Canadian union urges review of EA buyout over game industry security risks

A Canadian labor group is pressing the federal government to take a hard look at Electronic Arts’ $55 billion buyout, arguing the deal raises security questions and could affect the future of one of Canada’s most important game employers. CWA Canada president Carmel Smyth sent a letter to industry minister Mélanie Joly on May 5, warning that the proposed sale should not be treated as a routine financial transaction.

The acquisition, announced by EA on September 29, 2025, is an all-cash deal backed by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, Silver Lake and Affinity Partners, the investment firm run by Jared Kushner. EA said the takeover would help it “accelerate innovation and growth,” but the scale and makeup of the buyer group have made the transaction politically sensitive in Canada, where foreign investments can be reviewed for national-security concerns under the Investment Canada Act. Ottawa updated those review guidelines on March 5, 2025.

For workers, the issue is not just who signs the checks. EA has had a Canadian footprint since 1991, when it acquired Burnaby-based Distinctive Software, and now operates five offices in the country. Its careers page lists Toronto, Vancouver and Victoria among its Canadian locations, and industry listings put its British Columbia workforce at about 1,800 people across two development studios. Those teams have helped build major soccer and hockey franchises that anchor EA’s business and give the company deep roots in the country’s gaming labor market.

That footprint is why CWA Canada’s warning lands beyond the boardroom. A buyout of this size can affect hiring, studio autonomy and how much patience new owners have for long development cycles, especially in live-service and annualized sports games where schedule pressure already runs high. In an industry where Ubisoft layoffs and Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard have left workers on edge, labor groups are increasingly framing consolidation as a workplace issue as much as a corporate one.

For Nintendo, the comparison is useful. If scrutiny intensifies around EA, any future deal involving another major publisher or a platform holder would face more than antitrust questions. It would also invite deeper political and labor scrutiny over who controls studios, where jobs are based and how much creative independence survives once a global game company becomes part of a much larger ownership story.