertility rates, and widespread labour shortages. These challenges are generally more pronounced in rural regions, where long term outmigration, declining population growth, and limited access to talent constrain economic development. The RCI Pilot was designed as a targeted response to these pressures by supporting the attraction and retention of newcomers in communities that have historically benefited less from national immigration flows.

Unlike the PNP, which operates at the provincial/territorial level, the RCI Program will provide Economic Development Organizations with a direct role in shaping immigration outcomes. Through annual priority-setting exercises, Economic Development Organizations will identify in-demand sectors and occupations based on local labour market data, employer engagement, and community consultations. This will ensure that immigration selection is aligned with community-specific economic needs. Under the PNP, priorities are set at broader provincial and federal levels, limiting communities’ influence over candidate selection and reducing alignment with localized challenges.

The RCI Program will also offer benefits to participating communities by increasing the long-term retention of foreign workers in rural communities. The program integrates settlement supports within communities and requires coordination among local partners to support newcomer integration, thereby increasing the likelihood that newcomers will remain in smaller or rural communities. In comparison, the PNP does not include community-driven settlement requirements, and newcomers often settle in larger urban centres, limiting retention in rural areas. Retention issues in rural areas contribute to labour shortages, shrinking social services and an aging population. By increasing retention in these areas, the RCI Program will contribute to a more balanced distribution of economic immigration across Canada while strengthening labour market participation and economic growth in regions facing persistent population challenges.

Canadians

The Regulations will support IRCC’s mandate by strengthening Canada’s managed migration system and advancing regional economic development. At the same time, the RCI Program will reinforce Canada’s commitment to an inclusive and cohesive society. Its focus on welcoming communities, intercultural competency, and coordinated settlement support will promote social inclusion and public confidence in the immigration system, while maintaining Canada’s reputation as a destination of choice for newcomers.

Cost-benefit statement
Table 1: Monetized costs
Impacted stakeholder Description of cost 2026 2030 2035 Total (present value) Annualized value
IRCC Transition costs (communications products and operations costs) $241,831 $0 $0 $241,831 $34,431
Increased cost to admit candidates through the RCI Program rather than the PNP $929,387 $929,387 $929,387 $6,984,560 $994,444
Employers Costs for employers to recruit candidates, apply for designation, complete mandatory training. $3,198,711 $3,198,711 $3,198,711 $24,039,058 $3,422,621
Economic Development Organizations Costs to establish priority industries, and assess designated employers, candidate recommendations, and job offers. $811,360 $811,360 $811,360 $6,097,559 $868,155
Provincial governments Foregone revenue from PNP nomination fees $3,115,552 $3,115,552 $3,115,552 $23,414,097 $3,333,641
All stakeholders Total costs $8,296,841 $8,055,010 $8,055,010 $60,777,104 $8,653,292
Table 2: Monetized benefits
Impacted stakeholder Description of benefit 2026 2030 2035 Total (present value) Annualized value
Provincial governments Processing time savings $638,709 $638,709 $638,709 $4,800,045 $683,418
Employers Cost-savings from not having to complete certain PNP-related activities $3,066,643 $3,066,643 $3,066,643 $23,046,537 $3,281,308
Applicants Cost savings from not being required to pay PNP nomination fees $2,990,930 $2,990,930 $2,990,930 $22,477,533 $3,200,295
All stakeholders Total benefits $6,696,282 $6,696,282 $6,696,282 $50,324,116 $7,165,022
Table 3: Summary of monetized costs and benefits
Impacts 2026 2030 2035 Total (present value) Annualized value
Total costs $8,296,841 $8,055,010 $8,055,010 $60,777,104 $8,653,292
Total benefits $6,696,282 $6,696,282 $6,696,282 $50,324,116 $7,165,022
NET IMPACT -$1,600,559 -$1,358,728 -$1,358,728 -$10,452,988 -$1,488,270
Quantified (non-monetized) and qualitative impacts
Positive impacts

To employers

To applicants

To communities

To Canadians

Negative impacts

Distributional analysis

The Regulations are expected to have impacts on all provinces and territories, with the exception of Quebec and Nunavut, which do not have a provincial(territorial) nominee program and nor will they have any RCI Program communities. The most significant impacts will be concentrated in provinces where there are established communities that will participate in the RCI Program, where its implementation will affect both provincial governments and participating employers.

