Session Profile: Mart Võrklaev

The speaker is focusing on resolving the implementation challenges of the Motor Vehicle Tax Act, supporting the Chancellor of Justice’s proposal to bring the law into constitutional compliance regarding vehicle destruction and the refund of registration fees. He criticizes past policy for excessive spending that resulted in the budget deficit, and fundamentally advocates for a "leaner state": less intervention, fewer subsidies, and lower taxes. He emphasizes that the increase in defense spending (which necessitated raising VAT, income tax, and excise duties) is Putin’s doing, but the motor vehicle tax itself is linked to the budget deficit.

The speaker exhibits comprehensive knowledge of the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and the relevant constitutional provisions (specifically § 142 and § 139 section 2), which govern the proposals and supplementary observations submitted by the Chancellor of Justice. They are clearly proficient in the fields of taxation and fiscal policy, addressing in detail the administration of the motor vehicle tax, the absence of regulations concerning the refund of registration fees, and the underlying causes of the state budget deficit. Furthermore, they employ a technical comparison involving the land tax to clarify the fundamental principles used for calculating the motor vehicle tax.

The style is formal and analytical, focusing on facts and procedural matters, including the precise citation of committee meeting dates and constitutional articles. The speaker employs logical arguments and adopts a defensive position when discussing the transparency and inclusiveness surrounding the law's adoption. He/She frames political viewpoints as lessons learned, stressing the necessity of inquiring about the sources of funding before authorizing expenditures.

The speaker's pattern of activity demonstrates active participation in the work of the Finance Committee, presenting detailed reports on the committee sessions (March 11 and 25) and the positions developed. He/She addresses the Riigikogu plenary session to explain the procedural aspects of the Chancellor of Justice's proposal and the committee's consensus decision.

The main criticism is directed at politicians from previous years who created the budget deficit through irresponsible spending and promises, without ever asking where the money would come from. The speaker firmly rejects the question of Putin's direct role in implementing the motor vehicle tax, although they do link Putin's actions to the necessity of increasing defense spending.

The speaker emphasizes cooperation, highlighting the Finance Committee's consensus decision in supporting the Chancellor of Justice's proposal. He/She is cooperating with the Chancellor of Justice to clarify the procedural distinctions between conflicts with the constitution and political recommendations. He/She defends the motor vehicle tax process as "the most transparent and inclusive."

None. The focus is exclusively on national legislation, tax policy, and resolving the budget deficit.

Supports fiscal discipline, emphasizing that tax hikes (VAT, income tax, excise duties) are necessary to cover defense spending, and the motor vehicle tax is needed due to the large budget deficit. The preference is for an economic model where the state intervenes and taxes less, supporting a "leaner state" that provides fewer subsidies but also imposes lower taxes.

The text mentions social issues (namely, large families and people with disabilities) exclusively within the context of tax concessions, stressing that the omission of these specific exceptions was not part of the proposal submitted by the Chancellor of Justice pursuant to Article 142 of the Constitution. The stance taken is thus procedural and neutral, thereby avoiding any substantive political position regarding tax relief for these groups.

The primary legislative focus is amending the Motor Vehicle Tax Act and the Traffic Act to resolve practical bottlenecks that have emerged, such as the refunding of taxes upon the destruction of a vehicle and the administration of registration fees. The speaker is acting in a supporting role, helping to bring the legislation into compliance with the Constitution and reviewing implementation issues.