Hotel Market Overview

Lithuania
1st half of 2012

October 2012 This overview has been written in cooperation with Lithuanian Hotel and Restaurant Association
In the first half of 2012, growth in
tourism sector, helped Lithuanian
hotels to increase occupancy rates
compared to the first half of 2011,
but pricing had to be adjusted
downwards due to competition and
taxation changes.
Contents
Introduction 1

1. Key Highlights 2
H1 2012 – Business environment remains turbulent 2

2. Tourism Indicators 4
Demand structure 4
Tourist flows 4
Accommodation costs 5
Expenditure structure 5

3. Lithuanian Hotel Market Overview 6

Historical trends in key performance indicators 6
Other hotel market ratio 8

4. KPI Benchmarking to Neighbouring Countries 9

Key performance indicators in hotel industry 9
Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index 10

5. Interview with Noel Attard, General Manager at Kempinski

Hotel Cathedral Square 11

Appendix 1 14
Glossary 14

Contacts 15
Introduction

Deloitte presents its first public overview of

hotel market in Lithuania. This publication
focuses on the analysis of historical trends and
developments in hotel industry starting from
2006. The overview covers analysis of key
performance indicators in accommodation and
tourism sector, such as number of rooms,
guest nights, tourist flows, occupancy rate,
total revenues and revenues per room.

The overview shows that the period from 2006 to 2008 can be remembered by the
exemplary results which, however, were followed by steep decline in 2009 due to the
economic downturn, which hotel industry, like many other sectors, was unable to evade.
The tourism industry in Lithuania faced not only the global economic crisis, but also air
transport problems in Lithuania.

The publication also overviews recent developments in hotel business which occurred
during 2011 and the first half of 2012, when the performance of hospitality sector in
Lithuania showed positive recovery signs. The increase was recorded not only in
tourist arrivals and occupancy, but also in hotel revenues. Despite positive
achievements in 2011, year 2012 brings new challenges both from global and local
environments, such as uncertainties of economic health in EU and changing local VAT
taxation regime.

This publication focuses not only on developments in the hotel industry in Lithuania,
but also includes comparisons of key performance indicators with other countries in the
region: Latvia, Estonia and Poland. The comparison reveals that Lithuanian tourism
and hotel industries have space for further improvements in order to achieve the
performance levels of neighbouring countries.

Analyses presented in the publication were mainly based on the data sourced from
STR Global and the Lithuanian Department of Statistics.

Saulius Bakas
Managing Partner
Deloitte Lithuania

October 2012

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 1

1. Key Highlights

H1 2012 – Business environment remains turbulent

After two years during which hotel industry in
Lithuania struggled with difficulties, in 2011 it
started gradually recovering from the most
challenging period in the past decade.
The tourism industry had to face not only the global
economic crisis, but also adapt to changing VAT
taxation regime and local air transport problems.
After a significant contraction by 19% in 2009,
number of nights spent by guests in the hotels
started to grow again in 2010 and have returned to
their pre-crisis level in 2011. Occupancy rate
increased from 47.7% to 54.1% in 2011 as
compared to the previous year.
Although the occupancy level in hotels have not
reached the pre-crisis level of 56-58%, it could be
considered as very positive recovery of the
accommodation market.
The economy downturn hit the hotel market
revenues quite strongly – in 2009 ADR (Average
daily rate) decreased by 20% and RevPAR
(Revenue per available room) decreased by 33%.
In 2010 additional decline of 16% and 15% was
recorded.
As overall situation in hotel industry improved in
2011, average room rates started to grow too. ADR
increased by 14% and reached 188 LTL for a room
however this level was behind by 24% from its peak
in 2008. The growth of RevPAR amounted to 29%
compared to its lowermost level in 2010.

