Key takeaways
- About 17,500 survey responses, 1,021 information session attendees, 109 roundtable participants and 42 written submissions.
- Respondents were split on merging FSW, CEC and FST into one program: 41% for, 46% against.
- Most wanted more weight on education, language and Canadian work experience, and less on age, sibling and French bonuses.
- The report announces no decisions. Any regulatory change would first appear in the Canada Gazette, Part I.
On October 15, 2026, IRCC published the final report from its spring 2026 consultation on Express Entry reform. A day later it announced the first concrete result: new CRS points for high-wage occupations and job offers, starting November 3. The rest of the report shows which other ideas are still on the table.
Who took part
- Online survey: about 17,500 responses, open April 23 to May 24, 2026
- Information sessions: 1,021 attendees
- Roundtables: 109 participants, including provinces and territories, employers, regulators, lawyers and consultants, academics, francophone groups, settlement providers, newcomers and migrant rights groups
- Written submissions: 42
72% of survey respondents hoped to immigrate through Express Entry, 9% were members of the general public, 6% were successful Express Entry applicants and 3% were employers. 90% were in Canada, almost half of them (46.7%) in Ontario.
The big themes
- Simplify the system and focus on the factors that best predict success.
- Stability: predictable rules and protection against fraud.
- Cut-offs feel hard to reach and keep moving.
- Reward time in Canada: strong support for weighting Canadian work, study and tax contributions more.
- Essential jobs below TEER 3 need a path too.
What respondents said about each idea
Merging FSW, CEC and FST
41% of survey respondents supported combining the three federal programs and 46% wanted them kept separate. Employers leaned towards keeping them separate (55%); lawyers and consultants leaned towards merging (56%). IRCC noted the Federal Skilled Trades Program selects only about 5 people a year, because most tradespeople apply through CEC. Views were split on a proposed CLB 6 minimum language level, with some calling it too high and others too low.
High-wage occupations
42.3% supported points for Canadian work experience in high-wage occupations and 45.8% opposed. Support was much higher among employers (74.2%) and advisers (60.7%). Supporters liked that it's based on occupation-level wages, not individual pay; critics worried about younger workers and shortage jobs below the threshold. IRCC went ahead with this idea, effective November 3.
Spousal, sibling and French points
- Spousal grid: 37.7% wanted more weight, 30.6% less and 26.9% wanted it removed. There was general support for removing it. IRCC clarified that removing it wouldn't stop a spouse immigrating as a dependant on the same application.
- Sibling points: most supported removal or reduction (45.1% remove, 44.0% less).
- French: 28.6% wanted more weight, 40.0% less and 32.0% removal. Some suggested a separate francophone program.
Age, study and trades
- Age points were criticized for disadvantaging mid-career professionals, especially now that most job offers earn nothing. Some suggested starting the age reduction later.
- Study in Canada: mixed views, including limiting points to bachelor's, master's and PhD credentials.
- Trade certificates: support for recognising apprenticeships, but concern that limiting points to Red Seal trades would exclude others. IRCC said provincial and territorial certificates for non-Red Seal trades would still count.
- Canadian licensure: support for recognising licences outside the trades.
- Canadian work experience: calls to include work while studying and self-employment.
How survey respondents ranked CRS factors
| Factor | More weight | Less weight | Remove |
|---|---|---|---|
| Education | 81.4% | 15.3% | 9.1% |
| Strong language skills | 64.7% | 10.0% | 5.1% |
| Study in Canada | 56.0% | 11.0% | 7.1% |
| Spousal points | 37.7% | 30.6% | 26.9% |
| Canadian work in a high-wage occupation | 32.7% | 26.7% | 24.3% |
| Younger age | 26.8% | 40.6% | 36.1% |
| Job offer in a high-wage occupation | 25.4% | 33.7% | 32.3% |
| Sibling in Canada | 21.2% | 44.0% | 45.1% |
| Certificate of qualification (trades) | 19.5% | 23.4% | 18.4% |
Canadian work experience was the factor most respondents (84.8%) wanted weighted more. Some rows in IRCC's table add up to more than 100%, so respondents could probably pick more than one answer; the report doesn't say.
What happens next
The report doesn't announce decisions. IRCC says the feedback will inform possible changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations and the Ministerial Instructions for Express Entry. Proposed regulatory changes would be published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, and IRCC says it will explain timing and how profiles already in the pool would be affected.
For now, the only confirmed change is the November 3 labour market integration factor. IRCC's labour market outcomes research found that siblings, Canadian education, French and spouse characteristics showed weak links to short-term earnings, so those factors are worth watching. That's our reading, not an announcement.
Frequently asked questions
Is IRCC merging FSW, CEC and FST?
Not announced. The 2026 consultation asked about it: 41% of survey respondents supported combining the programs and 46% wanted them kept separate. IRCC's report makes no decision.
Are spousal or sibling CRS points being removed?
Not yet. Many respondents supported removing or reducing them, but the report announces no decision. Any regulatory change would first be published in the Canada Gazette, Part I.
Which reform from the consultation has been confirmed?
CRS points for Canadian work experience and job offers in high-wage occupations, with no LMIA required, effective November 3, 2026.
Official sources
Figures and rules in this guide are checked against IRCC program pages. If anything conflicts, trust the government page.
Canadian PRLedger is a free tracking and calculator tool — not a law firm, not an RCIC practice, and not affiliated with IRCC. These guides summarize public program rules for planning purposes only. For case-specific advice, speak with a licensed immigration consultant or lawyer.
