Author name: admin

General provisions and aims of changesDue to martial law and mobilization needs, from 2025, the Ukrainian government has revised and updated criteria for enterprises whose employees may be reserved. The main goal is to ensure the uninterrupted functioning of critical sectors of the economy, energy, security, medicine, and logistics. Reservation procedures allow companies to protect qualified specialists, maintain productive and managerial potential, and prevent essential process disruptions nationwide. Definition of a critical enterpriseTo qualify for reservation rights, a company must meet at least one sectoral or regional criterion approved by the executive authorities. Key areas include: energy (supply of electricity, gas, steam, water, etc.); transport, communications, logistics; agriculture and food provision; medical institutions and pharmacies; state bodies and strategic state companies; defense industry and military equipment manufacturers; and enterprises servicing critical infrastructure. Local authorities may supplement this list according to regional specifics. Eligibility is determined by the relevant ministry or regional military administration. Main criteria for enterprisesNew conditions for reservation include a minimum number of insured employees—at least 5 for municipal and 10 for private ownership; consistent salary payments over the last three months; no tax or fee debts; average monthly salary for reserved employees of at least UAH 20,000; actual operation for not less than two years, or performing state-approved production volumes. Confirmation of status procedureEnterprises must confirm critical status via the Diia Portal or submit necessary documentation in paper form if technically required. All enterprise data in state registers must be updated and accurate. Employee requirements for reservationAn employee to be reserved must be registered for military service, not under investigation or wanted, officially employed by a listed critical company, and receive a salary of no less than UAH 20,000 per month. Documents are filed exclusively through Diia, with rare exceptions for paper submission. Quotas and limitationsMaximum quotas are set for different organizations: for top-level state bodies—up to 100% of liable staff; for categories B and C (mid- and junior staff)—up to 50%; for private critical companies—a basic quota of 50%, which may be increased upon Ministry of Defense approval. Enhanced control and sanctionsSince 2025, monitoring of salary compliance has intensified, with regular checks and requests to companies. Failure to comply will result in loss of critical status, a ban on new reservations for six months, and possible financial penalties. New mechanisms and digitalizationReservation of employees is conducted exclusively online via Diia, with immediate decision-making—renewal and status updates occur in real time. Annual reconfirmation of status is mandatory. Sectoral and regional specificsCriteria may differ by industry and region (determined through ministerial orders and RMAs); companies should track actual local requirements to confirm strategic status. Special regional priority lists are often published. Conclusions and recommendationsDeadlines and requirements change rapidly—it is essential to monitor regulatory updates, ensure transparent financial discipline, fulfill tax obligations, and maintain a sufficient qualified workforce. Prompt digital registry updates are key to retaining staff and business stability. Overall, the new reservation criteria for 2025 have enhanced targeting and transparency but increased responsibility for strategic enterprises to support Ukraine’s economic stability during wartime. Svitlana Krutorogova — Attorney, “WINNER” Law Firm. https://youtu.be/zTDo7jW1KUg?si=rLe4Q34mHXL7l2t_

What does the abolition of the Commercial Code mean?The Commercial Code is repealed as of 28.08.2025, and its main provisions are integrated into the Civil Code, special laws, and by-laws. The abolition was prompted by years of conflicts between the Commercial and Civil Codes, which complicated contracting, corporate procedures, legal disputes, and created confusion for business regulation. Most provisions that duplicated or conflicted with the Civil Code have been eliminated, while the rest are being replaced with clearer mechanisms for transactions, corporate governance, and public-private relations. Who is affected: list of key subjectsState-owned enterprises (commercial, non-commercial, state-owned) and municipal enterprises. Within three years, these must be transformed into companies or other forms permitted by the Civil Code.Private, foreign subsidiaries, consumer cooperative enterprises, companies of public, religious and trade union organizations. New legal entities in these forms can no longer be registered, and all existing ones must undergo phased transformation.Local government bodies and state institutions managing enterprises or property. All changes