By Plenary Sessions: Lauri Laats

Emphasis is placed on economic damages and their impact (e.g., the damage sustained by Estlink 2, issues concerning the transparency of baseline data for energy plans, and the mention of a large sum (26 billion)); the focus must necessarily be on transparency and economic consequences, rather than growth-oriented fiscalism; the overall position leans toward infrastructure protection and damage mitigation.

The discussion revolves around the rising cost of the consumer food basket and the question of whether lowering VAT on food items is effective. Also under debate is the impact of taxing banks, alongside criticism directed at the profits made by shopping centers and retailers. It underscores the necessity of finding mechanisms to cap prices and influence essential businesses, but stops short of presenting any specific economic or tax policy proposal.

From an economic standpoint, the emphasis is on evaluating the impact of tax and fiscal policy: the fight against the bank tax and the explicit desire to maintain or increase people's purchasing power (9% VAT on essential goods). It describes the differences in the Lithuanian model and stresses that the Estonian system differs from Lithuania's (classic income tax versus advance income tax plus dividends). It criticizes the government's tax regime as an economic deterrent and emphasizes the need for measures that promote economic growth, including the idea of lowering taxes on foodstuffs.

In economic policy, the focus is on economic rationality and protecting consumer prices. It is critical of widespread investment in green energy and the associated pricing mechanisms, stressing the necessity of testing utility against cost and reducing the burden on the consumer. Skepticism is expressed regarding expenditures made on large fuel and wind farms, and it is emphasized that economic models should be market-based, not reliant on an ideological framework. It calls for transparency in budgeting and investments, as well as policies aligned with the interests of business and entrepreneurship.

From an economic standpoint, the consumer emphasizes the priority of electricity prices and is critical of ENMAK's price forecasts and investments that could increase future costs. They advocate for targets aimed at a lower price per kilowatt-hour (recommending 5–8 cents) and stress that major investors will be attracted if the price is competitive, rather than through extensive, state-funded subsidies. They express skepticism regarding the usefulness of large investments if those investments do not provide a competitive advantage for the consumer.

The economic platform focuses on transparency regarding corruption and resource management; it emphasizes the discussion of losses and savings (400,000 euros, 1,350,000 euros, for 6,700 nursing home residents), but it does not present a specific program for overall tax policy or economic growth. It highlights the need for recovering funds and implementing anti-corruption measures.

The text emphasizes the importance of competitiveness and key economic indicators, while warning of the potential consequences of green policies on competition. It also notes the impact of US protectionism and the broader context of China's technological advancement. It argues that the advancement of the green transition must consider global economic relations, necessitating the adaptation of European economic policy in response to these changes.

In economic policy, he is pro-market and anti-taxation. He opposes increasing consumption taxes, advocates for placing a greater burden on the banking sector (by accounting for the return on bank capital and profits), and using those funds to finance the state budget for security purposes. He values international comparisons and regional accounting, stressing that tax revenues must not impede economic growth; his focus is on data-driven, carefully considered decisions.