Currently, communities exist in Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia. For these provinces, both employers and provincial governments will incur net costs as a result of the regulatory changes. Some provinces will face higher impacts, as provinces with a larger labour force tend to receive a higher number of RCI Program recommendations than smaller provinces (and, therefore, employer costs in these provinces are expected to be higher).

Similarly, since applicants to the PNP would be more concentrated in certain provinces, the net costs to provincial governments in these particular provinces will also be more pronounced. The table below presents the number of communities and corresponding expected annual recommendations for each province/territory, as well as the expected net change in immigration volume for each province/territory due to the Regulations.

Table 4: Distributional analysis — Expected impacts on immigration volumes Note : Quebec and Nunavut are excluded from the table above due as there is nil impact for these provinces/territories
Province Number of communities Expected annual recommendations Expected net change in immigration volume
Newfoundland and Labrador - - -100
Prince Edward Island - - -74
Nova Scotia 1 53 -124
New Brunswick - - -158
Ontario 5 1 772 1 005
Manitoba 3 124 -252
Saskatchewan 1 143 -167
Alberta 1 28 -383
Northwest Territories - - -12
British Columbia 3 640 287
Yukon - - -22
Total 14 2 760 0

As presented above, Ontario will see the largest impact on net immigration volumes, with an additional 1 005 newcomers settling there each year due to the Regulations. The only other province that will experience a positive impact on immigration levels will be British Columbia, with an additional 287 newcomers each year.

In all other provinces and territories, the Regulations will cause the net immigration volume to decrease. Alberta will see the largest negative impact on annual immigration volumes, with a loss of 383 immigrants each year, followed by Manitoba (-252) and Nova Scotia (-124).

While it is acknowledged that this loss in immigration to most provinces may cause some negative impacts on these local economies due to a loss in labour, this is not a likely outcome given the relatively small volume of changes relative to the total population size of each province.

The following table presents the expected growth in designated employers by province, for those provinces which will have RCI Program communities. The table also details the corresponding impact of the Regulations on both employers and provincial governments, as well as the total combined impact by province.

Table 5: Distributional analysis — Expected costs and cost savings for employers and provincial governments in provinces with RCI Program communities
Province Expected annual growth in designated employers Expected annual cost to employers to complete RCI Program requirements Expected annual cost savings to employers from not performing certain PNP required activities Expected net cost to employers in provinces with RCI communities Expected annual processing cost-savings to provincial governments Expected annual foregone revenue to provincial governments Expected net cost to provincial governments Expected Net cost to provinces with RCI communities
Nova Scotia 7 $61,492 $58,480 $1,620 $12,178 $270,619 $258,441 $261,453
Ontario 118 $2,038,647 $1,968,531 $23,266 $410,066 $1,150,852 $740,787 $810,903
Manitoba 10 $143,919 $138,407 $2,218 $28,829 $188,386 $159,557 $165,069
Saskatchewan 19 $167,206 $158,738 $4,692 $33,054 $155,029 $121,975 $130,443
Alberta 2 $32,292 $31,023 $531 $6,462 $671,679 $665,218 $666,487
British Columbia 104 $755,155 $11,465 $26,767 $148,121 $617,321 $469,200 $512,890
Total (undiscounted) 260 $3,198,711 $3,066,643 $59,093 $638,709 $3,053,886 $2,415,177 $2,547,245

British Columbia and Ontario are the provinces with the highest volume of recommendations and new designated employers. As such, their estimated impacts on employers are higher when compared to other impacted provinces.

