💰 Issue
Economy and taxes: what each party thinks
6 questions, 42 party positions and 5 complete disagreements (how they are assigned).
What each party proposes on this issue
A summary of their positions on the questions in this issue, based on their manifestos, votes and statements. Details and sources, question by question, below.
Agrees: “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Disagrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”
Agrees: “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”; “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Disagrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”
Agrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”
Disagrees: “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Agrees: “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Disagrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”
In between: “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”
Agrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”
Disagrees: “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”; “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Agrees: “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”; “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Disagrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”
Agrees: “The annual car tax should be abolished”; “The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut”; “To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised”
Disagrees: “People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax”; “VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money”; “A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered”
People who earn more should pay a higher rate of income tax.
Estonia has a flat income tax of 22%, and since 2026 everyone has €700 a month tax-free. Under a progressive tax, people with higher incomes would pay a higher rate.
Of the 7 parties with a position on this question: 2 in favour, 0 in between and 5 against.
| Party | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Reformierakond | Strongly against | Reformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why |
| EKRE | Against | ERR, 22.01.2025: Opositsioon toetab kaitsekulude tõstmist, kuid näeb küsimust selle katmises Why |
| Keskerakond | Strongly in favour | Keskerakonna KOV2025 piketivoldik «Ummikust välja!», lk 2 Why |
| Eesti 200 | Strongly against | Reformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why |
| SDE | Strongly in favour | Sotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna valimisprogramm 2023, lk 8 Why |
| Isamaa | Against | Isamaa fraktsiooni eelnõu 680 SE «Maksurahu kehtestamise seadus» ja seletuskiri, 18.06.2025 Why |
| Parempoolsed | Strongly against | Parempoolsete maailmavaate alused (põhimõtted), parempoolsed.ee, muudetud 31.08.2026 Why |
-
Reformierakond Strongly againstReformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why
-
EKRE AgainstERR, 22.01.2025: Opositsioon toetab kaitsekulude tõstmist, kuid näeb küsimust selle katmises Why
-
Keskerakond Strongly in favourKeskerakonna KOV2025 piketivoldik «Ummikust välja!», lk 2 Why
-
Eesti 200 Strongly againstReformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why
-
SDE Strongly in favourSotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna valimisprogramm 2023, lk 8 Why
-
Isamaa AgainstIsamaa fraktsiooni eelnõu 680 SE «Maksurahu kehtestamise seadus» ja seletuskiri, 18.06.2025 Why
-
Parempoolsed Strongly againstParempoolsete maailmavaate alused (põhimõtted), parempoolsed.ee, muudetud 31.08.2026 Why
VAT on food should be cut, even if the state collects less money.
The standard VAT rate has been 24% since July 2025, and food is taxed at the same rate. Several parties propose a reduced rate for food, which would lower state revenue.
Of the 7 parties with a position on this question: 4 in favour, 0 in between and 3 against.
-
Reformierakond Strongly againstMaris Lauri arvamusartikkel, reform.ee, 11.10.2026 Why
-
EKRE Strongly in favourEKRE fraktsiooni eelnõu 1011 SE (käibemaksuseaduse muutmine) seletuskiri, 14.09.2026 Why
-
Keskerakond Strongly in favourERR, 12.12.2025: Riigikogu ei toetanud toiduainete käibemaksu langetamist Why
-
Eesti 200 AgainstRiigikogu hääletus 783 OE (toiduainete käibemaksu langetamine 9%-le), lõpphääletus 18.03.2026 Why
-
SDE Strongly in favourRiigikogu hääletus, Keskerakonna fraktsiooni otsuse eelnõu põhitoidugruppide käibemaksu langetamiseks, 11.12.2025 (ERR) Why
-
Isamaa In favourERR, 23.07.2025: Poliitikud jäävad toidukaupade käibemaksumäära langetamises eriarvamusele Why
-
Parempoolsed AgainstParempoolsed: käibemaks peab langema 20 protsendile!, parempoolsed.ee, 30.03.2026 Why
The annual car tax should be abolished.
Since 2025 car owners have paid an annual tax and a registration fee, based mainly on the vehicle's emissions and weight. Families with children get a discount.
Of the 7 parties with a position on this question: 4 in favour, 1 in between and 2 against.
-
Reformierakond Strongly againstMaris Lauri arvamusartikkel, reform.ee, 11.10.2026 Why
-
EKRE Strongly in favourEKRE fraktsiooni eelnõu 592 SE «Mootorsõidukimaksu seaduse kehtetuks tunnistamise seadus» ja seletuskiri, 12.03.2025 Why
-
Keskerakond Strongly in favourKeskerakonna volikogu avaldus «Eesti väärib Reformierakonna-vaba valitsust!», 15.11.2025 Why
-
Eesti 200 In betweenEesti 200 pressiteade „Eesti 200 teeb ettepaneku automaksu tühistamiseks“, 29.08.2025 Why
-
SDE AgainstERR, 16.01.2025: Läänemets: automaks tehti, sest Reformierakond soovis maksuküüru kaotamist Why
-
Isamaa Strongly in favourIsamaa KOV2025 üldprogramm, lk 2 Why
-
Parempoolsed In favourParempoolsete rahandusplaan, parempoolsed.ee, 17.07.2026 Why
A tax on expensive property should be introduced so that taxes on work can be lowered.
