Sergei Ivanov, a deputy from “Our Party” and chairman of the parliamentary committee on agriculture and the food industry, reported on the “ceasefire” immediately after the events. He represents the “loyal and constructive” opposition.
Apparently, both negotiating parties were not averse to voluntarily ceding the initiative. And this very opposition turned out to be more than willing to take up and build on that initiative—by reiterating its demand for the finance minister’s resignation over his proposed reform of budgetary and fiscal policy. This would be appropriate if the draft of this reform were to be significantly rewritten following “public consultations” in the form of roadside protests and attempts to block border crossings.
In short, for those who are “against” the reform, these interim results of the negotiations represent a visible success.
Now, the leadership of the Association of Grain and Oilseed Producers “Forța Fermierilor” have every reason to state in their communiqué following the “June wave” of protests that “kindness backed by fists” can achieve more than just the kind (wise) words of numerous experts “without fists.”
At the same time, to get the full picture, it’s worth noting that the mass harvest of first-group crops has already begun, and as it progresses, the farmers’ protests would have fizzled out anyway. Perhaps it would have been loud—if the roadblocks in the border regions had sparked widespread public outrage, forcing the police to intervene harshly.
Such a turn of events would have been disadvantageous to all parties involved. Presumably, for these reasons as well, the farmers decided it was best to retreat from the “battlefield” under a banner bearing the “clenched fist” logo.
Well, the authorities have gained some more time to analyze the “test run” organized by the farmers—and, of course, by the expert community that stands in solidarity with them.
What might the consequences be?
The day after the parliamentary negotiations, “Forța Fermierilor” issued a statement:
– apologized to the traveling public for the inconvenience caused;
– reminded the public that farmers are fighting for the common interest—to prevent price increases due to the rise in VAT on (certain—ed. LP) agricultural products from 8% to 20%;
– called on the media not to exploit the difficulties caused by the partial and temporary blockade of four border crossing points;
– reserved the right to resume protests—“if there is no clear response from the authorities stating that VAT will not be increased to 20%.”
And to cement this success, the “Forța Fermierilor” statement notes that “June 24–25 saw the largest and most representative protest in the last 25 years,” in which more than 500 farmers from 23 districts across the country took part.
For their part, some experts claim that they have already received an invitation to participate in drafting a joint proposal by agri-food associations and the Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Industry (MAIA) regarding the budget and fiscal policy reform project. In this context, the following aspects are likely to receive greater attention in the public debate.
The “VAT problem” also encompasses the issue of VAT accumulated in companies’ accounts: in agriculture, according to expert estimates, approximately 2.5 billion lei, and across the country’s entire economy—9–11 billion lei. The proposed 20 percent VAT can, in a certain (cynical) sense, be viewed as a way to gradually eliminate this “dead weight.”
As an alternative, the Ministry of Finance itself has already proposed “reverse taxation”—a zero VAT rate across the entire supply chain for grains and oilseeds, following Romania’s example (a specific form of offsetting).
The severity of the “VAT problem” could be mitigated, for example, by reimbursing excise taxes on diesel fuel and certain types of agricultural machinery, as well as by expanding subsidies—including “per hectare” subsidies.
However, “Forța Fermierilor” has made it clear that it will not accept a 20% VAT rate, even in exchange for other “perks.” It appears that this organization is not ready at this time to discuss a compromise option for a uniform (across the entire agri-food chain) VAT rate of 11%, 12%, or any other percentage higher than the current 8%.
Will farmers be able to push through their position by launching a “second wave” of protests in 2026? The answer is not clear.
The main question is how the rest of the summer and the beginning of fall will unfold. Alas, the Republic of Moldova now has very short “planning horizons.” It may well be that in a few months, the public will be preoccupied with entirely different issues.
