Author name: admin

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку Taxes and tariffs for Ukrainians will gradually increase under the new IMF programme due to the revision of tax benefits, the expansion of the tax base and a shift towards more market‑based energy prices. What kind of agreement Ukraine signed with the IMFThe new Extended Fund Facility (EFF) programme is designed for several years and provides about USD 8–8.2 billion in loans tied to the implementation of fiscal and structural conditions. Its goal is to gradually reduce the budget deficit and dependence on external aid by increasing the state’s own revenues. The key commitment blocks relate to: tax reform and the reduction of exemptions; raising energy tariffs to cost‑recovery levels; strengthening tax administration and combating the shadow economy. Taxes: what exactly may increaseThe government and the IMF are agreeing on broadening the VAT base, a possible rate hike and cutting exemptions and special regimes. For small businesses this means VAT for part of sole proprietors, a higher turnover threshold and the trimming of simplified schemes. The focus also includes a progressive personal income tax scale and “luxury taxes” with higher rates for large incomes and expensive assets. At the same time, efforts to combat tax evasion are being stepped up: tighter control over imports, closing customs loopholes, taxing digital income and limiting cash schemes, which levels the playing field for compliant businesses but increases risks for those operating in the shadows. Tariffs: gas, electricity, heatingThe memorandum separately stipulates higher tariffs for gas, electricity and heating, since current prices cover only about half of their real cost. By mid‑2026 the government must adopt a roadmap for market liberalisation with a gradual move to cost‑recovery tariffs after martial law ends; preparatory steps — lifting the moratorium, new tariff‑setting methods and a revision of subsidies — are starting already. For households this will mean several waves of higher utility bills and a transition to a model where the state provides targeted support to the most vulnerable instead of subsidising everyone. How households will feel the impactFor an average family the impact will depend on income, consumption and behaviour. Utility bills will gradually rise, especially after the moratorium on higher gas, heating and hot‑water prices is cancelled, while meters, energy efficiency and frugal consumption will become more important. Consumption taxes (VAT and excise) will hit hardest those who spend most of their income on everyday goods, whereas part of the burden will shift to high incomes and luxury items. For simplified‑tax entrepreneurs whose turnover exceeds the new threshold, the financial burden will grow due to mandatory VAT registration and stricter oversight. At the same time, higher tax revenues and lower tariff subsidies should reduce the risks of runaway inflation and default, supporting long‑term hryvnia stability and the ability to fund the army and social programmes. What will change for businessesFor compliant businesses the environment will become more transparent, but mistakes will be more costly. Stronger customs controls will make “grey” imports riskier, shifting competitive advantages towards efficient business models. The broader VAT base and removal of exemptions will force companies to plan pricing and cash flow more carefully to preserve margins. The prospective progressive PIT scale and tougher oversight of payroll will encourage a move away from cash‑in‑envelope wages and increase the role of legal incentives, bonuses and stock‑option plans instead of informal top‑ups. Are there “red lines” for the government in the dealUkraine is balancing between IMF demands and the realities of a country at war: some of the most painful tax measures for small businesses have already been softened by narrowing the group of sole proprietors subject to the new VAT rules. The IMF also requires that tariff increases be accompanied by targeted protection for vulnerable households and that full market liberalisation take place only after the war, giving the government room for gradual and adjustable decisions. How Ukrainians can prepareAt household level, the logic is straightforward: plan the family budget assuming higher utility and goods prices; check eligibility for subsidies or benefits and apply in advance; invest in home energy efficiency where possible (meters, insulation, efficient appliances) to offset future tariff hikes; and for sole proprietors, analyse turnover and business models to prepare for possible VAT registration and a shift to fully compliant schemes. For companies it is crucial to model the impact of tax‑rate changes, benefit cuts and tariff increases in their financial plans and to update tax strategies, pricing policies and contracts with counterparties. If you have questions or issues related to planning your tax burden, forecasting the impact of new tariffs on your family or business budget, or preparing your company for IMF‑related requirements, seek professional advice to analyse your situation and minimise potential consequences.Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner at Winner Law Firm, PhD in Law. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WU7J13eUo6U&t=4s

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку The Law on Simplified Certificates of Completed Work is not just a “victory for deregulation” but a signal for businesses to review their contracts and approaches to primary documents. Adopted on the basis of Draft Law No. 14023, it amends Article 9 of the Law on Accounting and allows the parties to a contract to provide for a simplified procedure for documenting primary data when services are rendered, work is performed or assets are leased. It is not about abolishing primary documents but about flexibility: some customer details may become optional, and in certain cases an invoice signed by the contractor will replace a traditional certificate of completion. Essence of the law: what requirements are simplifiedThe essence of the law is to reduce the administrative burden on business and simplify primary documentation without losing control. If this is expressly stated in the contract, a document may contain only the contractor’s signature without the customer’s details. The law allows the parties to use a signed invoice instead of a certificate as a primary document for accounting and tax purposes, while businesses may still issue full certificates if they wish. Limitations: where simplification does not workThe law is not universal: the simplified procedure does not apply to transactions funded from public money, leases of state or municipal property, construction contracts or design and survey work, all of which must still be documented by full certificates signed by both parties.In addition, the simplified procedure is allowed only if several conditions are met at the same time: it is expressly set out in a written contract between the parties; services or work are fully paid for in non‑cash form (for the “single signature” option); business transactions are recorded in the accounts in the period when they actually occur.If at least one of these conditions is not met, it is safer to stay within the traditional model with a bilateral certificate. Opportunities for business: where real savings ariseAccording to government estimates, abolishing the mandatory use of certificates of completed work and simplifying primary‑document details can save businesses up to 20 billion UAH a year by reducing time and