However, when comparing the projected impacts on provincial governments, while Ontario is still the most significantly affected province with a net annual cost of $740,787, it is closely followed by Alberta, with a net annual cost of $665,218. The reason for this is twofold. First, Alberta charges some of the highest nomination fees to PNP applicants ($1,635 per application). This is second only to British Columbia, where applicants are charged $1,750 per application. Second, the Regulations are expected to most significantly alter the proportion of immigrants settling in Alberta, compared to other provinces. Whilst 15% of PNP applicants settle in Alberta, only 1% of RCI applicants are expected to settle there, as there is only one community in Alberta and a low volume of expected annual recommendations based on the available data.

Consequently, when looking at the overall financial impact on provinces, the data suggests that the impact of the regulations will be most keenly felt in Ontario, with a net annual cost of $764,052, followed by Alberta and British Columbia (with expected net annual costs of $665,749 and $495,967 respectively).

In addition to the impacts on provinces where RCI Program communities exist, there will also be impacts on provinces where there are no RCI Program communities. This is due to the fact that some provinces assumed to have PNP nominations under the baseline do not have any RCI Program communities. As a result, these newcomers will be lost to these provinces and assumed to go elsewhere to provinces where there are RCI Program communities. The impact on these provinces is therefore computed as the expected annual foregone fee revenue to provincial governments.

Table 6: Distributional analysis — Expected costs to provincial governments in provinces where there are no RCI Program communities
Province Newcomers who would settle there if coming through PNP but who would settle in different provinces (within communities) under a permanent RCI Program Expected annual foregone revenue to provincial governments
Newfoundland and Labrador 100 $0
Prince Edward Island 74 $22,073
New Brunswick 158 $39,593
Northwest Territories 12 $0
Yukon 22 $0
Total 366 $61,666

For provinces where no RCI Program communities exist, the province that will be most impacted is New Brunswick, followed by Prince Edward Island. While there are other provinces and territories noted in the table above, there is no impact on these provinces in terms of foregone fee revenue to provincial governments, since these provinces/territories do not charge PNP nomination fees.

Sensitivity analysis

This cost-benefit analysis makes assumptions around variables that may be subject to uncertainty. It is important to acknowledge this uncertainty, in particular due to the lack of historical data due to the RCI Pilot only just coming into force in December 2025. For this reason, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine how changes in uncertain variables could impact the cost-benefit analysis results.

The variables considered for this analysis are the annual increase in designated employers, and the estimated recruitment costs per candidate. As discussed in the cost section above, the central analysis assumes 260 new designated employers each year. Given the absence of historical or proxy time series of a sufficiently reliable length, this assumption may overestimate the impact on employers, as fewer employers may choose to seek designation. Similarly, while participating communities were consulted on employer costs and related program activities, employers themselves were not involved in these consultations. Therefore, while the central analysis assumes 40 hours of recruitment activities per candidate, this may again overestimate the employer’s impacts. To assess the impact of these assumptions, sensitivity analysis results are presented below:

Table 7: Sensitivity analysis — Impact on total costs to employers
Variable Values Result (10 periods, PV)
Designated Employers: the projected annual increase in the volume of RCI Program designated employers Central scenario 260 new designated employers/year

Costs to employers:

$24,039,058
Sensitivity analysis 150 new designated employers/year

Cost to employers:

$23,787,699
Recruitment Costs: The expected cost each employer incurs to recruit candidates under the RCI Program, including issuing a job offer Central scenario 40 hours

Cost to employers:

$24,039,058
Sensitivity analysis 20 hours

Cost to employers:

$13,070,666

Small business lens

The small business lens applies, as there are impacts on small businesses associated with the proposal.

Specifically, there will be costs for all new employers involved in the proposed RCI Program to apply for designation, complete onboarding training required for designation under the proposed program, and to complete intercultural competency training. Businesses will also incur ongoing costs to recruit candidates and issue job offers, confirm applicants meet eligibility requirements and labour market priorities, and to connect candidates and their families with settlement service providers to support their retention and integration.

There will also be significant benefits to all employers in participating communities, including small businesses, through cost savings for PNP-specific activities which will not be required of employers under the RCI Program.