to legal status and ownership must now be made under the Civil Code.Small and medium-sized businesses, the private sector: activities can now only take the forms of LLCs, JSCs, or cooperatives, which will simplify registration, joint investment, and dispute resolution.Legal departments, notaries, accountants: documentation, charters, contracts, and HR policies must be reviewed and updated to meet the new standards. Transition period and key deadlinesThe transition period will run from 28.08.2025 to 28.08.2028, allowing enterprises to adapt to the new forms. State and municipal companies with a single founder (the state or a community) must complete reorganization or liquidation by February 28, 2026.New enterprises in “obsolete” forms may not be registered as of August 28, 2025.The Unified State Register prohibits updating data on “old” entities (except for liquidation, transformation, leadership changes, and bankruptcy).To preserve tenancy, ownership, or property rights, enterprises must update documents and re-register under the new rules. Key legal and practical consequencesUnification of the legal framework: business law becomes more transparent, flexible, and aligned with European models.Pre-trial dispute resolution: now governed by the Civil Code—claims are not mandatory unless expressly required by law or contract. Parties must carefully prescribe the mechanism for peaceful settlement of disputes.Corporatization of state assets: all state and municipal enterprises must be reformed as ordinary companies, losing the old benefits and restrictions.Reduced risk of abuse and conflicts—same approaches for both public and private actors. Recommendations for various categoriesState and municipal enterprises: Develop a reorganization strategy. Choose a business form (JSC, LLC, cooperative). Update property relations, employment contracts, HR policies, and all primary agreements. Private sector, small businesses: Ensure statutory documents comply with the Civil Code. Remove any provisions duplicating or contradicting the Commercial Code. Update all internal documentation and corporate governance mechanisms. Legal departments, accountants, notaries: Add compliance checks with the Civil Code to work protocols and contract templates. Adjust HR and employment policy, especially regarding ownership and real estate rights. ConclusionsThe abolition of the Commercial Code affects virtually all legal and natural persons engaged in business activities, marking a gradual transition to a more flexible, European-style model of business regulation. From now on, business, the state, and civil associations will operate according to modern civil-law standards, with a focus on transparency, equal rules for all, and advanced protections for all parties. Author — Nataliia Shcherbakova, advisor at WINNER Law Firm, expert in contract and commercial law. https://youtu.be/thNA5DAhcmI?si=x8KVXsprQtCp-FYN

The tax landscape for sole proprietors (FOPs) in 2026 will undergo significant changes and increased burdens due to a rise in minimum wage, new social security (USC) amounts, and higher main tax rates. The 2026 state budget bill sets the minimum wage at UAH 8,647 and the subsistence minimum at UAH 3,328. This automatically raises all key tax obligations for entrepreneurs and changes business planning approaches. Income limits for simplified taxation groups:Group 1 – UAH 1,444,049Group 2 – UAH 7,211,598Group 3 – UAH 10,091,049These limits determine the upper turnover threshold for single tax regime use and are calculated based on the minimum wage, allowing for inflation and economic dynamics. Key taxes for FOPs:Single tax:Group 1 — UAH 332.8/month (10% of subsistence minimum)Group 2 — UAH 1,729.4/month (20% of minimum wage)Group 3 — 3% or 5% of income (depending on VAT payer status) Military levy:Groups 1–2 — UAH 864.7/month (10% of minimum wage)Group 3 — 1% of income Unified social contribution (USC):All groups — minimum UAH 1,902.34/month (22% of minimum wage) In total, the annual tax burden for a Group 1 FOP will be UAH 37,198.08, for Group 2 — UAH 54,032.88; for Group 3 it depends on turnover, but not less than UAH 22,828.08 in USC. Administration, audits, and trends:2026 will see expanded digitalization of tax reporting, more automatic checks, and closer monitoring of income limits. If a FOP exceeds limits or violates rules, they will be automatically moved to the general taxation system. Financial monitoring will play a greater role, with tax authorities scrutinizing banking transactions to fight shadow business. Social effect and recommendations:Increased tax and social burdens may harm small entrepreneurs, especially those with low incomes — minimum contributions must be paid even with no turnover. At the same time, local budgets receive extra resources for social programs, and the state gets a steady source of revenue during wartime. Continuous monitoring of rates, timely accounting, and consultations with tax advisors are key strategies to minimize risk. Conclusions:2026 will mark a year of active fiscalization for entrepreneurship: FOPs must keep disciplined records, follow new rules, and factor higher tax obligations into financial planning. USC, military levy, and single tax are more substantial in an entrepreneur’s monthly and annual budget than ever before. Author — Yulia Popadyn, attorney of the tax and customs law practice at WINNER Law Firm. https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=gFk6sXawBC1F_6lJ