Occupancy and nights spent Average room rates

60% 58% 3.0 300
56%
54% 54% 245
55% 2.5 250 228 224
47% 48% 196 188
50% 2.0 200
164
45% 1.5 129 137
150 124
40% 1.0 92 101
100 78
35% 0.5
50
30% 0.0
200 6 200 7 200 8 200 9 201 0 201 1 0
200 6 200 7 200 8 200 9 201 0 201 1
Nights spent, mln Occupancy (% )
ADR (L TL) RevPAR (L TL )
Source: STR Global, LT Department of Statistics
Source: STR Global

Definitions:
Occupancy rate – number of rooms divided by
the number of available rooms.
ADR (Average daily rate) – sales divided by
the number of sold rooms.
RevPAR (Revenue per available room) – sales
divided by the number of available rooms.

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 2

Comparing the Q1 2011 and Q1 2012, the number
of nights spent by guests increased by almost 19%
which resulted in occupancy rate increase by 2.2 pp.
In the Q2 2012, the number of nights spent by
guests in hotels increased by 12.5%, while the
occupancy level grew by approximately 0.7 pp.
Despite the positive trend in occupancy rates, the
revenues per available room decreased by almost
7.7% in Q2 2012 compared to Q2 2011. This was
caused by lower room rates in 2012 due to intense
competition and higher VAT tax rate – it appears
that hotels did not fully transfer the VAT increase
(9% VAT rate in 2011 and 21% in 2012) to the
consumers, but had to reduce their service prices
as well.

Occupancy and nights spent (Quarterly) Average room rates (Quarterly)

250
80% 1.2
68%
70% 61% 62% 194 191
1.0 200 182 181
172 168
60%
48% 0.8
50% 41% 150 132
39%
111 104
40% 0.6
91
100
30% 70 70
0.4
20%
0.2 50
10%
0% 0.0 0
1Q- 2011 2Q- 2011 3Q- 2011 4Q- 2011 1Q- 2012 2Q- 2012 1Q- 2011 2Q- 2011 3Q- 2011 4Q- 2011 1Q- 2012 2Q- 2012
Nights spent, mln Occupancy (% ) ADR (L TL) RevPAR (L TL )

Source: STR Global, LT Department of Statistics Source: STR Global

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 3

2. Tourism Indicators

Demand structure

The number of nights spent by tourists has been
constantly decreasing since 2007, while in 2011
has started to grow again.
Structure of hotel guests reveals that fluctuations in
hotel occupancy ratios are mainly influenced by
foreign guests/tourists. Visitors from foreign
countries are also more affected by seasonality
than local guests.

Nights spent by guests (Quarterly)

1,000 964

825 819
800 728
602 604
600 501 544
458
400 364

200

0
1Q- 10 2Q- 10 3Q- 10 4Q- 10 1Q- 11 2Q- 11 3Q- 11 4Q- 11 1Q- 12 2Q- 12
Local guests, ths Foreign guests, ths
Source: LT Department of Statistics

Tourist flows

Within the global economic downturn, which started
in 2008, tourists had to reconsider their travel plans
and cut spending (both business and leisure)
causing the decrease in number of tourist arrivals
by 17% in 2009 as compared to the previous year.
At the beginning of 2009 the Lithuanian airline
company (flyLAL) faced bankruptcy, and moreover,
few months later the biggest Baltic carrier
(airBaltic) cancelled a number of direct flights
to/from Vilnius airport.

Another valid reason which influenced the number Foreign tourist arrivals picked up again by 12% in
of tourist arrivals was the air transport difficulties. 2010 and returned to their pre-crisis level in 2011.

Tourist arivals
1,800 5.4 6.0
4.9
1,500 4.5 4.4 5.0
4.3

1,200 4.0

900 1,776 3.0

1,486 1,611 1,507
1,341
600 2.0

300 1.0

0 0.0
200 7 200 8 200 9 201 0 201 1
Tourist arrivals, ths Average duration of one arrival, days
Source: LT Department of Statistics

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 4

Accommodation costs

Since 2007 tourist expenditure resembled the hotel
market trend and was largely affected by changes
in number of tourist arrivals.
The share of tourist expenses for accommodation
services has been relatively stable during the
period and accounted to 18-21% of all expenditure.
In 2011 the value of expenditure for hotel services
has increased by 43% as compared to 2010 and
reached 393 mLTL.

