Tiraspol protests against taxes. But who is responsible for the region's economic failure?

On October 23, in Tiraspol, the separatist administration organized a demonstration against the economic and fiscal policies of the constitutional authorities in Chisinau. Under the pompous name of the “Assembly of the Transnistrian People”, the region’s leadership is trying to send a clear message: Chisinau is to blame for Transnistria’s economic problems.

A convenient explanation. Too convenient. Every time the region's economy faces difficulties, the Tiraspol administration finds the same culprit: the Republic of Moldova. Never its own decisions, never the economic model built over the last three decades, never the dependence on Russian energy resources and Moscow's political support.

It is much easier to organize a rally against Chisinau than to explain to the population why, after more than three decades of separatist administration, the region's economy continues to be so vulnerable.

But what taxes are we actually talking about? From September 1, 2026, the authorities of the Republic of Moldova began to gradually eliminate tax incentives granted to businesses in the Transnistrian region. The first stage concerns VAT and excise duties on certain categories of goods, including alcohol, tobacco, perfumes, jewelry and other non-essential products. The process will continue in the coming years, so that by 2030, economic agents in the region will be subject to the same import tax regime as businesses in the rest of the Republic of Moldova.

And here comes Tiraspol's great dissatisfaction. For decades, businesses from the Transnistrian region have benefited from access to the trade and customs mechanisms of the Republic of Moldova, including foreign markets, without being fully subject to the same tax obligations as companies on the right bank.

They benefited from the economic opportunities offered by the Republic of Moldova, but the separatist administration constantly rejected the constitutional authority of Chisinau. In other words, the benefits to the Republic of Moldova are welcome. The obligations towards the Republic of Moldova are presented as an “economic blockade”.

How does this come about? Why does an entrepreneur from Chisinau, Balti, or Cahul have to comply with certain tax obligations, while a company from Tiraspol should permanently benefit from exemptions? Why is the gradual application of the same tax rules presented as an act of economic aggression?

Of course, the introduction of taxes can cause real difficulties for some businesses and can lead to higher prices for certain products. These effects need to be discussed and managed. But the existence of economic costs does not automatically mean that the Republic of Moldova must maintain a preferential regime indefinitely. However, there is another problem, which the leadership in Tiraspol prefers to talk about much less: its own responsibility.

Who has been administering the region for the past three decades? Who set the economic priorities? Who built a system dependent on Russian gas and a privileged political relationship with Moscow? Who should be held accountable for the accumulated vulnerabilities? Aren't they the ones who are calling people out into the streets today?

You cannot claim autonomy of decisions for three decades, and when economic difficulties arise, claim that the responsibility belongs exclusively to Chisinau.

Therefore, they should also assume the act of governing the region they control. And the demonstration on October 23 raises another question: how spontaneous is this protest?

According to reports from independent publications, there are allegations that employees of public institutions, businesses and students were pressured to participate in the demonstration. If these reports are confirmed, then we are no longer talking about just a protest against taxes, but also about using the population to convey a political message.

In essence, what is happening today in Tiraspol is not just a dispute about VAT and excise duties. It is also a confrontation between two approaches: Chisinau's attempt to standardize economic rules on the internationally recognized territory of the Republic of Moldova and the separatist administration's desire to maintain a distinct fiscal regime.

Tiraspol can challenge the tax measures. It can negotiate, it can request transition periods, and it can present economic arguments. But it cannot turn every tax obligation into evidence of alleged persecution. And if the separatist administration wants to have a serious discussion about the region’s economic future, it should start by answering its own citizens.

After more than 30 years of leading the region, why do you continue to tell people that Chisinau is to blame for all their problems?