Costs

As the pilot has only been implemented since 2025, data on the volume of active employers, newly designated employers, and recommendation volumes are limited. Based on the available data, the analysis uses the assumption of an initial stock of 1 896 designated employers, and that 63% of designated employers use at least one recommendation each year. In addition, it is assumed that there are 260 new designated employers each year.

While no data exists on the proportion of employers currently participating in the pilot that are small businesses, nor is any utilization frequency available, data from the Temporary Foreign Worker Program suggests that small businesses hire temporary foreign workers at a ratio of 4:10 (i.e. small businesses hire 28.6% of temporary foreign workers). This is used as a proxy for the purposes of the small business lens.

Since for new entrants it is assumed that they are seeking designation for the purposes of hiring foreign workers, this implies that there will be 74 new small business employers each year seeking designation which will incur costs following implementation of the regulatory proposal. Furthermore, it is therefore assumed that there are 542 small businesses in the initial stock of designated employers, and that 789 recommendations would be issued by small businesses each year.

In order to estimate the number of unique small businesses that would incur costs in a given year, IRCC must consider both new small business entrants applying for designation, as well as current designated small business employers. There is no data available on business turnover (businesses which would no longer actively participate in the program) and the decision to hire foreign workers is not a random event (therefore, assuming that participating employers in a given year were randomly distributed would not be a reasonable assumption). Indeed, it is more likely that the same subset of employers choose to repeatedly participate in the program and, therefore, it is assumed that 63% of the 542 small businesses who use a recommendation the first year would be impacted, i.e. 344 employers. Combining this with the 74 new small business entrants each year implies that a total of 1 087 unique small business employers would be impacted by the Regulations over 10 years (small difference due to rounding). Note that IRCC does not need to consider the employers in periods 2–10 who would utilize a recommendation in this calculation, since all employers beyond the initial stock are already counted as impacted in the calculation of new entrants seeking designation, and it is assumed that the same employers each year will be actively seeking to hire foreign workers.

Benefits

As discussed previously, the Regulations are also expected to deliver significant benefits to all employers in participating communities, including small businesses, through cost savings for PNP-specific activities which will not be required of employers under the RCI Program. While mandatory for the PNP, under the RCI Program, employers will not be required to contact provinces to express an interest in the program. They will also not be required to reach out to provinces for nominations and job offers for candidates, or assist candidates with the application process. Cost savings to small businesses as a result of not completing these activities are estimated as $6.6 million PV over 10 periods.

The table below outlines the impacts of the regulatory amendments on small businesses.

Small business lens summary
Table 8: Compliance costs
Activity Annualized value Present value
Onboarding training $7,356 $51,663
Intercultural competency training $4,203 $29,522
Recruitment and issuing job offers $892,373 $6,267,652
Confirming candidates meet eligibility requirements and labour-market priorities $33,464 $235,037
Supporting settlement and integration $27,887 $195,864
Total compliance cost $965,282 $6,779,738
Table 9: Compliance benefits
Activity Annualized value Present value
Businesses would not need to complete contact province to express an interest in the program $525 $3,690
Businesses would not need to find candidates and provide job offers $892,858 $6,271,058
Businesses would not need to assist candidates with the application process $22,321 $156,776
Businesses would not need to contact provinces for nomination $22,321 $156,776
Total compliance benefits $938,026 $6,588,302
Table 10: Administrative costs
Activity Annualized value Present value
Applying for designation $12,610 $88,565
Total administrative costs $12,610 $88,565
Table 11: Total compliance and administrative costs and benefits
Totals Annualized value Present value
Total cost (all impacted small businesses) $977,892 $6,868,302
Total benefits (all impacted small businesses) $938,026 $6,588,302
Net cost (all impacted small businesses) $39,866 $280,001
Net cost per impacted small business $37 $258

The expected total cost of the Regulations to small businesses is therefore estimated at $6.9 million PV over 10 periods of analysis, while the expected total benefits to small businesses is estimated as $6.6 million PV. Consequently, the expected net cost to small businesses is estimated as $0.3 million PV over 10 periods.