Tourist expenditure
2,400 2,208
2,100 1,844
1,753
1,800 1,577
1,500 1,346
1,200
900
600 359 361 393
249 274
300
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Total expenditure, mLTL Expenditure for accommodation, mLTL
Source: LT Deparmtment of Statistics

Expenditure structure

As presented above, tourist total expenses
increased significantly in 2011 compared to 2010,
i.e. by 40%. Comparing the structure of tourist
expenditure in 2010 and 2011 the following findings
could be made: the tourists spent approx.10 pp
more of the total expenditure for shopping in 2011
compared to 2010, the expenditure share for food
and drinks has decreased by 3 pp during the same
period, while other main groups of expenses
(transport, visa, leisure and culture) remained more
or less stable.

Tourist expenditure in 2010 Tourist expenditure in 2011

Shopping Other Shopping Other

23% 9% 33% 5%

Visa Visa
3% 2%
Accommo
dation
Accommo Transport
18% Transport 10%
11% dation
18%
Food, Food, Leisure
drinks Leisure drinks and
29% and culture
26%
culture 6%
7%

Source: LT Department of Statistics Source: LT Department of Statistics

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 5

3. Lithuanian Hotel Market
Overview

Historical trends in key performance indicators

Occupancy rate

Monthly data presented in the graph below reflects
the seasonality of the hotel industry. Occupancy
rate in hotels during summer season (June-
September) reaches and exceeds 70%, while
during winter months it almost halves.
In 2011 occupancy rate increased and was higher
by 6 percentage points on average in every month
compared to the year 2010. In H1 2012 monthly
occupancy rates were similar to H1 2011 with slight
improvements in January and July months.

Occupancy (%)
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 2011 2012
Source: STR Global

Average daily rate

ADR ratio shows the average price for a room and
is calculated as sales divided by the number of
rooms sold.
Starting from 2011 slightly higher room rates, in
terms of ADR, were applied as compared to the
year 2010. The price peak in September was
mainly caused by men’s European Basketball
Championship (EuroBasket) held in Lithuania. The
event started on 31 August 2011 and lasted for 3
weeks. According to the organizers of the event,
approximately 20,000 foreigners visited Lithuania
during the championship.
Although no significant change was recorded in the
occupancy rate during EuroBasket, the hotels
managed to increase room rates for September to
243 LTL, 44% higher compared to the previous
months. Such an increase influenced the average
annual rate for 2011.
During H1 2012 rates were lower compared to 2011,
due to intense competition among hotels and higher
VAT tax rate. It appears that hotels did not fully
transfer the VAT increase (9% VAT rate in 2011
and 21% in 2012) to the consumers, but had to
reduce their services prices as well.

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 6

 ADR (LTL)
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 2011 2012
Source: STR Global

Revenue per available room

RevPAR ratio shows sales for an available room
and is calculated as total sales divided by the
number of rooms available in the hotels. As this
ratio is the product of occupancy rate and ADR, it
reflects seasonal tourist flows and one-off increases
in room rates.
In 2010, average RevPAR decreased by 15% as
compared to the previous year. The main reason
for this change was not only dropped tourist flows,
but also lower Average daily rate for a room.
In 2008, the government was struggling to
decrease the state budget gap and among other
fiscal measures, decided to withdraw VAT
exemption for accommodation services. The
exemption for VAT exemption was introduced again
for the year 2011, however in 2012 VAT for hotel
business was restored to 21%. RevPAR ratio was
not affected by these changes a lot due to higher
tourist flows in 2012.

RevPAR (LTL)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 2011 2012
Source: STR Global

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 7

Impact on Revenue per available room

The graph below illustrates that the increase in
average RevPAR in 2011 by 29% was the result of
combination of both better occupancy rate (e.g.
increased tourist flows) and higher ADR applied for
a hotel room.
In H1 2012 RevPAR ratio decreased from LTL 91 to
87 as compared to H1 2011due to lower Average
daily rate for a room, as presented in the graph
below.

