Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The Center Party faction is firmly opposed to the car tax bill and stresses its lack of compliance with both the Constitution and European Union law. Their position is forceful, non-vindictive, and emphasizes adherence to the law: they recommend withdrawing the bill and replacing it with specific exemptions and social compensations. They also stress the need to protect vulnerable groups (people with disabilities, large families, and low-income families) and find ways to redistribute the tax burden, rather than increasing poverty through the implementation of a general tax. No shifts are visible compared to previous periods; the faction remains a consistent unit focused on legality and social justice.

It demonstrates strong competence in legal matters and public finance, highlighting an acute awareness of constitutional and European Union law. It has commissioned legal analysis and explicitly outlined potential risks concerning compensation for damages, interest payments, and registration fees. It uses terminology such as “constitutional legality” and “incompatibility with EU law,” and discusses the coverage of financing and the magnitude of costs, including previously considered tax sources (a bank windfall tax, abandoning the promise to eliminate the tax hump).

A formal, analytical, and slightly combative tone; utilizes legal and economic arguments, draws attention to vulnerable groups, and employs rhetorical questions to underscore criticism and the necessity for change. There is a strong emphasis on judicial and Union law compliance, coupled with a conservative, normative approach.

Two speeches on 2024-03-20, active participation in car tax discussions, and presentation of the underlying legal analysis. Amendments and the creation of specific exceptions are mentioned, along with cooperation with colleagues ("there are still more amendments"). Indicates involvement in the Riigikogu (parliamentary) procedure and a desire to withdraw the draft bill or make significant changes.

The fundamental opposing viewpoint on the car tax bill: the criticism is based on the interpretation of legality, compliance with the spirit of the EU, and the assurance of general legal certainty. The intensity of the criticism is strong: they demand the withdrawal of the bill and propose alternative financing methods. At the same time, it demonstrates a skillful readiness for compromise on specific amendments (such as adding exemptions for those with special needs, large families, and less affluent families).

Demonstrates a willingness to cooperate and compromise: mentioning proposed amendments that, among other things, would introduce special provisions for people with disabilities, large families, and low-income families. It emphasizes that various proposals exist for covering the costs (e.g., a tax on banks' excess profits, abandoning the promise to eliminate the tax bump) and that talks with other factions can continue.

The political focus is a matter of national level; the Riigikogu, the President, and the European Union are highlighted. Regional or region-specific topics are not brought up.

The economic policy perspective provides a critical assessment of current tax and financing policies: specifically, the car tax bill is seen as dangerous because it increases overall economic costs and risks pushing vulnerable groups into poverty. Alternative funding streams are proposed, including a tax on banks' excess profits and abandoning the promise to eliminate the tax bracket bulge (the 'tax hump'). The central focus of this critique is ensuring balanced revenue generation, guaranteeing social protection, and reducing bureaucracy.

Emphasis is placed on social justice and the protection of vulnerable groups: people with disabilities, large families, and low-income families are central to this focus. There is no support for a car tax if it deepens poverty or fails to provide concrete social support measures. It is argued that legal scrutiny and the principles of the welfare state must be implemented first.

The main topic is the car tax bill and its amendments: placing emphasis on adding exemptions for people with disabilities, large families, and low-income families, as well as the possibility of withdrawing the bill. Legally justified reasons have been presented (constitutionality, compliance with EU law), and the progress and risks within the Riigikogu have been covered.