While there are no accommodations or flexibilities afforded to small businesses in the regulatory proposal, the program was designed with a focus on supporting small businesses in rural areas. The employer requirements identified above have proven successful in supporting the integration and retention of skilled workers in the pilot and supporting pilot participating employers. While these requirements would be in place for all participating employers, they are key contributing factors in meeting the program’s objectives of ensuring successful retention in the region and addressing the labour market needs of these businesses.

Moreover, the long-term benefits to each business, such as support in navigating the immigration system, assistance in addressing employment needs, and improved employee retention, are expected to outweigh the costs imposed through the additional compliance burden.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies, as the regulatory amendments will impose an incremental increase in the administrative burden on Canadian businesses, and the amendments will be considered a burden “in” under the rule. Specifically, the permanent RCI Program will require that employers be formally designated in order to participate in the program. This will result in an additional annualized cost of $15,124 (in 2012 Canadian dollars and discounted to 2012 at 7% annually) for administrative burden, as estimated using the Red Tape Reduction Regulations’ prescribed method. No regulatory titles are repealed or introduced.

For this proposal, costs to businesses will be limited to those incurred by employers who wish to participate in the permanent RCI Program. Therefore, for the purpose of the one-for-one rule, only impacts incurred by the estimated additional volume of prospective RCI Program employers are considered.

The implementation of a permanent RCI Program will increase the administrative burden on new participating employers, as they will be required to complete application forms to submit their requests for designation. It is therefore estimated that the regulatory amendments will impact approximately 260 employers each year, with each business requiring approximately 6 hours to complete the administrative requirements for designation. The work is assumed to be completed by a human resources administrator, with an average wage rate of $26.98. The annualized administrative cost per business is therefore estimated as $58.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

An assessment of regulations in other relevant jurisdictions was undertaken, and it was determined that the Regulations do not interfere with any other regulatory initiatives. This proposal aligns with requirements set out in other economic immigration classes, such as the Atlantic Immigration Program and the Provincial Nominee Program.

International obligations

This proposal is not linked to any international agreements or obligations.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment (SEEA Directive), a preliminary scan concluded that a SEEA is not required. This economic immigration program is intended to address labour needs in communities that are historically underserved by immigration. The impacts of this program are limited to modest demographic increases in small communities and the potential for economic development in rural and remote economies. Given the limited scope and impact of this program, any new or existing environmental impacts are extremely unlikely.

Gender-based analysis plus

Participating rural and remote communities often face persistent socio-economic challenges, including aging populations, youth outmigration, labour shortages across a range of skill levels, and more limited access to services compared to urban centres. The resulting socio-economic challenges and limited economic opportunities can disproportionately affect women, Indigenous peoples, youth, and other equity-seeking groups, who may face greater barriers to entry into the workforce (Report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women (PDF), June 2021). The RCI Program is designed to attract a diverse population of candidates at all skill levels (TEER 0–5) from various socio-economic and cultural backgrounds. The initiative supports the full economic participation of all, including women and underrepresented groups, by targeting a wide range of occupations through the prioritization exercise and welcoming applicants who can fill these roles from diverse backgrounds, while strengthening cultural diversity and economic resilience in participating communities.

Newcomers tend to be younger and more ethnically diverse than the existing population in many rural and remote communities. This supports population growth and labour force renewal but also highlights the importance of inclusive community services and social integration supports. Principal applicants may bring spouses and family members, which further necessitates consideration of family-oriented services, including childcare, schooling, health care, and language training, particularly for women who may face additional labour market barriers. The Regulations will require participating employers to support candidates with accessing settlement services, including access to language training, childcare, transportation support, and assistance navigating essential systems such as education, financial services, and health care. These measures aim to promote equity, social inclusion, and long-term retention. Participating communities in similar programs have historically often emphasized the importance of integration supports to help newcomers and their families participate fully in community life.