Key budget-2026 figures and the role of the single tax2026 will be a record year for state expenditures (UAH 4.8 trillion) and higher revenue (almost UAH 2.8 trillion), with one of the main reserves being receipts from the single tax. It is a crucial source of stability for local government: in some communities, the share of single tax in local income exceeds 15%. The increase in minimum wage (UAH 8,647) and subsistence minimum (UAH 3,328) likewise raises simplified system limits: -Group I: UAH 1,444,049-Group II: UAH 7,211,598-Group III: UAH 10,091,049 These limits will remain for the year, with possible changes only in the next budget cycle. Rates and burdens for different payer groups-Group I (small retail/business): maximum single tax — UAH 332.8/month (up to 10% of subsistence minimum); annually — max UAH 3,993.60.-Group II (retail/services): not more than UAH 1,729.40/month (up to 20% of minimum wage); annually — max UAH 20,752.8.-Group III (FOPs and legal entities): 5% of income (without VAT) or 3% (with VAT).-All sole proprietors: mandatory military levy — Group I/II: UAH 864.7/month; Group III — 1% of income.-ESV (social contribution): minimum payment UAH 1,902.34/month (22% of minimum wage), annually — UAH 22,828.08. Total annual tax burden for Group I single taxpayer — UAH 37,198.08; Group II — UAH 54,032.88; Group III — varies by income. Updates and risks for payers in 2026Almost all 2026 law changes concern tax administration and control. E-document flow expands rapidly, as does the share of auto-calculations through digitalized reporting.Bank operations and payments are more closely monitored: if income data mismatches or limits are exceeded, one may be removed from the simplified system.Financial monitoring becomes more important — targeting shadow trade.Mandatory military levy will continue (at least for the duration of martial law).Stronger control over ESV payments: every sole proprietor, even with “no income,” must pay the minimum contribution. Local rates and regional featuresActual single tax rates for Groups I-II are set by city, town and village councils based on local financial needs, within the maximum national rate. Differences between regions are possible. In special status zones (occupied or wartime areas), extra reliefs may apply but are territory-limited and approved by government decree. Impacts for sole proprietors and local budgets-A higher minimum wage automatically raises tax and social contributions for FOPs, even without income growth.-Communities receive greater funding, but entrepreneurs must plan spending more carefully and register activity wisely to avoid exceeding limits.-Main advice is to monitor rate and council changes, keep reports current, and consult tax professionals promptly to adapt to new requirements. ConclusionsIn 2026, the single tax remains a strategic support tool for small business, but new limits, heavier burdens, and tighter control of income and limits are crucial for every entrepreneur’s financial planning. One must work with digitalization, wartime realities, and rising tax discipline demands, as the national budget requires stable revenues. Author — Yulia Popadyn, attorney of the tax and customs law practice at WINNER Law Firm. https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=gFk6sXawBC1F_6lJ

Reasons for lifting the moratoriumThe main argument of those supporting the return of inspections is the need for transparent market control, especially in the dairy and meat industries, which are most sensitive to safety issues. A permanent moratorium, as noted by the State Service of Ukraine on Food Safety and Consumer Protection (SSUFSCP), creates risks for public health since it can allow low-quality products to reach the end consumer. According to EU law, candidate countries must maintain strict control standards for food products—from production to export. Lifting the moratorium will also promote open dialogue with the European Commission on food trade. Business arguments against liftingAt the same time, the European Business Association, some sectoral organizations, and most entrepreneurs urge the government not to rush in resuming scheduled and unscheduled inspections. Their key points: During the war, business faces increased strain: logistics issues, staff shortages, destruction of infrastructure, and falling purchasing power. Resuming inspections may result in higher administrative and financial pressure and greater corruption risks. Statistics show violations in the food