administrative costs. In private‑sector practice this will mainly show up in the following ways: Less “certificate bureaucracy”. When there are many small services (marketing, IT support, SaaS, service rentals), there is no longer a need to chase signatures from several people on the customer’s side for each certificate. Faster period closing. If an invoice or certificate with the contractor’s signature plus payment provides the full set of primary‑document details, the accountant can close the month without waiting for the customer’s wet signature. Better alignment with international practice. In most EU countries an invoice is the basic document for confirming services, and the new approach brings Ukraine closer to this model, making life easier for companies working with non‑resident counterparties.However, these savings will be real only if lawyers, accountants and sales teams synchronise and clearly set out the new documentation rules in contracts and adjust internal processes to the invoice‑based model. Risks for accountants: where problems may hide Contract non‑compliance with the law: if a single signature or invoice instead of a certificate is not expressly stated, the document may not be recognised as valid primary evidence. Disputes with counterparties: without the customer’s signature it is harder to prove the fact and volume of services in case of a conflict. VAT and corporate income tax risks: an improperly prepared “simplified” document may lead to disallowance of expenses or input VAT, so contracts and invoice/certificate details must be checked carefully. What businesses should do nowTo benefit from the new law and minimise risks, companies should take a systematic approach to the changes. Practical steps may include: Contract audit. Review standard service, work and lease contracts and clearly specify the chosen documentation format: bilateral certificate, certificate with a single contractor’s signature or invoice as the primary document. Updating primary‑document templates. Update certificate and invoice templates so that they contain all mandatory details (name, date, description and volume of the transaction, unit of measure, amount, party details and signature of the responsible person on the contractor’s side). Setting up electronic document flow. Where a business switches to invoices or single‑signature certificates, it is logical to strengthen electronic document management in parallel (qualified e‑signatures and services like M.E.Doc or others) to maintain a clear electronic audit trail. Internal policies. Define in the document‑flow policy when the company uses the simplified procedure and when it keeps to classic certificates with two signatures (for example, large amounts, long‑term contracts, high‑risk counterparties). Training for managers and sales. Often managers are the first to agree the form of documents with clients; without an understanding of the new rules it is easy to end up with a contract that contradicts the company’s internal policy. Conclusions: simplification as a tool, not an end in itselfThe law on simplified certificates is a useful deregulation tool, but it is not about “getting rid of certificates”; it raises the level of responsibility for the quality of contracts and primary documentation. The main risk is switching to simplification without clear contracts and internal policies, which may result in tax disputes and conflicts with counterparties. A well‑thought‑out strategy (updated contracts, templates, policies and electronic document flow) can turn the law into a real tool for process optimisation and cost savings.If you have questions or issues related to applying the simplified procedure for documenting services, updating contracts or assessing tax risks, you should seek professional advice to analyse your situation and minimise possible consequences.Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner at Winner Law Firm, PhD in Law. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WU7J13eUo6U&t=4s

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку Ukraine’s IT landscape has changed dramatically: former accounting “standards” 1C and BAS have become sanctioned and effectively prohibited software for many users, and for private businesses their sanctions status and the proposed 2% annual turnover fine already turn continued use of these systems into a material legal and reputational risk. In this environment, the accountant of a private company effectively becomes the “first line of defence” between legacy software and new compliance requirements. Regulatory framework: from sanctions to draft law No. 13505As of 2026, restrictions on 1C/BAS operate on two levels. First, NSDC sanctions enacted by presidential decrees have banned the sale, support and distribution of a number of Russian products, including the entire BAS line and classic 1C, effectively depriving them of legal updates and official support in Ukraine. Second, draft law No. 13505 provides for a phased phase‑out of “hostile software” by 2030 and fines of up to 2% of annual turnover for legal entities using such solutions, so the use of 1C/BAS is increasingly seen as a threat to cybersecurity and digital sovereignty, and the room for a “grey zone” is rapidly shrinking. For government bodies, defence enterprises, critical infrastructure and payment‑system participants, a full ban is already in force, while private businesses, although not formally required to disconnect immediately, now find that continued operation in 1C/BAS conflicts with the spirit of current sanctions policy. Legal and compliance risks for private companiesThe key question is whether it is still safe to keep working in 1C/BAS when no explicit prohibition has yet come into force. In practice, the risks are: sanctions against 1C/BAS developers already give supervisory authorities grounds to question the use of software listed by the State Special Communications Service; if draft law No. 13505 is adopted, a fine of up to 2% of turnover will become a direct enforcement tool against companies that have not migrated; for investors and banks, sanctions compliance is mandatory; if a company’s internal policies record the use of “hostile software”, this may justify refusing cooperation or financing; sanctioned software also heightens cyber‑risk: vulnerabilities in the code and potential leaks of 1C/BAS databases containing financial information and personal data of employees and counterparties may lead to losses and claims for inadequate data protection. The accountant’s role: between IT choice and legal liabilityFormally, the accounting system is chosen by owners or management, but it is the accountant who is responsible for data integrity, reporting and communication with regulators, and therefore will be the first to feel the consequences of using “toxic” software. In practice, the accountant should initiate an IT‑landscape audit: explain the sanctions status of 1C/BAS, assess migration scope and risks, identify critical processes (payroll, taxes, primary documents) and participate in selecting and testing the new system. If this role is ignored and the choice is left solely to the IT department, the company risks years of “patchwork” accounting and, once 1C/BAS is formally banned, additional sanctions and fines landing precisely during a troubled migration. Transition strategies: what private‑sector accountants should doThe optimal scenario for a private company is not to wait for a formal “X‑date” but to launch a planned transition now. The “we won’t touch anything until we are forced to” approach is dangerous in the 1C/BAS context, because restrictions