[ad_1]
Do you work better, more easily with this ruling majority than with the previous ruling majority?
There is always a certain relationship that can be called: polishing the division of power between them. This process had to be done with both the previous government and this one. Easier to say unequivocally or not, I don’t know if that’s the correct criteria. For me, the only criterion is whether we will be able to implement those objectives, the legislative initiatives, the fiscal policy proposals. If we can do that with this ruling majority, I will say that the cooperation is successful because we have a result. All the other things, those little disputes, conflicts or their visibility that some very kindly exaggerate, are secondary and I would not give it so much importance if everything were in order in terms of implementation of initiatives.
The two heads of government you have to work with are former candidates in the presidential elections. This is who you can speak better to: Ingrida Šimonyte or was it better with Saulius Skvernelis?
My situation is that it is probably a little easier for me: I won the election. In the meantime, my colleagues have wasted this time, but does that prevent them from working with me? I do not believe it. They are both experienced politicians and they know very well that elections are something changeable. Of course, both have some differences of character. Again, it is very natural.
I think we need a period of time during which we get to know each other better, we understand each other. Then we draw the appropriate conclusions and can continue working normally. There has been such a period in my dealings with Mr Skvernel, I believe this period is coming to an end and in the dealings with the Prime Minister of this new ruling majority.
He has suggested a slight change in the tax system. Tell me, is this a shift towards progressivity or not? Because some of his proposals try to earn more from individual activities and raise taxes for them, but at the same time he is offering exemptions from income tax, which are already small in Lithuania, and for that he is receiving criticism from conservative representatives in the Seimas.
In the first place, it is necessary to define more precisely what we specifically propose here, because these corporate tax benefits are not linked to the mere desire to reduce the burden of corporate tax, but are linked to certain actions of employers against vis employees. In particular, we anticipate that salary costs, if salary increases are faster than the prescribed amount, can be deducted from corporate taxes and thus reduce the burden of income tax.
The objective is very simple. We have noted that since 2004 Lithuania has made very significant progress in terms of bringing GDP per capita closer to the European Union average. In practice, we ask for a limit of 80 percent. Meanwhile, at the salary level, we still have around 60 percent of the European Union average. It has been observed that in those countries where wages represent a higher proportion of GDP, the level of redistribution of GDP through the national budget is also correspondingly higher, which is probably quite logical as wages are taxed by contributions to social security, personal income tax and so on.
What’s happening in Lithuania lately? Unfortunately, this is a salary that is paid in other ways, not a secret, including salary in envelopes. And I think this measure, this path, which not only allows employers to share the value they create, but also reduces the shadow economy, is really promising. It is already being tested in some states, specifically Japan. We are well aware of the Japanese experience in this area and therefore we believe that it is a very meaningful way to invest in our people, to share in the economic prosperity that our employers and our company generate. This is fully in line with the principles of the welfare state.
In another place we are talking about the comparison of the tax rate between the personal income tax, individual activity, but only when the annual income exceeds 35 thousand. euros. It is definitely not such a small amount anymore. Well, and this should help to partially cure the problem that has been observed in Lithuania for a long time that different income from different sources are taxed at different rates. At different rates, in our opinion, it is not certain types of income that should be taxed, but the amount of income. The higher the income, the higher the tax rate. So, we must put everything on our feet.
As for the president, Health Minister Arūnas Dulkys basically suggests that the president can say what he wants, there are as many vaccines as there are, and there will be no more, so we won’t vaccinate until two-thirds of the summer. . Do you receive different information about the vaccine and vaccinations from the Minister? How is it really?
I receive information from a primary source, that is, the European Union, which is negotiating with manufacturers trying to reach the maximum quantity of vaccine. At this point, it can probably be said that we can all talk about what we want, but if there is enough vaccine, we just won’t have a choice and we won’t understand if the vaccine is supplied in that volume and we say ‘oh, you know, we’re not very ready here ‘or’ we really don’t want to, we are not in a hurry, we will vaccinate twice ‘, not only will people not understand this, but people will take us with forks.
It is at this point that I think we should not argue in vain, but we should do everything possible to increase vaccine volumes in Lithuania, and I have no doubt that in the coming months both Johnson & Johnson and other manufacturers will hit the market. to receive vaccines in the European Union. Once again, we must be prepared for a rapid increase in vaccine volumes in March-April.
The Latvian president has vaccinated AstraZeneca against the coronavirus, urging it to get vaccinated. Are you also going to get vaccinated to be an incentive for the public, or do you think it would be a demonstration of some kind of privilege?
You know, in the current circumstances, we’re actually seeing some nasty cases of out-of-turn shots. It’s gratifying that the harsh reaction we’ve shown as an infinitely cynical and disgusting act has slowed down these attempts, and I’m hearing less of those things right now. I am ready to get vaccinated according to the established procedure, I trust all the vaccines that are currently available in Lithuania so I can get vaccinated with any of them and I don’t see any problem here, especially since age still allows it.
The Russian negotiations with the Germans on the use of the Sputnik vaccine for recognition in Europe became known. Furthermore, as we have seen, Hungary is immediately beginning to vaccinate Sputnik without waiting for such recognition. He does not intend to follow Hungary’s example, but what if Sputnik were recognized by the European Medicines Agency?
What if. If it could be considered, and Angela Merkel has repeatedly said that yes, it is possible to talk about the use of this vaccine, but we do not trust the vaccine as long as this vaccine is not recognized, approved, evaluated by the relevant specialists. . Until this fact exists, it is not talking about anything. Once again, more and more manufacturers are completing the trial and testing processes and submitting applications. If those applications are met, the offer will certainly increase very steeply.
Mr President, there is a debate in Europe about how to sanction Russia for what is being done there. One of the topics of discussion is Nord Stream 2. In your opinion, is it possible to suspend this project or is it already doomed to completion?
A very difficult question. Discussions have taken place on this issue, including in the European Council. Germany itself or its leader, Ms Angela Mergel, had raised this issue at one of the meetings. I have no doubt that this would be perhaps one of the most painful instruments for the Putin regime, because all other instruments work, but I would say that they would have such limited action. The Nord Stream 2 project, for its part, would undoubtedly be a very powerful medicine, given the amount of money invested in it and the great strategic, geopolitical and energy importance it has for Russia. I’m not really going to speculate whether all parties will be able to agree and take this position with one voice.
Probably the main challenge at the moment is that we must take a very clear position on Russia, but doing it among the 27 countries that have different experiences, different perceptions of relations with Russia, different distances from Russia and Russia, is not an easy task. It is a very difficult task, but we still have to work on it. I see that the position of principle of the Baltic States and, in particular, of Lithuania is being heard, especially in the current context. When things are going more or less well, those calls or voices of concern that we constantly raise are barely audible. However, when we see with open eyes what is happening and the fears that we express come true, then our voice is heard much more strongly.
See the full conversation with President Gitan Nauseda in the video at the beginning of the article.
[ad_2]