Change in RevPAR (LTL) Half year change in RevPAR (LTL)

120
100 2.5 6.0
11.2 6.2
100 1.1 14.9 90 12.1
11.9
101 80 91
87
80 92 70
78 60 72
60
50
40 40
30
20
20
RevPAR RevPAR RevPAR
0 10
RevPAR RevPAR RevPAR
200 9

201 0

201 1
Occup ancy
Occup ancy

ADR

ADR

H1 2010

H1 2011

H1 2012
Occup ancy

Occup ancy

ADR
ADR
Source: STR Global Source: STR Global

Other hotel market ratios

The data presented in the table below shows that
year 2008 was marked as a peak year for the whole
accommodation sector, with hotel revenues
exceeding 500 million LTL and a number of nights
spent by tourists reaching 2,500.
After the impressive results achieved in 2008
tourism sector plummeted during 2009. Revenues
dropped by almost 30%, the number of nights spent
by guests also recorded double digit decline. In
order to mitigate the situation, hotels had to reduce
pricing and cut off expenses and investments.
Only one indicator that proved to be “crisis-proof”
was the number of rooms in the hotels, which
recorded slow but stable growth since 2007
evidencing that investors in hotel businesses
strongly believed in positive prospects for growth.
In the H2 2010 the recovery process and the upturn
of hotel performance indicators started. The growth
was recorded in hotel revenues, number of guests,
and number of employees.
During 2011 and H1 2012 the tourism sector
continued gradual emerging from the period of
significant challenges and while the number of
nights spent increased significantly, the low ADR
did not allow revenues to reach pre-crisis levels.

Indicator 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 H1 2011 H1 2012

Revenue (excl. VAT), mLTL 483 519 369 388 485 209 230
change, % 17.3% 7.4% -28.8% 5.1% 25.1% 10.3%
Nights spent, ths 2,464 2,498 2,019 2,291 2,755 1,187 1,364
change, % 7.2% 1.4% -19.2% 13.5% 20.2% 14.9%
Number of rooms per 1,000 people 3.1 3.2 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.9
change, % 1.4% 2.1% 8.3% 3.1% 6.4% 8.8%
Average number of employees 6,484 6,791 5,655 5,775 6,071 6,008 6,539
change, % 7.9% 4.7% -16.7% 2.1% 5.1% 8.8%
Source: Lithuanian Department of Statistics

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 8

4. KPI Benchmarking to
Neighbouring Countries

Key performance indicators in hotel industry

Annual data analysis

The table below summarizes key hotel performance and 2011, 47.7% and 54.1% correspondingly. In
indicators in Lithuania and the closest neighbouring 2010 hotel occupancy rates were the highest in
countries: Latvia, Estonia and Poland for the last Poland – 55.4%. In 2011 Estonia managed to
two years. increase hotel occupancy rate to 64.4%.

All countries in the region experienced recovery of
hotel industry in 2011 compared to the previous
year. In the Baltics occupancy rate increased by 13-
17%, average price per room increased by 10-12%
and the growth of RevPAR was even higher (26-
30%). Growth rates were smaller only in Poland.
In terms of occupancy, among peer countries
Lithuanian hotels had the lowest rate in year 2010
Average room ratios, including both ADR and
RevPAR, were the lowest in Lithuanian hotels in
2010 and 2011. In 2011 ADR of Latvian hotels was
higher by 1.4%, Estonian – by 7.9% and Polish – by
20.8% in comparison to Lithuania.
The highest room rates both ADR and RevPAR
were achieved by Polish hotels.

Occupancy, % ADR, EUR RevPAR, EUR Occupancy ADR RevPAR

Country
2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011 Annual change, %
Lithuania 47.7 54.1 47.5 54.3 22.7 29.4 13% 14% 29%
Latvia 51.8 59.5 50.2 55.1 26.0 32.8 15% 10% 26%
Estonia 55.1 64.4 52.6 58.6 29.0 37.8 17% 12% 30%
3%
Poland 55.4 58.4 63.7 65.6 35.3 38.3 5% 8% (12%)
(7%)
* Number in brackets reflects change in local currency
Source: STR Global

Half-year data overview

In H1 2012 the occupancy rate improved in
Lithuanian hotels as well as in the hotels of
neighbouring countries compared to H1 2011, as
presented in the table below.
However, contrary to the results achieved in Poland
and Estonia, the ADR and RevPAR ratios
decreased in Lithuania. Hotels in Lithuania had to
reduce pricing as intense competition did not allow
transferring the increased VAT rate to customers.

