By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The focus on procedural economy indicates a preference for procedures that save time and resources; it does not represent any specific broader economic or tax policy.

The central economic debate revolves around mitigating consumer prices and optimizing the tax system. There is support for targeted subsidies (specifically to local producers rather than across all goods) and criticism regarding a general increase in VAT. Emphasis is placed on the effect of inflation and the cost of living on families, alongside the necessity of boosting economic growth and competitiveness. The consensus is to avoid sweeping tax reforms, favoring instead targeted support measures.

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.

It supports regulation and consumer protection (e.g., requiring traffic insurance for scooters) and highlights the need to establish and ensure additional social guarantees for the ride-sharing workforce. At the same time, it criticizes the lobbying efforts of certain interest groups that contradict social or market principles. It does not directly address detailed positions on taxation or the general large financial structure.

Addressing economic policy, the speaker opposes making tax increases permanent, stressing that the sustained rise in VAT and income tax damages residents' financial well-being and undermines business competitiveness. He emphasizes the necessity of budget transparency and points to potential changes, including the ongoing debate regarding the treatment of corporate profit tax and income tax. Furthermore, he argues that taxation negatively affects family finances and the overall economic climate.

The economic perspective focuses on the legitimacy of the tax policy and the available legal protection mechanisms; tax exemptions are supported for vulnerable groups (people with disabilities, large families) as specific exceptions within the context of the car tax. The car tax is evaluated as a potential detriment to family budgets and social welfare, rather than a source of broad-based tax funding, and legal and ethical considerations are stressed as being of greater importance than short-term economic impact.

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.

Economically, the criticism centers on the costs associated with state interventionism and the impact of tax policy on taxpayers. It highlights that state expenditures and potential over-procurement entail a fixed cost (approximately 68 million euros), and stresses the crucial importance of transparency and oversight. Furthermore, skepticism remains regarding taxation and the lack of clarity in tax-related decision-making.

Insufficient data; specific views on the economic or employment impact are not presented.