By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder

Economic views are strongly opposed to tax increases, especially those impacting landowners and rural businesses, including farmers. The necessity of legal certainty and stable tax policy is emphasized, with criticism directed at the breaching of the previous 10% annual increase limit.

Supports strict fiscal discipline and opposes measures that reduce state budget revenues during an economic crisis (such as the abolition of the tax hump). It supports reducing the tax burden for low-wage earners, while simultaneously criticizing the current reform for granting benefits to higher-income individuals. It proposes a specific billion-euro solution, which involves abandoning the abolition of the tax hump and ceasing the borrowing used to cover the second pillar.

The politician is vehemently opposed to the growth of bureaucracy, criticizing the draft legislation for increasing expenditures and placing an undue burden on businesses and local municipalities. He supports the overall objective of cutting red tape, noting that the new law runs counter to the desired direction.

There isn't enough data. The adoption of the tax package was mentioned only as an example of the government's political will to disregard good legislative practice, not as an economic policy standpoint.

Data is unavailable. The discussions focus on procedural, security, and social/moral legislative bills. Tax law packages are mentioned merely as an example of the coalition's fast-track procedure, rather than to express an economic policy position.

Expresses strong opposition to the government's economic policy, calling it a "tax war" and linking it directly to economic insecurity. It supports overall confidence in the economy.

The speaker is critical of the upcoming income tax change, arguing that it will raise the tax burden for all citizens, including teachers. They refute claims about the existence of a tax kink and emphasize the need for fiscal accuracy, calling into question the government's declared financial gain.

His economic stance is firmly against tax hikes, viewing them as cumulative burdens that damage the Estonian economy and deepen instability. He criticizes the additional administrative costs and bureaucracy associated with introducing new taxes. The politician defends the interests of entrepreneurs, emphasizing the problem of unequal treatment for producers resulting from the limited scope of taxation options.