Occupancy, % ADR, EUR RevPAR, EUR Occupancy ADR RevPAR

Country
H1 2011 H1 2012 H1 2011 H1 2012 H1 2011 H1 2012 Change, %
Lithuania 50.2 51.4 51.0 48.6 25.6 25.0 2.4% -4.6% -2.3%
Estonia 58.1 58.9 57.1 66.0 33.1 38.9 1.4% 15.7% 17.5%
Poland 55.3 57.2 67.1 75.5 37.1 43.2 3.4% 12.5% 16.4%
Source: STR Global

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 9

Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index

Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index,
prepared by the World Economic Forum, is based
on three broad categories: (1) regulatory
framework, (2) business environment and
infrastructure, and (3) human, cultural and natural
resources. Each of these three categories is
composed in turn by a number of pillars of travel
and tourism competitiveness, of which there are 14
in total.
According to the Travel and Tourism
Competitiveness Report, in 2011 Lithuania was
th
ranked 55 among 139 countries. Compared to the
previous result, Lithuania went down by six
positions.
Among neighbouring countries Lithuania not only
took the worst position, but also recorded the
highest negative change compared to the previous
st
period. Latvia was ranked 51 (decreased from
th th th
48 ), Poland – 49 (increased from 57 ), and
th
Estonia stood out with the highest position – 25
th
(increased from 27 ).
In terms of the separate categories, Lithuania and
Latvia shared similar positions in all three major
areas. Estonia showed exceptional results in (1)
legal regulation of the tourism industry and (2)
business environment and infrastructure.
Comparing to other countries in separate
categories, Poland was evaluated differently – the
strongest feature of Poland is human, cultural and
natural resources, while two other areas are below
the positions of neighbouring countries.

2011 Rank Estonia Poland Latvia Lithuania

Overall position 2011 25 49 51 55

previous 27 58 48 49
T&T regulatory framework 17 49 38 33
T&T business environment and infrastructure 19 65 39 46
T&T human, cultural and natural resources 50 30 83 85
Source: World Economic Forum

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 10

5. Interview with Noel Attard,
General Manager at Kempinski
Hotel Cathedral Square
In 2011 Lithuania recorded a positive
development on the hotel market; both ADR
rates and the occupancy rate grew, while in H1
2012 ADRs started to decrease. How do you see
new Kempinski fitting into such context?
It is evident that occupancy has grown in Lithuania
in 2012, but the ADR has decreased. This has been
expected due to the change in VAT from 9% to
21% which offset all of the occupancy gains, since
RevPAR has also decreased. Basically 2012 till
now shows that the occupancy gains have not
mitigated completely the fall in ADR.
As a general trend for us in the luxury market of 5
star hotels the trend is that guests expect a higher
level of service and product wherever they travel.
Our idea for opening in Vilnius was to bring a new
product to the market with an ideal location
Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012.
showcasing the grandeur and heritage of the
building itself, while focusing on higher service level
standards for which Kempinski stand for in order to
increment the luxury market within the city.
What do you see as the most significant steps
to increase the attractiveness and occupancy
rate of hotels?
In order for occupancy and attractiveness to
increase I do believe that one needs to assess the
possibility of increasing accessibility to Lithuania
through additional flights capacity and airlines from
major destinations, more promotion of Lithuanian
and the city of Vilnius as a destination through new
ways of marketing especially in an era of digital
communication, reassessing of the product offering,
rethinking of the VAT in a way to be more
competitive with neighbouring countries and other
destinations, while of course the private sector and
hotels need to look at the product being offered and
the service levels to increase the guest experience.
What developments do you anticipate in the
coming years? Do you expect an improvement
in the situation?
I do believe that tourism in Vilnius and Lithuania will
continue to prosper as the economic situation
improves and as the country is becoming more
known as a touristic destination. However there is
the need to address the points mentioned above for
increasing the attractiveness of the country and as
well the number of guests traveling to the country.
This can only be done if all parties whether
governmental, tourism associations and hoteliers
together with all the hospitality institutions work in
one direction. The country and city have a lot to
offer in themselves but this is not too much known
to the outside world and the only possibility to
increase this is through more accessibility and
11
marketing and ensuring that when guests do visit
we as the private sector are able to offer what is
being promised. The need of a long term strategy
and marketing plan for the development of tourism
in Lithuania needs to be drafted and all entities
need to be involved. There is the need of more
investment in tourism if one wants to see
continuous growth in such an important segment
which always has a multiplier effect on the
economy. It is evident that the tourism situation in
neighbouring countries as Poland and Estonia has
by far been larger with a double digit growth in
RevPAR compared to Lithuania which has
contracted.

