Session Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The central focus is the criticism of the Social Democrats' tax policy: opposition to the proposed car tax, the increase of VAT to 24%, and the increase of income tax to 24%, as well as opposition to tax recommendations that include taxing income starting from the first euro (with the exception of pensioners). The position emphasizes that the government has damaged people's livelihoods and proposes suggestions and open discussion regarding local mechanisms, such as lowering the VAT on foodstuffs. Final conclusion: oppositional, yet pragmatic—stressing the need for public welfare and tax transparency, and ready to consider certain ideas related to negotiations with the coalition.

The issues of VAT, car tax, and income tax, along with criticism of state budget transparency, hold a central position. Specific figures are cited (24% VAT, 24% income tax, taxation from the first euro), as are reports from the National Audit Office. An analysis of tax and budget policy is presented, detailing their potential impact on people's livelihoods.

The rhetoric is critical and coalition-based; it employs strong emotional language (e.g., "anti-people government," "hypocrisy") and engages the audience through questions. The structure is question-and-answer, and the arguments are supported by data and examples, while remaining polemical and seeking to involve all parties in the discussion.

Multiple interventions during the same day's plenary session: asks questions, provides answers, and reflects upon the viewpoints of others, emphasizes the principle of the free mandate, and refers to previous discussions; demonstrating active and comparative participation across various debates simultaneously.

The main rival is the Social Democrats and their tax policy, which is treated as detrimental to people's livelihoods and opposed to the democratic spirit. The criticism is noticeably strong and emotional (referring to an "anti-people government" and "hypocrisy"), but the direct possibility for compromise is signaled by an unwillingness to restrict rather than approve. It is emphasized that the criticism of previous decisions is visually manifest.

Indicates a willingness to cooperate on certain specific issues, such as the reduction of VAT on local products; expresses a desire to listen and gather other ideas, and to foster a bipartisan or non-aligned discussion, while simultaneously maintaining a critical stance toward some of the coalition’s decisions.

Not enough data

The economic agenda focuses on achieving balance in the implementation of the tax system: opposing tax increases or implementing narrowly targeted special conditions (e.g., lowering VAT on groceries, support for local businesses), and improving the transparency of tax allocations. COVID subsidies have been praised as targeted and necessary, but the overall issue of budget transparency has been highlighted.

The main focus is on people's livelihood and fair taxation. The tax policy is criticized, particularly for its potential impact on pensioners and low-income individuals. Emphasis is placed on the need to review how taxes and the budget are allocated, and how funding ultimately contributes to the welfare of citizens.

The main topics covered include tax policy bills (car tax, VAT, income tax), improving budget transparency, and the analysis of the impact of previous support measures in light of the reports from the National Audit Office. Ideas are presented and discussion is invited, emphasizing the need for further bills in the near future.