can be introduced quickly, while migrating an accounting system always takes months of preparation and testing. From a practical standpoint, accountants should: Initiate a compliance audit of software.Assess which specific 1C/BAS products the company uses, whether they appear on public lists of prohibited software, and record this in a memo to management. Define requirements for the new system.A clear list of functional needs (payroll, inventory, production, management accounting, IFRS, etc.) helps avoid the temptation to install “one system for everything” without regard to actual business processes. Break the transition into stages.It is advisable to start with a “minimal critical core” — current accounting and tax reporting — and then import historical data in batches (by years or transaction types). This reduces the risk of business paralysis caused by a complex one‑time migration. Budget for training and support.Moving from 1C/BAS to another platform always requires training accountants and integrating with bank systems, M.E.Doc, the taxpayer e‑cabinet and similar services; underestimating these costs often results in “double work” done manually and missed reporting deadlines. Monitor legal aspects.Involve a lawyer or tax adviser to review contracts with software providers, analyse sanctions‑related risks and track the progress of draft law No. 13505. This helps adjust internal policies in time and avoid fines being imposed retrospectively for a period of delay. Ethical and reputational dimensionIn wartime, using products linked to the aggressor state goes beyond pure economic calculation: for companies working with international partners, abandoning 1C/BAS has become a matter of corporate stance and social responsibility, and the accountant is often the one who explains to management that “it’s cheaper this way” is no longer a valid argument. Sanctioned software also influences audit opinions: although IFRS contains no explicit ban, auditors increasingly focus on cyber‑risk and sanctions compliance, so the accountant will have to justify why the company still operates in an environment the state officially labels as high‑risk. Conclusions: time for a strategic decisionThe ban on 1C and BAS is now part of a consistent state policy featuring sanctions, official lists of prohibited software and a draft law on financial liability, so for businesses the question is no longer “whether to migrate” but “how and when to do it with minimal losses.” In this context, the accountant is not just a user but a key expert who sees sanctions, compliance and cyber‑risks as well as the operational consequences of migration; the earlier they initiate an honest conversation with owners about phasing out sanctioned software, the higher the chances of a controlled transition instead of chaotic decisions under pressure from inspections or security incidents. Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner at JSC “WINNER Law Firm”, PhD in Law. If you have any questions or issues related to assessing the

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) continues to adapt foreign‑exchange restrictions to the realities of the wartime economy and the needs of specific export sectors. Its latest decision concerns an extension of statutory settlement deadlines: for some exporters, the period for receiving export proceeds increases from 180 to 270 days. Based on government proposals, NBU Board Resolution No. 18 of 26 February 2026 sets a 270‑day settlement period for export operations involving agricultural and specialised machinery (UKTZED codes 8424, 8428, 8432, 8716) under contracts concluded from 1 March 2026. The standard 180‑day limit remains in place for most operations, so the change effectively creates an “extended window” specifically for machinery exporters. Reasons for the changeThe initiative to lengthen settlement periods came from the Ministry of Economy, reflecting requests from businesses and industry associations: exports of complex machinery involve long production, delivery and installation cycles, so 180 days is often insufficient. War‑related logistical challenges — damaged infrastructure, blocked routes, dependence on ports and railways — further prolong the gap between shipment and payment, especially on new markets with deferred payment or sophisticated financing schemes. Expected impact on the sectorAccording to the regulator, the longer deadlines are intended to: support growth in exports of agricultural and specialised machinery; stimulate higher production and investment in machinery‑building companies; help preserve human capital and create new jobs; expand access to new export markets and increase foreign‑currency inflows. In practice, the NBU is using FX rules as a tool of industrial policy: by easing repatriation deadlines for capital‑intensive sectors, the state gives them more room to manoeuvre in negotiations with foreign buyers. Implications for exportersFor companies exporting machinery under the specified UKTZED codes, the key practical effect is the ability to include longer payment terms in contracts without automatically breaching FX regulations. This enables them to: offer buyers more flexible payment terms (deferrals, instalments); work more comfortably with foreign banks and export‑finance schemes; reduce the risk of transactions being blocked solely due to exceeding the 180‑day limit. The extension does not cancel basic requirements: if proceeds are received late, supervisory authorities may still impose fines, and companies must document the reality of transactions and take steps to recover overdue receivables. At the same time, the new rules apply only to operations from 1 March 2026; earlier contracts are assessed under the previous regime, so exporters must carefully track the actual export date to avoid misapplying the deadlines. Risks and limitationsFrom an FX‑control perspective, longer settlement periods increase the risk of non‑payment: the more time between shipment and receipt of funds, the higher the probability of commercial, political or force‑majeure problems on the buyer’s side. For that reason, the NBU maintains a stricter regime for these operations than for some goods where the limit reaches 365 days or is removed altogether. For businesses, the main task is not to treat 270 days as an “indulgence”, but to build a robust receivables‑management system: clearly worded payment schedules, security mechanisms (advance payments, guarantees, letters of credit) and documented claims work to demonstrate due diligence during inspections. What accountants and compliance officers should doAccountants and CFOs need to update internal policies and contracts so that commercial terms match the new statutory deadlines. In particular, they should: verify whether a specific product falls within the list of UKTZED codes eligible for the 270‑day period; adjust standard foreign‑trade contract templates (payment terms, delivery conditions, penalties for delay); revise internal procedures for monitoring FX proceeds and controlling settlement dates; coordinate the changes with servicing banks to prevent payment blocks caused by differing interpretations of the rules. Compliance officers should assess how the new deadlines fit into the company’s overall risk‑management framework, including concentration of receivables on individual counterparties or markets. Prospects for further liberalisationThe NBU’s move on technical exports fits into a broader policy of targeted easing of FX restrictions for sectors that are critical for economic recovery: the regulator has already extended settlement periods for some agricultural exports from 90 to 120 days. Future changes are likely to remain selective and will depend on the balance between supporting exports and safeguarding FX inflows, so businesses should not only monitor new resolutions but also engage through industry associations, whose advocacy helped shape the current decision. If you have questions or issues related to applying the new settlement deadlines in foreign‑trade contracts, structuring export deals or mitigating FX risks, you are welcome to seek individual advice — we will help adapt your operations to the updated NBU requirements. Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner at JSC “WINNER Law Firm”, PhD in Law. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYwWY2n1cG0

