Advertising Rules and All-In Pricing

Every advertisement an Ontario dealer runs sits inside a layered rule set. The Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002 sets the false-advertising prohibition and the Registrar’s enforcement powers. Section 36 of Ontario Regulation 333/08 spells out the granular content rules: dealer identity, all-in price, prior-use disclosure, used-vehicle labelling, available stock, and warranty terms. The Consumer Protection Act, 2002 layers on the unfair-practice prohibition that catches misleading claims aimed at consumers.

These rules apply to every registrant, whether the dealer is a franchised store, a wholesaler advertising to other dealers, a broker, or an outside-Ontario dealer placing buy ads. They cover any medium that tries to induce a trade: print, radio, television, billboards, websites, social media posts, third-party listing platforms, vehicle window stickers, and signs displayed in or on a vehicle.

What this category covers

This category tests how a registrant must structure an advertisement so it survives scrutiny by the Registrar, the discipline committee, and a consumer who reads it carefully. Expect questions on what must appear in the ad, what cannot appear in the ad, what triggers an enforcement order, and how long pre-approval can last after a finding of false advertising.

Key rules to remember

Dealer identity must appear in every ad

Section 36(2) of Ontario Regulation 333/08 requires every advertisement that attempts to induce a trade to include the dealer’s registered name and contact information in a clear, comprehensible, and prominent manner. The contact method has to be one the dealer has filed with OMVIC and that appears on the public registry. A salesperson’s personal post on a social platform does not satisfy this rule unless the dealer’s registered name and contact details are included on the post itself.

A narrow exemption in section 36(3) allows space-constrained ads (classifieds, radio, television, billboards, bus boards) to drop the full contact information, but only if the ad still states that it is being placed by a registered dealer.

The advertised price is an all-in price

Section 36(7) of Ontario Regulation 333/08 says that if an ad shows a price for a vehicle, the price has to be the total of the amount the buyer must pay plus every other charge related to the trade: freight, pre-delivery inspection, fees, levies, and taxes. Section 36(10) carves out a narrow exception for amounts under the Retail Sales Tax Act and the federal goods and services tax, but only if the ad states clearly, comprehensibly, and prominently that those amounts are not included. There is no permitted asterisk for an admin fee, an OMVIC fee, freight, or PDI; if the dealer requires the buyer to pay it, it goes inside the headline price.

Prior use must be flagged

Section 36(5) requires the ad to disclose, clearly and prominently, if the specific vehicle was previously leased on a daily basis (and has not since been owned by anyone other than a dealer), used as a police cruiser or emergency-services vehicle, or used as a taxi or limousine. Section 36(6) requires an ad showing the current or immediately previous model year to state that the vehicle is used, if that is the case. This is how the regulation prevents a demonstrator or low-mileage former rental from being passed off as new.

The advertised vehicle has to actually be available

Section 36(12) prohibits an ad from showing a price unless the vehicle is available at that price during the period the ad runs. Section 36(13) adds that if only a limited number of units are available at the advertised price, the ad must disclose how many. This is the regulation’s bait-pricing rule: the ad cannot exist to draw shoppers in for a vehicle the dealer never intended to sell at that number.

False, misleading, or deceptive statements are prohibited

Section 28 of the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act bans any false, misleading, or deceptive statement in an advertisement, circular, pamphlet, or material published by any means relating to a trade. Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2002 makes the same kind of statement an unfair practice when directed at a consumer, and lists seventeen specific examples, including representations that goods are new when they are reconditioned, that a specific price advantage exists when it does not, or that use exaggeration or ambiguity to deceive about a material fact.

Cost of credit and lease ads carry extra disclosure

When a vehicle ad states a finance interest rate or a payment amount, the Consumer Protection Act, 2002 requires the dealer to disclose the annual percentage rate (APR) at least as prominently, the term, the cash price where applicable, and the cost of borrowing. A lease ad has to identify itself as a lease and state the term, the payment, the APR, the up-front amount, and any per-kilometre overage charge if the allowance is under 20,000 kilometres a year.

Extended-warranty mentions need terms

If an ad says an extended warranty is included with the purchase, section 36(14) requires the term of the warranty and any maximum individual claim limits to be stated clearly, comprehensibly, and prominently. A vague claim that warranty coverage is “included” is not enough.

Common mistakes

The fastest paths to a discipline letter from OMVIC tend to be:

• Listing a price that excludes the dealer admin fee, the OMVIC fee, freight, or pre-delivery inspection
• Forgetting to disclose that a used vehicle was a former daily rental, taxi, or police cruiser
• Posting a vehicle on a salesperson’s personal social account without the dealer’s registered name and contact information on the post itself
• Showing a “sale” or “blow-out” price that was never preceded by a higher regular price actually offered
• Running a finance offer at a teaser interest rate without the matching APR, term, and cost-of-borrowing disclosures
• Continuing to run an online listing after the specific vehicle has sold, so the ad shows a price the dealer can no longer honour
• Using a stock photo that shows a different model year, trim, or colour from the vehicle actually for sale
• Marketing a demonstrator vehicle alongside new inventory without identifying it as used

Most of these slip through on third-party listing sites and social platforms, where it is easy to forget that the regulation applies the same as it does to a glossy newspaper insert.

How OMVIC enforces this

Under section 29 of the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002, if the Registrar believes on reasonable grounds that a registrant is making a false, misleading, or deceptive statement, the Registrar may order the dealer to stop using the material, retract the statement, publish a correction of equal prominence, or do both. The order takes effect immediately, and the dealer’s only stay route is the Licence Appeal Tribunal under section 9. If the order stands, section 29(4) lets the Registrar require the dealer to submit every ad for pre-approval before publication; section 37 of Ontario Regulation 333/08 caps that pre-approval period at two years. On conviction for an offence, section 32 of the Act exposes an individual to a fine of up to $50,000 or imprisonment for up to two years less a day, and a corporation to a fine of up to $250,000.

Where to learn more

The two primary public sources here are Ontario’s MVDA and Ontario Regulation 333/08. Both are reproduced section by section on this site under the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act and Ontario Regulation 333/08 pages, with deep links from the practice questions on this page. The DealerPrep iPhone app carries the full bank of advertising questions plus tracked progress for paid subscribers.