Ottawa is launching consultations for a national anti-fraud strategy that will address the issue of liability for fraud losses, government officials say.

Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne plans to announce the consultations during a press conference in Montreal on Monday, the officials said.

The Globe and Mail is not identifying the officials, who were not authorized to discuss the plans publicly.

Fraud has surged in recent years, with the latest data from the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre indicating that victims reported more than $704-million in losses in 2025. That likely represents just the tip of the iceberg, as the centre estimates that only 5 per cent to 10 per cent of fraud is reported.

Consumer advocates and the Bloc Québécois have proposed that banks be required to reimburse customers who fall victim to fraud, pointing to Britain, where the liability is split equally between the bank that sent the money and the one that received it.

Other jurisdictions, such as Australia, have a more-expansive shared liability model, where the responsibility for preventing, detecting and disrupting scams is split between multiple entities such as banks, telecoms and digital platforms.

Ottawa’s 2025 budget included a plan to develop a cross-sector, national anti-fraud strategy, bringing together financial institutions, telecommunications providers and technology companies. The consultations, which will be open for 30 days, will determine what shape that strategy will take.

Canada’s banking industry has been advocating for a cross-sector approach, arguing that including telecoms and social-media companies is essential to preventing fraud from occurring.

Scammers typically connect with victims through phone calls, text messages or social-media posts.

In February, the Bloc proposed an amendment to the budget bill that would have held banks liable for fraud losses, except in instances where the customer was grossly negligent.

The amendment was defeated, with both the Liberal and Conservative members of the finance committee voting against it.