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку The scope of application of RRO and PRRO has long gone beyond individual business types: today almost anyone who accepts cash or cards must factor in the cost of working without a cash register, since from 1 August 2025 full fines of 100% and 150% of the value of goods or services sold apply to everyone, depending on how often the infringement is repeated. Legal framework and general approachFinancial sanctions for violating RRO/PRRO rules are set out in Article 17 of Law No. 265/95‑VR, which links the amount of the fine to the value of goods or services sold in breach of the rules, effectively making liability “turnover‑based”: the larger the receipt, the greater the hit to the business. From 1 August 2025 and therefore throughout 2026, these provisions apply to all entities performing settlement operations, and in addition to turnover‑based fines, fixed penalties (UAH 510, 5 100 etc.) apply for breaches related to receipt books, control tape and reporting, which are often imposed on top and significantly increase the overall burden. 100% and 150%: key fines in 2026· 100% of the value of goods sold/services rendered – for the first detected violation.· 150% of the value of goods sold/services rendered – for each subsequent violation.· “Each subsequent” means each individual transaction with a breach, so the fine may be charged on every non‑fiscalised transaction, which in high‑volume sales quickly turns into tens or hundreds of thousands of hryvnias in losses. Violations subject to these sanctions include:· processing payments via RRO/PRRO or using receipt books for less than the full amount (partial fiscalisation);· not processing transactions through RRO/PRRO in fiscal mode at all;· failure to issue a fiscal receipt to the customer (paper or electronic);· carrying out settlements without a receipt book in cases where its use is mandatory. Thus, “non‑use of RRO/PRRO” covers both the complete absence of a cash register and any manipulation of the receipt amount or failure to issue a fiscal document. Other financial sanctions related to RRO/PRROIn addition to the main 100%/150% fines, businesses must take into account a number of fixed penalties that apply regardless of turnover, including:UAH 510 – for the absence of a control tape (paper or electronic) or for distorted data in it;UAH 510 – for failure to submit RRO/PRRO reports (Z‑reports, electronic reporting to the tax authority, etc.);UAH 510 – for breaching the prescribed procedure for using receipt books or books of settlement operations;UAH 5 100 – for processing payments through an RRO without programming the names of excisable goods with the relevant UKT ZED code, price and quantity;UAH 5 100 – for using an RRO that has unauthorised structural or software modifications. For traders in excisable goods, selling unrecorded excise products is particularly dangerous: the fine equals the full value of the batch sold. This is effectively another turnover‑based penalty that may be applied on top of sanctions for RRO/PRRO violations. Martial law specifics and deferred sanctionsDuring martial law, the approach to RRO/PRRO fines was partly softened, but this does not mean there is no liability. The tax authorities explicitly state that such violations may be assessed after martial law ends, taking into account paragraph 52‑1 of sub‑section 10, section XX of the Tax Code. Those who deliberately ignored RRO/PRRO requirements, referring to “wartime reliefs”, risk receiving a consolidated package of fines in peacetime if they cannot provide documentary evidence that compliance was objectively impossible (lack of internet, occupation of the territory, etc.). Who is at highest riskThe most vulnerable to sanctions are businesses with a large number of small cash or card transactions: retail trade, HoReCa, consumer services, and online shops with delivery and cash‑on‑delivery. For them, every non‑fiscal receipt becomes a separate fine equal to the full value of the purchase, and repeated breaches quickly push the sanction from 100% to 150%, which can not only wipe out profit but also create a debt exceeding revenue for the disputed period. A separate high‑risk group are simplified‑tax sole proprietors who have worked without RRO/PRRO for years, relying on exemptions; after full restoration of fines from August 2025, inspections in 2026 are likely to focus on them. How to reduce fine risks in 2026To minimise the likelihood of financial sanctions, businesses should implement practical safeguards:– analyse whether their activities require RRO/PRRO and document this internally;– choose an appropriate solution (hardware RRO vs. software PRRO) based on business scale;– organise daily control of fiscalisation (Z‑reports, completeness of recorded revenue, receipts for each sales channel);– train staff, since most “technical” breaches stem from cashier mistakes;– conduct a separate audit of settings for excisable goods to avoid UAH 5 100 fines at each point of sale. Practical takeaways for entrepreneursIn 2026, operating without RRO/PRRO becomes a major strategic risk: 100% and 150% fines on turnover effectively act as an additional “turnover tax” that can fully absorb financial results. Consequently, spending on implementing and maintaining RRO/PRRO should be viewed as an insurance premium against much higher future losses, while investment in proper fiscalisation, staff training and periodic tax‑legal audits of settlement systems is an essential element of financial security. If you have questions or issues related to using RRO/PRRO, assessing fine risks or appealing tax authority decisions, seek professional advice to analyse your situation and minimise potential consequences.Author – Yuliia Popadyn, attorney in tax and housing law at the law firm “Legal Company ‘WINNER’. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYwWY2n1cG0