Based on RNIP and RCI Pilot data (noting that RCI Pilot is only 2025), from 2020 to 2025, approximately 54% of admissions identified as male and 46% identified as female, based on available binary sex indicators collected at the time of application. The top source countries for participation in the pilots are India, the Philippines, and Nigeria — with China, Ukraine, and Brazil amongst the top 10 source countries. The pilots are open to those of all ages and under the RNIP and RCI Pilot most newcomers were aged between 22 and 31 years old (2020–2025). Compared to the existing population in many participating rural and remote communities — where the median age is often higher and populations are often less ethnically diverse — RCI Pilot and RNIP newcomers tend to be younger and more racially, ethnically, and culturally diverse. This demographic difference supports population growth and labour force renewal, while also highlighting the need for inclusive community services and social integration supports.

Participating communities have expressed the importance of integration efforts by established newcomers and ethnocultural communities, as well as settlement supports, to help connect newcomers and their families to community life. Some examples of these practices include access to language training, childcare, and transportation supports to address limited public transit options in rural communities, as well as assistance navigating essential systems such as education, financial services and health care. Additional settlement supports may include airport pickups and connections to community and cultural activities that promote social inclusion and long-term retention. IRCC will continue to work with participating communities and share best practices to ensure that equity and diversity practices are maintained when evaluating designated employer and recommendation applications. When possible, through existing channels, IRCC will collect information in order to monitor equity outcomes and ensure continuous improvement for the program.

Rationale

The Government of Canada has committed to attract the best talent in the world to help build Canada’s economy, while returning Canada’s overall immigration rates to sustainable levels. This program will support this priority by ensuring that an immigration pathway exists for those looking to contribute to key national economic priorities, such as construction and health care, while also supporting communities traditionally underserved by immigration, thus alleviating the pressure on larger urban centres to welcome and support newcomers.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

The Regulations will come into effect upon registration.

While the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration will be accountable for the administration of the permanent program, it will be implemented by IRCC in close partnership with participating partner communities. Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) between IRCC and each of the participating communities will be developed. The MOUs are standard across all communities, outlining the roles and responsibilities of both parties. Similar to the pilot phase, communities will continue to be responsible for the designation of employers and issuance of recommendations to candidates that meet the requirements of the program. Annual priority setting and program integrity will be shared responsibilities between communities and IRCC. IRCC will continue to be responsible for the overall management of the program, the assessment of temporary and permanent residence applications, final selection, admissibility decisions, and temporary and permanent visa issuance, as well as performance management, monitoring, and evaluation. Processing standards will be in line with other permanent residence programs under the economic class.

Communities are selected through a standardized Expression of Interest process. The Expression of Interest application process is open to all communities that meet the eligibility requirements of the program as set out in the Regulations.

Prior to the launch of the permanent program, IRCC will coordinate with the participating communities to ensure a smooth transition from the pilot to the permanent program. Communities will have until December 31, 2026, to finalize all existing recommendations under the RCI Pilot. Given the six-month validity of a recommendation under the pilot, the RCI Pilot Ministerial Instructions (MIs) will remain in force until June 30, 2027, so that candidates who were recommended under the MIs are still able to apply to IRCC under them. As of January 1, 2027, allocations will be issued to communities under the new program, and communities may begin issuing program recommendations to candidates. The intent of this approach is to be facilitative and allow candidates to apply under the program eligibility that they were assessed for in the recommendation phase. Communications activities will also take place to inform the public of the program launch and a full suite of communication products will be prepared to accompany the announcement. Web information and toolkits will also be prepared to provide employers and candidates with support in understanding the transition from pilot to program and navigating the new aspects of the program. After the program launch, IRCC will monitor the performance of the program as part of its commitment to program integrity and client service. It will also continue to meet regularly with the participating communities to ensure effective program governance.

Contact

Sabrina Mahfouz
Director
Regional Economic Policy and Programs
Permanent Economic and Chief International Talent Office
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
365 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 1L1
Email: IRCC.RCIProgram-ProgrammeICR.IRCC@cic.gc.ca