Nemo

Governments are then subsidizing consumers and not directly oil and gas by not taxing commodities at the same rate in every province.

With your explanation and the IMF's flawed rationale farmers are then even more heavily subsidized because PST isn't applied on the majority of produce the same way in every province. But the majority of farms don't receive a dime directly from the possible revenue lost by not applying tax so how can the IMF claim agriculture is being subsidized if they offered to use this exact same rationale?

Conversely things like the egg and dairy marketing boards do in fact offer subsidized protection to gouge consumers that goes directly to the farmers.

Looking back at the report the IMF also felt oil and gas should also responsible for paying medical expenses for stress caused due to traffic congestion and accidents. Ridiculous! 

Do we then go after the lumber industry if someone breaks a toe on a coffee table? The report was a complete joke.