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку Concept and structure of land paymentsThe legislator treats land payments as part of the property tax, which is levied in the form of land tax and rent for land plots owned by the state or municipalities. Land tax is paid by owners and permanent land users, while rent applies to tenants of such plots where a lease agreement has been concluded.The object of taxation for land tax is land plots and land shares that are in the ownership or permanent use of the taxpayer. For rent, the actual object is the right to use a land plot on the basis of a contract, and the amount charged is determined by the terms of this contract within the limits set by the Tax Code. General conditions for a tax liability to ariseThe tax liability in the area of land payments follows the general rules of the Tax Code. The taxpayer must pay tax from the moment the circumstances arise that the Code links to the obligation to pay, and this obligation is unconditional and has priority over other, non‑tax obligations. Such circumstances for land payments include, in particular, the acquisition of ownership, permanent use, or lease rights to a land plot, as well as other legal facts directly provided for in the Code.Importantly, the tax liability does not depend on whether the tax has been assessed by the tax authority or whether the taxpayer has received a tax notice‑decision. The tax authority calculates and sends tax notices, but this is only an element of enforcing an already existing obligation and not a ground for its emergence. Ownership and permanent use as a basis for obligationsFor owners and permanent land users, the basis for a land tax obligation is the very fact of acquiring rights to the plot, and land payments are charged from the day the ownership or use right arises. The moment when such a right arises or terminates is usually linked to state registration in the State Register of Property Rights, rather than to the date of signing a contract or decision of a public authority. Loss of the right (disposal, termination of use, termination of the relevant act) stops further accrual of tax but does not release from paying amounts already charged for the period when the right existed. Land rent: the lease agreement as legal basisThe ground for a rental obligation to arise is the lease agreement for the land plot, not the general rules on land tax. Mere factual use without a properly formalised agreement does not create a rental tax obligation for the purposes of the Tax Code, although it may entail other legal consequences (civil liability, additional assessments, penalties, etc.). For state and municipal land, the agreement sets the essential terms, including the amount, procedure, and deadlines for paying rent. The obligation to pay rent arises after the lease right passes to a new entity and this right is registered with the state; until then, the previous tenant remains the payer. Date when obligations arise and accrual periodThe Tax Code provides that owners and land users pay land charges from the day their ownership or use right to a land plot arises and stop from the day it terminates. For individuals, the tax authority calculates the tax based on data from the State Land Cadastre and the Register of Property Rights and sends tax notices‑decisions, as a rule, by 1 July of the current year.If no assessment was made earlier, the tax authority may assess additional tax liabilities for past periods within the 1,095‑day limitation period established by Article 102 of the Tax Code. In practice, this means that an individual may be charged land tax for the last three years, regardless of whether notices were sent previously, provided that the land right existed and was not terminated. Minimum tax liability on landThe minimum tax liability (MTL) for agricultural land ensures a minimum level of tax burden on land users regardless of business results and income. It is calculated using a formula that takes into account the normative monetary valuation, the area of the plot, a coefficient of 0.05, and the number of months of ownership or use during the year. The MTL is compared with the total amount of taxes and fees paid on this land; if that amount is lower, the taxpayer is charged the difference. Importance of correct registration of land rightsSince the basis for the emergence or termination of land‑payment obligations is the legal fact of acquiring or losing rights to a plot, proper documentation and timely registration of these rights are crucial for tax consequences. Discrepancies between the actual use of land and the data in the cadastre or registers lead to additional assessments, disputes with tax authorities, and financial sanctions. Taxpayers must monitor changes in the designated use, area, and boundaries of plots and promptly reflect them in the registers, as these parameters form the tax base. Poorly documented lease relations, use without valid contracts or under expired contracts sharply increase tax risks and the likelihood of claims from supervisory authorities. If you have questions or issues related to documenting land rights, determining the grounds for land charges, or appealing tax notices‑decisions, seek professional advice to analyse your situation and minimise potential risks. Author – Svitlana Krutorohova, attorney at the law firm “Legal Company ‘WINNER’”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYwWY2n1cG0

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку Who files quarterly reports and why· Sole proprietors and self‑employed persons who use hired labour or engage contractors under civil‑law agreements effectively have the obligations of an employer and a tax agent.· Any entrepreneur who pays taxable income to individuals (salaries, fees under contracts, other payments) becomes a tax agent.· A tax agent must calculate, withhold and pay personal income tax and the military levy on all such payments.· They also calculate and pay social security contributions as an employer for insured persons.· All accruals and payments must be reflected in the tax calculation, which is submitted quarterly.· Quarterly reporting is therefore not an “extra” document but a direct consequence of using hired labour or paying individuals.· Even a sole proprietor with one employee formally has the same set of tax obligations as a large company; only the scale of amounts and number of employees differs. Structure of the tax calculation and its link to accountingThe tax calculation is a consolidated report that records amounts of accrued income, the tax base, withheld personal income tax and the military levy, accrued social security contributions, categories of insured persons, and income codes. For sole proprietors and self‑employed persons it often serves as the only form of payroll and HR accounting, because most do not maintain full bookkeeping, and any error in calculating salaries, sick leave, vacation pay or contract fees automatically flows into the report. In practice, incorrect reflection of specific types of income (one‑off bonuses, compensations, fees under civil‑law contracts) and wrong income codes are the most common reasons for amendments, penalties and other financial sanctions for small businesses. Quarterly cycle: when the report becomes a planning toolQuarterly filing is often seen as a purely technical requirement, but with the right approach sole proprietors and self‑employed persons can turn it into a financial planning tool. Each quarter provides a “snapshot” of staffing and financial obligations: the entrepreneur sees the real cost of staff, including taxes, identifies imbalances in the tax burden and, if necessary, adjusts the model of cooperation with particular contractors. Quarterly reporting also enforces discipline regarding payroll and tax payment deadlines, since regularly preparing the calculation requires keeping HR and payroll documents up to date rather than postponing them “for later”. Key risks for sole proprietors and self‑employed personsThe most common issues when submitting the quarterly tax calculation can be grouped as follows. Formal errors. Technical inaccuracies such as the wrong period, incorrect taxpayer details, duplicate lines, or typos in employees’ registration data. These do not change tax amounts but may lead to rejection of the report or a requirement to submit a revised one. Errors in accrual amounts. Miscalculating the tax base, under‑reporting salaries or fees, or misapplying tax and social contribution rates are immediately visible in the calculation and signal potential underpayment to the tax