sector have decreased: in 2024, over 9,000 unscheduled inspections were initiated by producers themselves, with violations found in only 20% of cases—evidence of stronger internal controls. Regulatory and legal basis for changesThe process details are governed by Cabinet Resolution No. 303 and proposed amendments permitting the full restoration of government control. SSUFSCP has already unveiled a development strategy through 2028, focused on transparent business dialogue and gradual rather than abrupt inspections. Particular emphasis is placed on objective grounds for state control—consumer complaints, suspected threats to health, as well as export needs. Experts’ view on market impactFood safety experts believe a moratorium, on the one hand, reduces the risk of uncontrolled activity, but may also negatively affect Ukraine’s reputation as a food exporter. Growing inquiries from EU partners and the prospect of “industrial visa-free” trade require deeper control and the highest quality standards. Meanwhile, legal specialists recommend the state develop transparent audit algorithms, set criteria for regular inspections, and minimize risks for small and medium businesses—such as via process digitalization and the use of mobile audits and modern technology. Possible effects for consumers and producers For consumers: improved guarantees of product quality, ability to respond quickly to violations by contacting SSUFSCP. For exporters: reduced risk of losing external markets, retention of reliable partner status with the EU. For small business: potential risk of administrative burden, need to adapt to new standards and recordkeeping. Conclusions and recommendationsRestoring government control over the food sector means balancing safety requirements, business interests, and wartime restrictions. Authorities should follow the principle of “reasonable sufficiency,” make inspections preventive rather than punitive, and establish transparent rules for all market participants. Recommendations for business: Update internal quality control policies. Maintain documentation and clear response algorithms for inspections. Monitor changes in regulations and participate in consultations with SSUFSCP. For consumers: contact control agencies online if needed and actively use consumer protection mechanisms. The ongoing debate over ending the moratorium is an example of seeking compromise between state, business, and citizen interests in uncertain times—one that will shape the standards of Ukraine’s food market for years ahead. Author — Yulia Popadyn, attorney of the tax and customs law practice at WINNER Law Firm. https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=GXso2-Jy-6zWSWJJ

What’s the core issue?By law, a payment transaction means accepting cash, payment cards, checks, etc. for a product or service, as well as refunds. When paying by card, the transaction is confirmed by the buyer’s bank.The tax authorities (DPS) have clarified in recent years: if the goods are delivered by an expediter or logistics company (like Nova Poshta), the seller must generate a fiscal receipt before shipping the goods and include it in the parcel or send it electronically, since Nova Poshta and NovaPay are just intermediaries. Not considered payment transactions by Law No. 265 (and not requiring RRO/PRRO) are payments for goods (services) through: a bank, transferring funds from one current account to another; direct cash deposits at the bank desk to be credited to a current account; payment terminals and/or self-service kiosks owned by a bank. If payment is via banking services where the consumer can pay only using the account details (e.g., IBAN Registry:2009, NEQ, DSTU-N 7167:2010), or by invoice (like those paid through banks from account to account with no acquiring), RRO/PRRO are not required, as these are not characterized as payment transactions under Law No. 265. In all other cases, the use of RRO or PRRO is mandatory for all businesses conducting payments in cash. Why is the situation ambiguous?The buyer orders a product online; it is delivered by a carrier to a pickup point (Nova Poshta), where the buyer pays for delivery (to the carrier) and for the product (to a financial intermediary that then wires money to the seller’s account based on their contract). So, with online sales, the seller does not receive cash directly from the buyer, but from a financial company, which counts as a non-cash operation for sole proprietors. Practical tips for entrepreneurs: The safest approach is to fiscalize the sale through PRRO when shipping and include a receipt or send an electronic one. Check your contract terms with the carrier: if funds go to your account, DPS views this as requiring fiscalization. Keep all documents: invoices, Nova Poshta receipts, payment confirmations—they will help during inspections. Monitor DPS updates and changes in receipt forms to avoid penalties. ConclusionThe legal situation around the use of RRO/PRRO for COD with Nova Poshta remains controversial: the tax authority demands mandatory fiscalization, but the courts are increasingly siding with business.The safest option for entrepreneurs is to issue the receipt in advance, yet in case of dispute, legal practice shows there is a chance to successfully defend their position in court.Author — Yulia Popadyn, attorney of the tax and customs law practice at WINNER Law Firm. https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=GXso2-Jy-6zWSWJJ

