Cost of 1 f35 which canada has to pay to the US. and the cost of those 15 as per the contract, cost price and then buy price also mention why the extra charges

1. What Canada “has to pay” for one F‑35: headline unit figures and who says what

Public sources give multiple unit numbers because different reports quote different baselines: flyaway/airframe-only prices, export-package prices, or fully bundled acquisition costs that include training, weapons, simulators and initial sustainment. The Standing/official announcement used an overall acquisition cost for 88 jets of CAD 19 billion — which averages to about CAD 216 million per aircraft if you simply divide 19 billion by 88 ^[1]. Other international figures cited by analysts place a typical F‑35A airframe in the roughly US$80–110 million band depending on lot and variant, while export/package pricing often raises the per‑jet effective cost because of bundled support ^{[7] [8] [9]}. The Canadian government also reported tranche pricing: the first four jets were said to cost about US$85 million each in earlier coverage ^[10].

2. The contract for 15 or 16 aircraft: what Ottawa is contractually committed to now

Reporting indicates Canada had made legally binding financial commitments for the first tranche of jets — commonly reported as 16 aircraft — and those initial aircraft are being produced; government officials and reporting emphasize Ottawa is contractually committed for those 16 ^{[11] [12]}. Sources note that Ottawa has transferred funds for 16 jets and that production of those airframes is underway ^[11].

3. Why the “extra” charges and wide variation in per‑jet math

Analysts and auditors explain the discrepancy between simple airframe prices and the Canadian contract totals by noting what is bundled into “acquisition” packages: infrastructure upgrades, training, simulators, initial sustainment and weapon stocks, plus logistics and domestic industrial offsets. The PBO life‑cycle analysis explicitly distinguishes the acquisition price (CAD 19 billion) from total life‑cycle costs (~CAD 70 billion), and media/auditor reports say additional program infrastructure and sustainment add substantially to the per‑aircraft effective cost ^{[1] [2] [6]}. Independent observers also point out that export contracts for allies commonly include multi‑year sustainment and support up front, which inflates headline per‑jet contract numbers compared with a straight “airframe only” flyaway price ^{[8] [13]}.

4. Audit and reporting: recent upward revisions to the Canada price tag

An Auditor General report and subsequent reporting found acquisition and program costs rising beyond the original CAD 19 billion headline: some coverage cites a project value of CAD 27.7 billion or government project pages list a program valued at CAD 27.7 billion that includes the 88 aircraft plus sustainment setup, training and infrastructure ^{[4] [5] [6]}. FlightGlobal and other outlets summarized an audit projecting total acquisition to more than CAD 33 billion in some calculations, showing substantial divergence in how costs are tallied ^[6].

5. International price context: airframe vs. bundle vs. life cycle

International reporting and program figures show the F‑35A flyaway/airframe price has in recent lots been quoted around US$70–90 million depending on production lot and whether the engine is counted; US DoD and industry lot pricing pushes the airframe toward the low‑to‑mid tens of millions (in USD) while export packages commonly reach US$80–110m per unit once support is bundled ^{[9] [7] [14]}. Meanwhile lifecycle studies (PBO, other analysts) show owning and operating F‑35s over multiple decades multiplies the per‑aircraft cost many times over — which is why Canada’s PBO estimated life‑cycle totals of roughly CAD 70–77 billion ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

6. Competing viewpoints and implicit agendas in coverage

Pro‑procurement voices stress interoperability with NORAD and allied forces and warn that canceling or changing course risks political or industrial fallout; proponents also highlight Canadian firms’ contracts and industrial benefits tied to the program ^{[12] [15] [5]}. Critics and audit‑minded sources stress rising audited costs, infrastructure shortfalls, and the gap between headline acquisition and full life‑cycle costs, arguing the government undersold long‑term expenses and industrial outcomes ^{[6] [16] [1]}. Industry sources and Lockheed‑aligned materials emphasize unit price declines and economies of scale, which can understate the effect of bundled sustainment that allied customers purchase ^{[17] [18]}. Each side has an implicit agenda: defence planners prioritise capability and alliance interoperability, industry promotes sales and jobs, and auditors/ watchdogs prioritise taxpayer transparency.

7. Bottom line for readers wanting a single number

Available sources do not provide a single undisputed per‑jet “Canada must pay to the U.S.” figure because published totals depend on what’s included: airframe‑only flyaway prices (roughly US$70–90m in recent lots), Canada’s announced acquisition bundle (CAD 19 billion for 88 jets — roughly CAD 216m each if averaged), and higher audit/PBO and project totals including infrastructure and sustainment (CAD ~27.7–33+ billion acquisition‑level or CAD 70–77 billion life‑cycle) ^{[9] [10] [1] [6]}. If you want, I can produce a concise table that maps each of these figures to what’s included and cite the specific source lines.