authorities. Incorrect income and category codes. This is particularly relevant for civil‑law contracts, secondary jobs and employees with special status. A wrong code may result in an incorrect social contribution rate or in an employee losing insurance service record. Missed filing deadlines. The quarterly calculation has strict due dates; missing them leads to fines and interest. For small businesses this is often a matter of process organisation when the entrepreneur keeps the books personally while running day‑to‑day operations. How to streamline preparation of the calculationTo prevent quarterly reporting from becoming a constant source of stress, sole proprietors and self‑employed persons should build a systematic approach to preparing the tax calculation. First, it is advisable to separate payroll accounting from general accounting and maintain a dedicated register of payments to employees and contractors, including contract dates, amounts, payment types, tax rates and due dates – this avoids searching through all documents and allows data to be lifted directly from an organised register. It is also important to check employee details (tax IDs, names, dates of birth, category codes) in advance, because mistakes in these data later become costly for both employee and employer. Finally, do not leave preparation of the report to the last days: the best practice is to draft it immediately after the end of the quarter and use the final week before the deadline only for review and submission, leaving time to correct any inaccuracies. Digital tools as a way to reduce errorsOnline reporting services and accounting software greatly simplify preparation of the tax calculation: they automate tax and contribution calculations, pull in recurring details, validate data formats and flag typical mistakes. For sole proprietors and self‑employed persons without an in‑house accountant, these tools are a convenient compromise between doing everything manually and outsourcing. However, automation does not replace basic tax knowledge: the entrepreneur must understand the type of income, applicable rates, reliefs and contract rules, because software helps with form only, while responsibility for content always lies with the taxpayer. Why expert advice pays offFor sole proprietors and self‑employed persons with one or two employees, a consultation with a tax adviser or accountant is often cheaper than potential fines and additional assessments. An expert helps structure relationships with staff and contractors, set up registers and document templates, explain tax treatment of different payments and develop an action plan in case of errors or requests from the authorities. As a result, the quarterly tax calculation stops being a “scary” document and becomes a manageable process; the key is not to ignore your status as a tax agent and not to postpone resolving issues until an audit or tax notice arrives. If you have questions or problems related to payroll arrangements, determination of tax obligations or preparation of the quarterly tax calculation, seek professional advice to analyse your situation and minimise potential risks. Author – Yuliia Popadyn, attorney of the tax and housing law practice at the Law Firm “Winner Legal Company”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRL208Qz3f4

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку Internal labour rules / internal labour regulations (ILR) are often perceived as a formal “check‑box template” that can be downloaded from the internet, signed and put into a cabinet. In reality, the Labour Code of Ukraine explicitly defines them as a mandatory local normative act that establishes the working‑time and disciplinary order within the enterprise and serves as a source of labour law at the level of the concrete employer. Therefore, the quality of ILR affects not only the result of a State Labour Service inspection, but also the predictability of daily processes, discipline and the legal protection of both the employer and the employees. Why ILR are mandatory local acts Article 142 of the Labour Code of Ukraine establishes that the labour order at enterprises, institutions and organisations is determined by internal labour rules, which are approved by the labour collective on the proposal of the employer and the representative body of employees, based on typical regulations. Local normative acts, including ILR, are binding for all employees of the enterprise, regardless of position, type of employment contract or working regime, and may not worsen the employees’ position compared with labour legislation or a collective agreement. The Ministry of Justice and specialised labour‑law publications emphasise that ILR are one of the core documents of the HR system, alongside the remuneration policy, the leave schedule, job descriptions and health‑and‑safety instructions, and that their absence indicates gaps in the employer’s local rule‑making. The existence of approved ILR is mandatory for both legal entities and sole proprietors (self‑employed persons) who use hired labour, because by entering into an employment contract the employee undertakes to comply with the employer’s internal labour rules. Role of ILR in regulating employment relations ILR detail and “adapt” general provisions of the Labour Code to the specific conditions of each enterprise: the procedure for hiring and dismissal, working‑time regime, breaks, leave, behaviour rules, incentives and disciplinary sanctions. Through ILR, local rule‑making takes place: they fill gaps in legislation and reflect the peculiarities of the organisation of work, shift schedules, remote work, corporate standards, etc., without exceeding the limits set by law. For employees, ILR serve like a clear “rules‑of‑the‑game” agreement: what is expected from them, what procedures apply in disputes (tardiness, absenteeism, refusal to perform tasks, conflicts), and how the mechanisms of incentives and liability operate. For employers, ILR provide legal support: they are used as the basis for imposing disciplinary sanctions, documenting breaches of labour discipline, substantiating dismissal and defending the employer’s position in disputes with employees and supervisory authorities. Why copying “typical rules” is dangerous There is still no single, up‑to‑date typical ILR that corresponds to modern forms of employment, flexible working schedules, remote work and digital tools for monitoring working time. Most “online templates” are based on norms of Soviet‑era typical rules and do not reflect requirements concerning employers who are sole proprietors, remote work, night shifts, job‑sharing and other nuances, so they are difficult to use as evidence in inspections or in court. A formal document that does not match the real organisation of work (for example, prescribing a classic five‑day week when actual work is performed in shifts or call‑centres) only increases legal risks, as it demonstrates the discrepancy between declared rules and practice. Professional sources recommend drafting ILR with consideration of the specific structure, schedules and corporate culture of the enterprise, involving a lawyer and an HR specialist, and, for larger employers, also the occupational health and safety service and the trade union. Legal requirements for the adoption and communication of ILR Article 142 of the Labour Code of Ukraine provides that ILR are developed by the employer jointly with the elected body of the primary trade‑union organisation (or another representative body of employees) and submitted for approval by the labour collective. The decision on approval is adopted at a meeting (or conference) of the labour collective, recorded in minutes, and the rules are brought into force by an order of the head; only after this does the document become a valid local act. Local normative acts, including ILR, must be brought to the attention of employees with their signature; this is usually done when hiring or when changes are introduced, and the record of familiarisation is kept in the employee’s personal file or in a separate register. Any provisions of ILR that are less favourable to employees than the Labour Code, collective agreements or sectoral agreements are invalid, even if the employee has formally agreed to them, and may serve as grounds for claims by the State Labour Service. Practical consequences of absence or formal ILR During State Labour Service inspections, inspectors directly request the ILR and analyse how well they correspond to actual working conditions; absence or outdated rules can be treated as a violation in the organisation of employment relations and strengthen the employee’s position in a dispute. Without clear local rules, employers often cannot legally hold employees liable for disciplinary offences: courts frequently recognise dismissals as unlawful if the employer fails to prove which specific rules were breached and when the employee was acquainted with them. The absence of clearly defined procedures (for example, leave‑scheduling, handling confidential information, compliance with the regime of commercial secrecy) complicates risk management, from data leaks to conflicts over work schedules or the distribution of duties. For employees, a purely formal approach to ILR means uncertainty: people do not know which actions are considered violations, how to protect their rights if schedules or working conditions change, and what mechanisms for influencing the employer are provided for in local acts. If you have questions or problems related to drafting or updating internal labour rules, harmonising them with the labour collective and the trade union, checking their compliance with the Labour Code and the practice of the State Labour Service, or resolving employment disputes concerning violations of or unlawful changes to internal rules, seeking qualified legal assistance will help build an effective system of local acts, minimise the risk of

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку A tax notice‑decision on real estate tax for an individual is not just a “payment slip” but an official decision of the supervisory authority determining your tax liability for a specific year. Such notices‑decisions are issued by the State Tax Service based on data from state registers and information from local self‑government bodies and are sent to owners by 1 July of the year following the reporting year. Understanding the structure of this document, payment deadlines, and the data reconciliation mechanism helps not only avoid penalties but also protect yourself against erroneous assessments or loss of tax benefits. What a tax notice‑decision contains and why you should read it carefully A standard real estate tax notice includes: taxpayer details, the address and characteristics of the property (residential or non‑residential, its area), the tax rate, the amount of exempt area, the total amount payable, and the payment details.· The explanatory section or annex often contains a separate calculation for each property, which allows you to check whether all houses, apartments, non‑residential premises, and their shares are reflected correctly.· An individual must pay the annual tax liability within 60 days from the date of delivery of the notice – it is the date of actual receipt, not the date of issue, that starts the payment period.· If the notice is returned to the tax authority with a postal mark “storage period expired”, the Supreme Court indicates that this does not make the notice unlawful: the obligation to pay the tax remains, and the payment period is counted from the moment the taxpayer had an opportunity to receive the letter. Therefore, it is important to monitor your postal address and the taxpayer’s e‑cabinet. Key figures in the notice to check first List of properties: verify that all properties listed in the notice actually belong to you – mistakes in registers may result in “extra” properties or missing ones.· Property area: the total area of apartments, houses, or non‑residential premises must match the figures in your title documents; errors of just a few square metres can significantly affect the tax amount where rates are high.· Applied benefits: check whether the benefits provided by Article 266 of the Tax Code and your local council’s decision are taken into account (for example, 60 m² of non‑taxable area for an apartment or 120 m² for a house, benefits for large families, combatants, internally displaced persons, etc.).· Tax rate: it is set by the local council within the maximum limit defined by the Tax Code (no more than 1.5% of the minimum wage per 1 m²), and rates may differ for various types of property. If the rate indicated in the notice does not correspond to the published council decision, this is a ground for reconciliation and correction. When and how to request data reconciliation Subparagraph 266.7.3 of the Tax Code entitles the taxpayer to apply to the supervisory authority at their tax address with a written request for data reconciliation. This applies to both residential and non‑residential property, including shares in joint ownership.· Grounds for reconciliation include: discrepancies in the number of properties (there are “extra” buildings or some are missing), incorrect area, unaccounted benefits, suspicion of an incorrect rate, or a wrongly calculated tax amount.· It is advisable to initiate reconciliation immediately after receiving the notice, without waiting for the 60‑day deadline to expire, so that the tax authority has time to recalculate the liability and send a new notice‑decision before the payment deadline.· If the reconciliation confirms an error in the tax authority’s data, the authority recalculates the tax amount and sends a new notice; the previous one is automatically considered cancelled (withdrawn), and only the amount in the updated document must be paid. How to prepare for reconciliation: documents and arguments Attach copies of title documents for each property to your reconciliation request: sale and purchase agreement, ownership certificate, extract from the State Register of Property Rights, technical passport indicating the exact area.· If you claim a benefit, prepare documents confirming your entitlement: a combatant ID, documents confirming large‑family status, an IDP certificate, local council decisions granting additional benefits, etc.· In the application, clearly describe which specific data in the notice are incorrect: address and area of the property, date of acquisition or termination of ownership, type of property (residential/non‑residential), applied rate; this will help the tax officers verify the information quickly.· If your properties are located in different settlements but you are registered at one tax address, reconciliation is still carried out at your tax address; it is important to list all properties in the application and attach documents for each of them. What to do if you still disagree with the notice after reconciliation If, after reconciliation, the tax authority insists on its calculation, the taxpayer has two options: an administrative appeal to the higher tax authority or a court challenge of the notice; neither option automatically releases you from the obligation to pay, but they give a chance to have the assessment cancelled or reduced.· It is crucial to meet the deadlines: a complaint to the tax authority must be filed within 10 calendar days from the date of receipt of the notice, and a lawsuit must be filed within six months; missing these deadlines may deprive you of effective protection.· In its case‑law the Supreme Court stresses that errors in the date of issue or dispatch of the notice are generally not, by themselves, grounds for cancellation if the liability is assessed within the limitation period (1,095 days) and the property and rate are determined correctly. Therefore, disputes mainly focus on the actual data on the properties and ownership rights.· At the same time, you should correct information in the registers (for example, update the State Register of Property Rights in respect of the area or co‑owners), so that in subsequent years the tax is calculated correctly. If you have questions or encounter issues related to verifying the correctness of a real estate tax