The decision declaring the mobilization of a student in 2025 unlawful has become a true legal revolution in the context of protecting constitutional rights to education and proper administrative mobilization procedures. The latest rulings by the courts of first instance and appellate courts have changed the approach to granting deferments for students, highlighting the priority of actual grounds for deferment over the formal act of submitting an application. Below is an analytical review of this landmark judicial practice and its significance for conscripted students and the Territorial Centers for Recruitment and Social Support (TCCs). Factual justification for deferment: a shift in legal philosophyTraditionally, mobilization deferment for students was granted exclusively upon application and its review by the TCC. However, the case reviewed in a district court—and confirmed by the appellate court—proved that the very fact of studying and the presence of factual circumstances supporting the right to deferment are sufficient grounds. The court referred to the student’s legal right to education, and held that the TCC was obligated to independently investigate these grounds by accessing university registers. Unlawfulness of mobilization without genuine verification by the TCCAccording to the ruling: the student approached the court seeking to cancel the mobilization order, because he had valid grounds for deferment under Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mobilization Training and Mobilization.” The court noted that the TCC’s failure to independently verify the plaintiff’s status constituted a breach of objectivity and the presumption of legality of his right to deferment. The absence of a submitted application for deferment is not an obstacle if the authority had an objective opportunity to check the student’s data and identify his status. Appellate focus: protecting actual rights, not mere procedural formalitiesThe appellate court upheld the primary ruling, emphasizing that the crucial aspect in mobilization is examining circumstances, not just the formal requirement to submit an application. The courts imposed the duty to verify on the TCC and established a new administrative standard: a person with actual grounds for exemption (education) cannot be mobilized regardless of application, and procedural lapses by the authority lack legal effect. Consequences for students: precedent and practical recommendations Any student who is truly studying and has supporting documents can count on the imperative cancellation of unlawful mobilization, even without a previously submitted deferment application. TCCs are obligated to verify the status of individuals before issuing a mobilization order by requesting information from university or education registries (EDBO). The military unit must remove the student from personnel rolls if the court finds a deferment right was violated. Negligence or formalism by TCC or military officials during status verification could result in personal liability. Impact on further judicial and administrative practiceThe decision is revolutionary for three reasons: The right to education cannot be formally restricted by administrative procedure flaws. The absence of a deferment application is not grounds for mobilization if documentary grounds exist. The court can order TCCs and military units not only to cancel an unlawful order, but also to remove the student from personnel lists. This means centralized bodies must reform their processes: automated EDBO access, open student registries, and timely updates on education status to prevent errors and violations. Legislative reforms on the horizonAmidst students’ court victories, draft law No. 13634 is under development, aiming to clarify and digitalize the deferment mechanism, establish automatic data exchange between the Ministry of Education and TCCs, and require student status verification in open registries before mobilization. Conclusions and legal algorithm for students Document your right to study (certificate, student card, EDBO reference). If you receive a mobilization order, prepare a lawsuit to cancel the order and be removed from personnel lists. Refer to new judicial practice: the fact of study is sufficient and an application is not mandatory. Demand independent verification from the TCC through (electronic) registries. File an appeal following the precedent in similar cases. The court decisions of first instance and appeals regarding the illegality of student mobilization demonstrate a new approach to protecting rights amidst military reform. This precedent enables thousands of students to protect their rights, even when authorities violate them, enshrining the true legal presumption and creating a reformist impulse for the Ukrainian human rights system. Svitlana Krutorogova — attorney, Legal Company WINNER. https://youtu.be/zTDo7jW1KUg?si=2VxLCY-DD8msAjiE