What could be the key focus areas in the long

run for businesses operating in hospitality
sector?

The current situation of tourism within Lithuania

seems to move in the right direction as growth of
visitors continues to improve but it is evident that if
the right strategy is not adopted to ensure an
improvement in RevPAR which probably is the
most important indicator some hotels will face tough
challenges in the coming years. At the end a falling
RevPAR is most of the situations is a clear
indication of a lower operating profit which will not
help hoteliers to continue improving on the product
as hotels with further investment, which is
detrimental to the attractiveness and offering of a
destination. Such a conclusion is valid for all type of
hospitality whether guest houses, or any other type
of hotel and one needs to look at a long term
strategy on how such issues can be addressed.
There is also the need to collect more valuable
information from all hotels as only by having the
right information of all hotels and segments that one
can take a real picture of the current scenario.

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 12

Appendices
Appendix 1 14
Glossary 14

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 13

Appendix 1
Glossary
Abbreviations and definitions used in the overview:

 ADR – Average Daily Rate, calculated as room revenue divided by rooms sold, displayed as the average
rental rate for a single room;

 EU – European Union;

 H1 2012 – the first half year of 2012;

 KPI – Key performance indicator;

 Occupancy rate – number of rooms sold divided by the number of available rooms;

 pp – percentage points;

 Q1 2012 – the first quarter of 2012;

 RevPAR – Revenue per Available Room, calculated as room revenue divided by rooms available;

 STR – Smith Travel Research, Inc;

 Tourist – is any person who travels to Lithuania out of his/her permanent place of residence and remains
for at least one night, but no longer than for a year, on condition that this activity is not studies or paid work.

Hotel Market Overview. Lithuania. 1st half of 2012. 14

Contacts
Saulius Bakas
Managing Partner
+370 5 255 3000
sbakas@deloittece.com

Linas Galvelė
Director, Financial Advisory
+370 5 255 3022
lgalvele@deloittece.com

Marius Stalenis
Manager, Financial Advisory
+370 5 255 3023
mstalenis@deloittece.com

Laura Puodžiūnaitė
Manager, Consulting & Risk Services
+370 5 255 3013
lpuodziunaite@deloittece.com

Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by
guarantee and its network of member firms, each of which is a legally separate and independent entity.
Please see www.deloitte.com/lt/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte Touche
Tohmatsu Limited and its member firms.

Deloitte provides audit, tax, consulting, and financial advisory services to public and private clients
spanning multiple industries. With a globally connected network of member firms in more than 150
countries, Deloitte brings world-class capabilities and high-quality service to clients, delivering the
insights they need to address their most complex business challenges. Deloitte's approximately 182,000
professionals are committed to becoming the standard of excellence.

This publication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, any
of its member firms or any of the foregoing’s affiliates (collectively the “Deloitte Network”) are, by means
of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional
advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor
should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your finances or your business.
Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your finances or your business, you
should consult a qualified professional adviser. No entity in the Deloitte Network shall be responsible for
any loss whatsoever sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

© 2012 Deloitte Lithuania