By Plenary Sessions: Lauri Laats

The aim is to avoid increasing the tax burden on ordinary citizens. There is criticism regarding the current tax practice, and a preference is expressed for directing funding through the taxation of goods and companies (a digital tax) as an alternative. At the same time, it is noted that the draft bill is not suitable for their faction, and the speaker emphasizes that, when examining the current tax reality, money is being taken from people, not corporations.

The text is critical of the supplementary budget and expresses concern regarding the loss of tax revenue following the recent cuts. It stresses the importance of investments, highlighting defense investments and infrastructure (Rail Baltic, nuclear power plant) as central themes of economic policy. While it does not present specific tax or expenditure policy proposals, it underscores the necessity of transparency and control in public finance.

He emphasizes that adopting the bill will bring additional costs to taxpayers and consumers, and its cost-effectiveness must be assessed. He wants a solution that will cost taxpayers and consumers less in the future. He stresses that socio-economic analyses and an energy balance must be available.

The direct written elaboration of economic policy is not covered; participants in the discussion refer to utilizing development cooperation instruments and potentially freeing up resources for Georgian civil society, but there is no clear overview regarding taxes, expenditures, or overall economic policy. The prevailing sentiment may be critical concerning the financing and procedures involved, but no concrete fiscal policy is presented.

The economic policy approach focuses on evaluating the impact of fees and taxes and preventing price increases. Attention is directed toward specific examples (e.g., increases in express passport fees, state duties, and fines) as perceived negative impacts on family budgets. Recommendations lean toward lower or more transparent fees, and the protection of stakeholders, especially families, is emphasized.

Information is lacking regarding economic, tax, or state budget matters. No economic positions or reconstruction plan was presented.