Legislative Review July 24–July 30, 2026
ENERGY
TAXES
– Draft Regulation “Regulations on the State Information Systems of the State Revenue Service”
CUSTOMS
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
– Planned amendments to the regulation on the application of probation supervision
– Proposal for amendments to implement the E-evidence Regulation into the Latvian legal system
– Summary of case law in cases concerning illegal border crossing and illegal movement of persons
– The Senate has concluded that an authority may not change the official communication channel without warning if a person has requested to continue communicating in a specific manner
– Collection of Constitutional Court judgments for 2024 has been published
ENERGY
Draft Regulatory Acts
New regulation for the operation of wind power plants – draft Cabinet Regulation “Requirements for the Operation of Wind Power Plants” (Project ID: 26-TA-1439)
Public consultation July 28, 2026–August 17, 2026.
For the first time, the draft regulation establishes uniform requirements for the operation of wind power plants in Latvia in a single document. The draft regulation will apply to wind power plants with an installed capacity of 1 MW and more, stipulating requirements for noise and low-frequency noise limit values, flicker effect mitigation, nature conservation measures, operational safety, monitoring, and supervision. Simultaneously, the regular submission of reports by electricity producers to the State Environmental Service is provided for, the responsibilities of competent authorities are more clearly divided, public involvement in noise control processes is established, and mechanisms for monitoring compliance and applying sanctions in case of violations are introduced. The objective of the draft regulation is to ensure a unified, transparent, and clearly applicable regulatory framework for the operational period of wind power plants, while promoting the protection of human health, the environment, and biodiversity.
TAXES
Draft Regulatory Acts
Draft Regulation “Regulations on the State Information Systems of the State Revenue Service” (Project ID: 25-TA-1246)
Adopted at the Cabinet meeting on July 28, 2026
The draft regulation establishes a unified legal framework for the state information systems of the State Revenue Service (SRS). It stipulates what information is processed in these systems, how it is stored, to whom it is accessible, and how the protection of personal data is ensured. The project was developed in connection with the reorganization of the SRS and the implementation of the new Law on the State Revenue Service.
The draft regulation provides for the consolidation in external regulation of the storage periods and disclosure procedures for audit logs of EMCS, CMIS, DNS, ESNDA, EMDAS, ITVS, MAIS, NIS, TLKAIS, SRS EDS, and SRS PDB.
The purpose of using the aforementioned systems was to ensure the fulfillment of tasks specified in the regulatory enactments of the SRS. Upon the entry into force of the Law on the State Revenue Service on January 1, 2026, the status of the state information system manager, the purpose of use, the scope of data, and the processing procedure will henceforth be determined by Cabinet regulations rather than by law.
CUSTOMS
Industry News
Information for exporters regarding additional customs tariffs introduced by the USA (Current Topic)
2026. On July 23, 2026, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) announced a final decision to introduce additional tariffs for 60 trading partners, including the European Union (EU), which have not implemented or do not effectively apply a ban on importing goods produced using forced labor.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Draft Regulatory Acts
Planned amendments to the regulation on the application of probation supervision (Draft Law No. 1472/Lp14)
Submitted on July 23, 2026.
The amendments provide for the supplementation of Section 38.1, Paragraph 2.2, Clause 5 of the Criminal Law with Section 253.1, Paragraph 3 of the Criminal Law.
A person was entitled to receive a suspended sentence as a primary punishment even for committing an especially serious criminal offense if the sanction of the relevant section of the Criminal Law provided for imprisonment starting from 3 years, for example, Section 253.1, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law.
After January 1, 2025, a person is not entitled to receive probation supervision as a primary punishment if an especially serious criminal offense has been committed for which liability is established under Section 253.1, Paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law, which essentially worsens the position of the person (the accused). Currently, a situation is arising where a person may receive two different types of punishment for two analogous criminal offenses; namely, if the criminal offense was committed by December 31, 2024 (inclusive), the person may receive probation supervision as a primary punishment in the case of a suspended sentence, whereas if the criminal offense was committed on January 1, 2025, only a sentence of imprisonment may be applied to the person.
Proposal for amendments to implement the E-evidence Regulation into the Latvian legal system (Draft Law No. 1476/Lp14)
Submitted on July 28, 2026.