Потрібна допомога адвоката? Залишай заявку The state is increasingly closely monitoring cases where an individual entrepreneur (FOP) is formally a “contractor” but in fact works as an employee for a single employer, which allows savings on social security contributions and taxes but deprives the person of part of their social guarantees and distorts competition in the labor market; in the coming years, counteracting such schemes, rather than putting pressure on small businesses, will become one of the key vectors of tax policy. Why the “FOP = employee” issue has become so acute The mass shift to FOP models in IT, creative industries, and the service sector was driven by the desire to reduce the tax burden: instead of 18% personal income tax, 1.5% military levy, and 22% unified social contribution, companies pay a single tax of 5% and a minimal unified contribution “for themselves”. In many cases, a FOP performs work under what is effectively an employment schedule – fixed working hours, subordination to the company’s internal rules, regular “salary‑like” payments, and the absence of entrepreneurial risk. For the state, this means a loss of revenues to social insurance and pension funds, while for the contractors themselves it means limited access to sick leave benefits, paid vacation, protection against unlawful dismissal, and other labor guarantees. Ukraine’s European orientation also plays a role: in the EU there are already several initiatives aimed at combating bogus self‑employment and protecting platform and gig‑economy workers, and Ukrainian legislation is gradually aligning with these standards. How it is currently determined that a FOP is actually an employee The Tax Code differentiates between a self‑employed person and an employee: a self‑employed person may conduct activities only if they are not an employee within the scope of the same activity, whereas an employee performs a labor function under an employment contract and is subject to the employer’s rules. In practice, inspectors look at a combination of indicators: a single customer, regularity of payments, fixed schedule, presence of a supervisor, corporate email, workplace in the office, and restrictions on working for other clients. If most of these indicators are present, the tax authority or a court may reclassify the FOP’s civil‑law contract as an employment relationship, assess additional taxes and social contributions, and impose fines both on the company and on the “pseudo‑FOP”. Even now, the State Tax Service is actively analyzing “business splitting” schemes into dozens of FOPs, especially where there is a high turnover and uniform contracts with people who in fact perform identical labor functions. What tools the state plans to use against pseudo‑self‑employment Strengthening risk analytics: the tax service is building profiles of taxpayers that show signs of bogus self‑employment – a single major client, synchronized payments, and the absence of expenses typical for entrepreneurial activity (rent, advertising, purchase of materials, etc.). Expanding audits: after the moratorium on inspections of FOPs in groups 1–2 was lifted, the tax authorities gained the ability to include them in the general audit plan and review a period of up to three years, paying particular attention to employment‑like relationships. Harmonization with European approaches: in the future, legislation may introduce a list of formal criteria under which a self‑employed person is automatically deemed an employee (number of clients, share of income from one customer, degree of control, duration of cooperation), similar to EU directives on platform work. Encouraging “white” models: in parallel, tax regimes are being discussed that would allow companies to legally engage gig workers or experts under flexible conditions but with basic social guarantees (for example, via gig contracts of Diia.City residents). How this may change the labor market and tax burden For businesses, stronger oversight will mean reassessing cooperation models: large companies, especially in IT and services, are likely to gradually convert key FOPs to employees or gig‑contractors, keeping the FOP format only for truly independent consultants. The tax burden on employers will increase, but the risk of large additional tax assessments and litigation following audits will decrease; instead, there will be greater predictability and manageability of personnel costs. For FOPs who de facto work as employees, a change of status may mean a lower net income but a broader package of social guarantees – paid vacation, sick leave, protection against unjustified termination, and contributions to the pension system. The state expects that bringing such relationships out of the shadow will increase revenues from social contributions and personal income tax, reduce distortions between “white” employers and those aggressively optimizing taxes through mass FOP schemes, and at the same time will not harm genuine small businesses that have multiple clients and bear entrepreneurial risk. What companies and FOPs should do now Conduct an audit of relationships with FOPs: identify where individuals are effectively integrated into the staff (fixed schedule, subordination to managers, use of corporate infrastructure) and assess the risk of reclassification into employment during an inspection. Review contracts: replace standard “FOP‑type” templates with more flexible models that clearly set out the contractor’s independence – the right to work with other clients, self‑organization of working time, and payment for results rather than a fixed “salary”. Analyze payments separately: if there are mostly regular identical amounts “on the 25th of each month”, this looks more like wages than payment for services; it is worth either changing the remuneration structure or honestly switching to employment contracts. FOPs working with a single client should assess their own interests: sometimes employee status with clear guarantees and insurance record is more beneficial than a higher but unstable income without protection or prospects for a pension. In high‑risk sectors (IT, logistics, creative agencies), it is worth considering combined models – a mix of employees, gig contracts, and FOPs only where there is genuine entrepreneurial initiative and several independent clients. If you have questions or issues related to choosing a safe cooperation model with FOPs, assessing the risks of reclassification of civil‑law contracts into employment, preparing for tax audits, or changing the remuneration structure for employees and contractors, seeking professional legal and tax