By Plenary Sessions: Helle-Moonika Helme

There is not enough data.

The economic platform strongly advocates for tax cuts, particularly lowering the VAT on food items to mitigate the financial strain on the populace. It criticizes government policies that serve the narrow interests of the elite (bankers, wind energy moguls) rather than focusing on the welfare of ordinary citizens and small business owners. It supports economic measures designed to improve the circumstances of the average person.

Economic viewpoints emphasize the importance of affordable energy and support the domestic oil shale energy sector. They oppose regulations that have artificially inflated energy prices and put the European Union at risk of ruin in global competition, prioritizing economic pragmatism over ideological environmental policy.

The speaker opposes the government's tax policy, suggesting that taxes are actually rising despite the government claiming otherwise. He sharply criticizes the channeling of state resources into the pockets of major business interests (arms dealers, renewable energy magnates, bankers) while social benefits are simultaneously being cut. He advocates for social redistribution and the protection of the vulnerable by the state.

The speaker strongly supports regulations to prevent unfair competition in the public transport market, demanding a level playing field for taxi services. He criticizes ride-sharing operators who are operating on a massive scale but fail to comply with the requirements imposed on traditional taxi service providers. This position favors regulated market conditions and seeks to protect traditional service providers.

The speaker is vehemently opposed to tax hikes, arguing that 20 new taxes plus the cost of abolishing the tax 'hump' (500–700 million) will ultimately be borne by the poorest segment of the population. They advocate for cheap and stable oil shale energy and are extremely critical of the government's plans to hand out billions of euros (ranging from 2.8 billion up to 20 billion) to a select few "green and energy profiteers." They also oppose the infringement of landowners' rights and the reduction of compensation (which they equate to nationalization).