The amendments to the draft law are intended to implement the E-evidence Regulation and the Second Additional Protocol, as well as to make other necessary technical amendments.
Case Law
Summary of case law in cases concerning illegal border crossing and illegal movement of persons (Summary of Case Law)
The Department of Criminal Cases of the Senate has compiled case law, conclusions, and findings in criminal cases regarding illegal crossing of the state border, illegal movement of persons across the state border, and providing the possibility to reside illegally in Latvia. The summary analyzes rulings of the Senate and regional courts in cases heard from 2020 to 2025.
The objective is to promote a unified approach to the understanding and application of these criminal offenses and to provide courts and other legal practitioners with an overview of significant issues that have been relevant in judicial practice when applying Sections 284, 285, and 285.1 of the Criminal Law.
The Senate has concluded that an authority may not change the official communication channel without warning if a person has requested to continue communicating in a specific manner (Case SKA-685/2026)
The Department of Administrative Cases of the Senate has examined an ancillary complaint filed against the refusal of a judge of the Administrative District Court to renew a lapsed procedural deadline and to accept an application, and has recognized that the judge’s decision is to be set aside and the matter regarding the progress of the application is to be remitted for re-examination.
The applicant had applied to the court to appeal a decision of the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs regarding a departure order applied to him. Although he had requested that communication be organized via email, the appealed decision was first sent to his official electronic address and only several months later to his specified email address. Therefore, the applicant requested the renewal of the lapsed procedural deadline for appealing the decision, considering that the period for this deadline should only begin after the actual notification of the decision via email.
The Senate’s decision emphasizes that if a person is granted the right by a regulatory enactment to choose another communication channel by providing specific justification, it is impermissible to treat these rights formally or to perceive compliance with the notification procedure as an end in itself. The legislator has not defined criteria for what constitutes “specific justification”; therefore, the authority must evaluate the person’s request, striving to fulfill it as far as possible, while a refusal must be reasoned and the person must be given the opportunity to provide justification if they have not done so. This is particularly significant in cases where the authority has suddenly changed the method of communication without informing the person, as in such a case, grounds may arise to doubt the presumption of notification of the document. The Senate recognized that the applicant had the right to rely on the fact that communication with the authority would continue in the previous manner using email; therefore, the authority unreasonably refused to evaluate his request and, without warning, conducted further communication via the official electronic address.
Industry News
Collection of Constitutional Court judgments for 2024 has been published (Collection of Constitutional Court Judgments)
The Constitutional Court has published the 2024 collection of judgments, which compiles all judgments adopted by the Constitutional Court in 2024 and the separate opinions of judges attached thereto.
The collection of judgments includes rulings on various issues significant to society, including the protection of fundamental human rights, the basic principles of a democratic state governed by the rule of law, and the lawfulness of the activities of state institutions.
Need help? Contact us
VIKTORIJA Cherkas
PARTNER, ATTORNEY AT LAW
Viktorija is a Latvian legal expert recognized by international directories in project management and mergers and acquisitions (M&A), including energy projects (development of wind and solar park projects).
Viktorija also provides legal advice for day-to-day business operations – from company formation, management, shareholder relations, restructuring, and other business-related matters. At the same time, Viktorija is an expert in real estate development, acquisition, and leasing, and provides assistance to individuals and companies regarding relocation or property acquisition in Spain.
ALISA LEŠKOVIČA
PARTNER, ATTORNEY AT LAW
Alisa is an experienced attorney and a partner at RockBridge Legal. Since 2008, 2008, Alisa has been advising clients and providing legal assistance in the most complex tax and customs matters.
Alisa also specializes in anti-money laundering (AML), sanctions, and compliance matters. Alisa has significant experience in corporate crime and investigation cases related to tax, customs, and sanctions issues.
Viktorija Jarkina-Toča
PARTNER, ATTORNEY AT LAW
Dr. iur. Viktorija Jarkina is a partner at RockBridge Legal, ranked by international legal directories Chambers Europe, Chambers Global, Best Lawyers, and Legal 500 among the leading criminal defense attorneys in Latvia.
Viktorija specializes in shareholder disputes, civil and commercial litigation, as well as criminal law, providing representation and defense in white-collar crime cases, including money laundering and environmental offenses. Additionally, Viktorija has extensive experience working with franchises, providing full legal assistance related to franchising.