Grain transit charges rise by 25% on average: what did Latvia’s government check before its promise?

The new issue in Latvia’s Russian grain transit dispute is how the government prepared its decision. In LTV’s De facto interview on 18 October, Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs acknowledged that he had not previously known about legal obstacles to the announced infrastructure charge increase. The programme reports an actual average increase of 25%. However, a rise in one charge is not an equivalent increase across the transport chain.

Rumours and facts — promises versus delivery. The charge has increased; that alone does not establish that transit has stopped.

What was promised, and what did the law require?

The Cabinet’s 7 October statement sets a goal of stopping grain transit from aggressor states and recalls asking LatRailNet to consider tripling the charge. That means a 200% increase; the “300% increase” also used in public discussion would mean quadrupling it. These figures are not interchangeable.

The Railway Law amendment, effective from 22 September, required a review and a reasoned decision, without prescribing a multiplier. The special procedure covers grain transit with a dispatch station in Russia, including consignments to Latvian ports.

LatRailNet’s 29 September notice confirms that the new charges apply from 13 October to 31 December 2026. It publishes individual rates, rather than a universal percentage for every shipment; the 25% average increase is the figure reported by LTV.

What was known before the promise?

In LTV’s De facto report, Climate and Energy Minister Jānis Vitenbergs says comprehensive effectiveness calculations were lacking and several ministers raised objections. LatRailNet told the programme its representatives attended the closed Cabinet meeting but were not given the floor or involved in the decision.

These are interview statements. They raise a legitimate question: how were the political objective, legal options and economic calculations reconciled before the public promise? They do not themselves prove deliberate deception. Assessing accountability requires the preparatory documents and an explanation of how objections were considered.

Less than one euro per tonne: what changes?

Industry estimates gathered by the programme put total costs from the Russian border to a ship in a Latvian port at around €25–30 per tonne. The infrastructure charge change adds less than €1 per tonne. These are approximate industry estimates, not a uniform price for every contract.

Citing State Revenue Service customs data, LTV reports that Russian and Belarusian grain transit reached 888,000 tonnes by 6 October, compared with approximately 652,000 tonnes throughout 2025. The periods differ, and the data predate the new charge. They cannot establish its effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Moreover, the statistics also cover Belarus, whereas dispatch from a Russian station determines the special charge’s scope.

Three checks for businesses and government

• Invoice: distinguish the infrastructure charge from total transport and handling costs.
• Contract: check which party bears tariff changes and the service date from which they apply.
• Outcome: compare subsequent cargo flows, accounting for seasonality and alternative routes.

Businesses reviewing costs may find accounting and documentation services useful; business and service listings can support partner searches. The government must demonstrate the link between its instrument and a measurable outcome: a higher tariff alone does not fulfil the objective of restricting transit.

Official information sources

• Railway Law amendment.
• LatRailNet: decision and application period.
• Cabinet: statement of 7 October.
• LTV De facto/LSM: interviews and data, 18 October.