Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The representative maintains a neutral and inquisitive stance; they do not express firm support for either raising or lowering the alcohol excise tax, but instead focus on clarifying the justifications and underlying logic. They refer to the decision made by the Finance Committee to leave the 2025 alcohol excise tax unchanged and stress the necessity of understanding why cross-border trade and tax collection are crucial elements in the forecasts. The representative demonstrates that policy-based reflection and potential risks were considered, rather than presenting a strong personal mandate favoring one option over the other.

Demonstrates knowledge of the economic impact of tax collection and border trade; utilizes terminology such as excise revenue, calculation, and border trade, and references the interplay of their effects. The necessity for a comprehensive explanation and a discussion based on supplementary data is emphasized.

The tone is exploratory, formal, and constructive; it uses specific questions and seeks clarification, rather than an emotional attack. A balanced and fact-based approach; the emphasis is on discussion and understanding.

Not enough data.

Insufficient data.

Not enough data.

There is not enough data.

Economically, the concern centers on the forecasts for excise duty revenue and the impact of cross-border trade. There is a noticeable proposal to discuss how the revenue might fall short of expectations, and attention is drawn to the 2026 excise tax hike in the context of increasing border trade; however, specific recommendations or a broad position of endorsement are absent.

Not enough data.

The focus is on the second reading of the bill and the decisions made by the Finance Committee; a request has been submitted seeking clarification regarding the underlying logic and the consequences stemming from the impact assessment. The necessity for further explanation and the continuation of the debate are noted.