Problem: the same rule – fundamentally opposing court interpretations
The version of point 2 of the Per Diem Payment Procedure Description valid until October 1 allows paying lower per diems if “smaller specific amounts, differentiated according to objective criteria,” are set in a collective agreement, or in its absence – in a local regulatory legal act, and if they are not less than 50 percent of the maximum amount set by the Government. The term “objective criteria” was not clarified in the resolution and became the main source of disputes, especially in the international freight transport sector, where per diems constitute a significant part of the employee’s income.
Vilnius District Court in its decision on December 10, 2024 (civil case No. e2A-2941-1097/2024) formulated the rule: per diems perform not a salary but a compensation function – they cover increased employee expenses arising from a business trip.
Therefore, per diems can only be reduced when the actual business trip expenses decrease, and the reduction criteria must be directly related specifically to such expenses. Criteria related to the nature of the work, not expenses – such as the truck’s year of manufacture, the length of the combination, the route only through the European Union, not changing pallets, etc. – are not considered objective. The court recognized the reduction of per diems as illegal and awarded the driver 3,599.88 EUR in per diems and 6,778.38 EUR in penalties.
Less than a year later, Kaunas District Court in its ruling on September 16, 2025 (No. e2A-2200-945/2025) interpreted the same norm essentially oppositely. The court noted that the purpose of paying per diems is not directly stated in national legal acts, and the employer’s obligation to pay per diems is not directly linked to the employee’s incurred expenses.
Per diems can be viewed in two ways – both as expense compensation and as additional pay for work. If the employer pays per diems as additional remuneration, criteria focused on the nature and complexity of the work cannot be considered non-objective. Therefore, the first-instance decision based solely on the concept of “expenses” (as in the Vilnius case) was annulled and the case was returned for reconsideration.
The controversial nature of the situation was confirmed by other decisions – for example, Klaipėda District Court (November 13, 2025, No. e2A-1429-513/2025) ruled in favor of the employee regarding the objectivity of the relevant criteria, while Panevėžys District Court (June 17, 2026, No. e2A-331-1059/2026) ruled in favor of the employer. Such inconsistent practice caused confusion and legal uncertainty: employers could not predict whether their procedure would withstand judicial scrutiny, and employees could not know exactly the amount of per diems they would receive.
Read more Warning to TikTokers: what is not allowed to be filmed in the store?
Changes from October 1, 2026
The new version of point 2 of the Government resolution abandons the disputed requirement to differentiate per diem amounts “according to objective criteria.” Instead, clear and unambiguous per diem amount limits are established.
Main changes:
- The “objective criteria” requirement is removed. It is sufficient that specific lower amounts are set in a collective agreement or local regulatory legal act – there is no longer a need to separately justify their “objectivity.”
- Two measures and their limits are separated. In a collective agreement, amounts cannot be less than 50 percent of the maximum amounts set by the Government. In a local regulatory legal act, amounts can only be reduced when the business trip lasts at least 7 days, and not less than 65 percent of the Government-set norm. Practically, this means that for business trips shorter than 7 days, the employer can no longer unilaterally reduce per diems – reductions are only allowed with a collective agreement concluded with trade unions.
- Advance written notification is established. The employee must be informed in writing about the set lower per diem amounts before the start of the business trip, and these amounts apply until the end of the respective business trip – they cannot be changed during the trip.
If the route and the country (city) to which the business trip is made change during the trip, per diems are calculated according to the amount set for that country (city).
How this benefits employers and employees
The new procedure provides legal certainty for employers. Instead of the evaluative concept of “objective criteria,” clear percentage limits and conditions appear, reducing the risk that a court will recognize the reduction of per diems as illegal and award the difference with penalties. Employers retain the ability to reasonably manage business trip costs: reduce per diems to 50 percent by collective agreement or to 65 percent by local regulatory legal act for longer (at least 7 days) business trips.
Employees’ guarantees are strengthened. Per diems for short business trips cannot be reduced unilaterally by the employer, and when per diem rate reduction is allowed by local regulatory legal act, the limit rises from 50 to 65 percent. Moreover, mandatory advance written notification and the rule that amounts cannot be changed until the end of the business trip ensure transparency and predictability – the employee knows in advance how much they will receive during each business trip.
Business trip expenses incurred until September 30, 2026, are reimbursed according to the procedure valid until then, so employers should review and update local regulatory legal acts in advance if necessary to comply with the new requirements from October 1.
Read more Thai minister: Myanmar leader to visit Thailand next month
