By Plenary Sessions: Riina Solman

Economic views are aimed at criticizing the state's fiscal discipline, particularly when it is achieved at the expense of tax increases and cuts affecting vulnerable groups, measures which have been labeled the "tax festival" and the "tax cascade." It is emphasized that increasing healthcare co-payments leads to impoverishment and inaccessibility of services, and that marginal sums (1.3–1.5 million) should not be taken from the most vulnerable.

It supports employee well-being and vacation compensation, viewing this as a direct benefit to the quality of work and to businesses, because a well-rested individual is a better employee. It is strongly opposed to increases in land tax, protecting homeowners from the tax burden. In the context of previous policy, it mentions the desire to attract more businesses to the regions and restore a larger share of the personal income tax to local municipalities.

The economic views expressed are strongly pro-market, opposing state intervention that distorts competition and creates unfair advantages in the pharmaceutical market. The speaker criticizes expensive solutions (such as the two-stock system) and favors optimal models that operate in collaboration with the private sector, issuing a warning against creeping nationalization. They also oppose the proposed car tax, noting that it could potentially exceed the actual cost of the vehicle.

There is insufficient data.

Economic views are strongly opposed to tax increases (VAT, fuel excise duty, car tax), arguing that they disproportionately harm the livelihoods of rural residents and exacerbate inequality. We support protecting the incomes of vulnerable groups (pensioners) from cuts. We favor policies that promote regional development, rather than "timid and unambitious sustainable degrowth."