Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
First reading of the Draft Resolution of the Riigikogu "Making a Proposal to the Government of the Republic for the Implementation of the Digital Services Tax in Estonia" (408 OE)
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Political Position
The draft bill for the Digital Services Tax (DST) has a strong proponent position; it is emphasized that delays in European Union decisions must not impede fair taxation, and the example set by France demonstrates that the tax can indeed be implemented. He/She points out that Facebook, Google, and Amazon collect data and advertising revenue without being taxed, whereas media companies are taxed, which highlights the need for equalization. He/She is critical of the government's stance on the digital tax and stresses that the digital tax must be put into effect.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Mentions specific companies (Facebook, Google, Amazon) and their advertising revenue and data collection; refers to European Union decisions and French practice as examples, demonstrating knowledge of the digital tax context.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The narrative tone is direct and declarative; it uses comparisons (the example of France versus Estonia). It employs rhetorical questions and moral considerations, through which it highlights issues of fairness and competition. The discourse is argumentative and clearly focused, without disparaging objections.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
On May 29, 2024, at least three presentations took place during the same discussion concerning the digital tax. This indicates an intensive and multifaceted debate, featuring elements of both support and criticism. The speakers' positions suggest differing partisan viewpoints.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The government has demonstrated delay and a lack of readiness regarding the digital tax, a situation that is being criticized. Criticism is also directed at the Centre Party's initiative (a meaningless assessment). The third call for requirements concerning the commission's opinion emphasizes procedural contradictions, placing the opposition in the midst of both political and procedural difficulties.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
A conclusive example of cooperation is not directly presented; the text contains references to consensus decisions within the commission and the overall necessity of reaching a final vote, which suggests a willingness to be open to collaboration, but specific forms of cooperation are not detailed in the trials.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The emphasis is placed both on the Estonian national level and the context of the European Union. Both Estonian and European examples (France) are mentioned, but the primary focus remains on the national-level discussion of the digital tax.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic approach focuses on ensuring a fairer representation of the digital tax: specifically, taxing the advertising revenue of the major technology sector and regulating data collection as a means of establishing legal balance. Furthermore, it is noted that the taxation of pensioners could be a fiscally significant issue, highlighting the broader debate surrounding tax and income distribution within the economic context.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The focus is on the first reading of Bill 408 OE and the subsequent procedural process: specifically, the final outcome of the debate and moving it to a final vote in the main chamber. The procedural dimension is highlighted through the criticism raised by the speakers and the procedural questions posed.
3 Speeches Analyzed