Session Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The representative of the Centre Party, speaking at the parliamentary session on April 9, 2025, took a strong stance against the car tax, asserting a position that upholds constitutional and social justice. He/She emphasized that the car tax unfairly burdens large families, people with special needs, and residents of rural areas, suggesting the necessity of either withdrawing or amending the tax. Concurrently, he/she criticized the general tax policy (VAT, fuel excise duty) as excessively draining for families. The framing of the argument is policy- and value-based, and the representative pledged to utilize legal remedies and protection derived from international standards, including appealing to the Supreme Courts if necessary. Furthermore, he/she expressed readiness for broader cooperation with the opposition and for considering compensatory measures (for instance, in Tallinn).

The presenter is strongly grounded theoretically and legally informed: referring to constitutional requirements (Section 28), the Chancellor of Justice, the Supreme Court, and administrative courts, utilizing legal instruments in disputes concerning the car tax. He also addresses the context of general taxation and CO2 taxation and mentions specific problematic mechanisms (Value Added Tax, fuel excise duty, registration fee, annual car tax) and the creation of the impact associated with them. He provides detailed, legally referenced analysis, which enhances the credibility of his arguments.

This is a speech style that is largely combative and requires quick reaction. The tone is urgent, accusatory, and emotional, but at the same time structured and features a logical enumeration; it uses repetition, questions, and concrete examples (the situation of families, people with disabilities, rural areas). The core themes are elevated and aesthetically rich, yet at the same time direct and firm regarding controversial causes.

The addresses were delivered on the same day (09.04.2025) across multiple segments, demonstrating active participation in the plenary session. Emphasis is placed on previous steps taken, engagement with stakeholders, and the necessity of utilizing legal instruments and judicial assistance; mention is made of measures planned in Tallinn and prospective court judgments. The presenter exhibits continuous involvement and recurring debate centered on legislation and draft bills, illustrating consistent political activity.

The main targets of criticism are the government coalition (including the Reform Party) and the Social Democrats, who are accused of increasing taxes and imposing an unfair burden on families. The speaker emphasizes that the car tax perpetuates injustice and lowers the standard of living for key social groups; it is directly claimed that the coalition is guilty of implementing damaging tax policies. The attack is strong, but it is constrained by the desire to utilize legal means and seek cooperation with the coalition, rather than foreclosing compromises through personalizing the conflict.

Cooperation is emphasized not only with the opposition but also with stakeholders: legislative drafts and amendments have been prepared collaboratively, specifically "together with the Association of Large Families and the Chamber of Disabled People." The necessity of dialogue with coalition partners is mentioned, as well as the need, if required, for a broader societal dialogue and even taking issues all the way to the Supreme Court. Readiness is demonstrated for cooperation and the involvement of multiple parties in order to improve tax policy.

Emphasis is placed on the problems facing rural areas (large families, families with special needs, and general country living), along with serious attention paid to local transport needs and mobility. At the same time, Tallinn is mentioned as an area where car tax compensation is planned to be offered, and the challenges of the rural mobility reform, which could affect the overall quality of life, are highlighted.

Regarding the economy and taxation, the speaker holds a limited positive economic outlook. He is highly critical of the overall tax burden (VAT, fuel excise duty, car tax), arguing that these measures increase the cost of living and place a heavy strain on families. He stresses the need for the redistribution of tax services and the equalization of burdens, proposing to abolish the car tax and potentially offer compensation, specifically acknowledging the needs of rural areas. A firm preference is stated: tax relief should be based on social needs, not on generating a broad surplus.

The central focus is social justice: specifically, addressing the special needs of people with disabilities, protecting large families, and ensuring state care for them. The speaker emphasizes that the car tax could lead to poverty and that people with disabilities must not be left without tax exemptions; they incorporate the interests of families and the community and seek to implement legal safeguards to ensure their rights.

The main goals are the repeal of the car tax law and challenging it through the courts and the administrative court. The speaker emphasizes a systemic and substantive approach to legislative activity, highlighting the necessity of involving stakeholders and, if required, appealing to the Supreme Court. Alternative actions are also referenced, along with clearly established priorities: improving tax policy and finding a socially fairer solution.