In Estonia property is only subject to land tax, whose rate each municipality sets; buildings are not taxed on their value. Most taxes fall on labour and consumption.
Of the 7 parties with a position on this question: 2 in favour, 1 in between and 4 against.
| Party | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Reformierakond | Against | Reformierakonna valimisprogramm 2023, lk 27 Why |
| EKRE | Strongly against | EKRE kohalike omavalitsuste valimiste programm 2025 «Muidugi EKRE!» Why |
| Keskerakond | In favour | Keskerakonna programm (keskerakond.ee/erakonnast/programm), maksupoliitika Why |
| Eesti 200 | In between | Estimated position Why |
| SDE | In favour | ERR News, 14.09.2023: Läänemets – no escaping asset, wealth taxes for Estonia in long run Why |
| Isamaa | Strongly against | Isamaa valimisprogramm 2023 «Eestluse elujõud», lk 18 Why |
| Parempoolsed | Strongly against | Parempoolsete maailmavaate alused (põhimõtted), parempoolsed.ee, muudetud 31.08.2026 Why |
-
Reformierakond AgainstReformierakonna valimisprogramm 2023, lk 27 Why
-
EKRE Strongly againstEKRE kohalike omavalitsuste valimiste programm 2025 «Muidugi EKRE!» Why
-
Keskerakond In favourKeskerakonna programm (keskerakond.ee/erakonnast/programm), maksupoliitika Why
-
Eesti 200 In between
Estimated position: inferred from the party’s overall programme, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
SDE In favourERR News, 14.09.2023: Läänemets – no escaping asset, wealth taxes for Estonia in long run Why
-
Isamaa Strongly againstIsamaa valimisprogramm 2023 «Eestluse elujõud», lk 18 Why
-
Parempoolsed Strongly againstParempoolsete maailmavaate alused (põhimõtted), parempoolsed.ee, muudetud 31.08.2026 Why
The standard VAT rate should be brought back down from 24%, even if public spending has to be cut.
The standard VAT rate rose from 20% to 22% in 2024 and to 24% in July 2025, mainly to pay for higher defence spending.
Of the 7 parties with a position on this question: 4 in favour, 0 in between and 3 against.
| Party | Position | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Reformierakond | Strongly against | Reformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why |
| EKRE | In favour | EKRE fraktsiooni eelnõu 596 SE (käibemaksuseaduse muutmine) seletuskiri, 12.03.2025 Why |
| Keskerakond | In favour | Keskerakonna KOV2025 piketivoldik «Ummikust välja!», lk 2 Why |
| Eesti 200 | Against | Reformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why |
| SDE | Against | Estimated position Why |
| Isamaa | In favour | Isamaa fraktsiooni eelnõu 680 SE «Maksurahu kehtestamise seadus» ja seletuskiri, 18.06.2025 Why |
| Parempoolsed | Strongly in favour | Parempoolsete rahandusplaan, parempoolsed.ee, 17.07.2026 Why |
-
Reformierakond Strongly againstReformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why
-
EKRE In favourEKRE fraktsiooni eelnõu 596 SE (käibemaksuseaduse muutmine) seletuskiri, 12.03.2025 Why
-
Keskerakond In favourKeskerakonna KOV2025 piketivoldik «Ummikust välja!», lk 2 Why
-
Eesti 200 AgainstReformierakonna ja Eesti 200 koalitsioonilepe 2025–2027, lk 34 Why
-
SDE Against
Estimated position: inferred from the party’s overall programme, without a specific document stating it.
Why -
Isamaa In favourIsamaa fraktsiooni eelnõu 680 SE «Maksurahu kehtestamise seadus» ja seletuskiri, 18.06.2025 Why
-
Parempoolsed Strongly in favourParempoolsete rahandusplaan, parempoolsed.ee, 17.07.2026 Why
To reduce the budget deficit, public spending should be cut rather than taxes raised.
The state spends more than it takes in, largely because of higher defence spending. To close the gap, taxes can be raised, spending cut, or both.
Of the 7 parties with a position on this question: 5 in favour, 0 in between and 2 against.
-
Reformierakond In favourKristen Michal, „Eesti tuleviku eelarve“, reform.ee, 29.09.2026 Why
-
EKRE In favourEKRE fraktsiooni eelnõu 595 SE «Julgeolekumaksu seaduse kehtetuks tunnistamise seadus» ja seletuskiri, 12.03.2025 Why
-
Keskerakond AgainstKeskerakonna KOV2025 piketivoldik «Ummikust välja!», lk 2 Why
-
Eesti 200 In favourERR, 29.06.2026: Kallas: sõja ajal ei saa ennaktempos eelarvedefitsiiti vähendada Why
-
SDE Strongly againstSotsiaaldemokraatliku Erakonna valimisprogramm 2023, lk 5 Why
-
Isamaa Strongly in favourUrmas Reinsalu kõne 2027. aasta riigieelarve üleandmisel Riigikogus, 29.09.2026 (Eesti Uudised) Why
-
Parempoolsed Strongly in favourParempoolsete rahandusplaan, parempoolsed.ee, 17.07.2026 Why
Explore other issues
Who do you agree with on this issue?
The questions in this issue are part of the full test. On 5 of them the parties hold opposite positions, so your answer matters.
Take the political test