The issue of removing a person from the wanted list while staying abroad is becoming increasingly relevant, given the growing number of requests from Ukrainians, especially in connection with the implementation of digital services for tracking violations of military registration and the strengthening of control by the Territorial Recruitment Centers (TRC) and the police. This article examines the procedures for canceling a wanted status (both administrative and international, including through Interpol), algorithms for interaction with state authorities, options for remote communication, and key legal risks that may arise in today’s conditions. Reasons for being placed on the wanted list A person may be declared wanted most often in the following cases: For violations of military registration rules (failure to update data, failure to appear when summoned, other administrative offenses). For evading the execution of a court sentence or investigative actions (criminal proceedings, extradition procedures). On the basis of a resolution issued by a court, TRC, National Police, investigator, or prosecutor. At the international level — upon a request submitted by a competent authority to Interpol (Red Notice). Initial steps to be removed from the wanted list Remote identification of the problemThrough electronic systems (“Reserv+”, “Oberig”, and others), one can quickly learn about the “Wanted” status. If such a status exists, it is strongly advised not to travel to or return to Ukraine before taking legally correct actions. Clarifying the legal grounds for being listed as wantedA request should be submitted to the TRC, National Police, or investigator demanding a copy of the document or resolution that served as the basis for declaring the person wanted. Assessment of validity and legal consultationA detailed analysis of the legal grounds allows for proper planning of further steps. Often, the optimal solution lies in correcting technical errors in the data or proving the legitimacy of the person’s actions. Algorithm for canceling administrative wanted status (TRC, police) while abroad Submitting an application for removal from the wanted listA written application must be filed with the TRC or National Police — either in person, by mail, or through a foreign consulate. The application should provide facts and evidence of legitimate reasons for absence or non-fulfillment of obligations. Paying an administrative fine onlineIn most cases, fines can be paid remotely (via “Reserv+”, banking services), after which a copy of the payment confirmation is sent along with the application to the relevant authority. Contacting the Ukrainian consulateConsulates, according to current clarifications from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, accept documents to facilitate communication with the TRC or police. Some consular offices may require removal from the wanted list in advance in order to issue a passport or official certificates. Appealing the decision to declare a person wantedIf the grounds are deemed unlawful, an administrative lawsuit should be filed in court for annulment of the TRC or police decision and for the removal of the record from wanted registers. Legal representation by an attorney is strongly recommended. International wanted status: removal through Interpol If a person is listed by Interpol (Red Notice), the removal issue is resolved through the following procedure: Contacting a lawyer experienced in Interpol casesIt is best to work with an international team of lawyers who can coordinate defense both in the country of residence and in Ukraine. Preparing a substantiated complaint to the Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files (CCF)The complaint should emphasize the lack of justification for the wanted status, the political or administrative character of the case, violations of fundamental human rights, or the irrelevance of the case (for example, if the conviction was overturned or the case closed). Parallel work with local law enforcement authoritiesIf necessary, the lawyer submits appeals to the state authorities of the country of residence to refuse extradition if Interpol has already transferred the data to local police. Judicial proceduresIt may be possible to file a lawsuit in the court of the country that initiated the wanted status or where the person resides, based on violations of international law or specific national legal procedures. Special notes and risks The absence of proper grounds for the wanted status or violation of procedural rules may serve as a basis for automatic removal from the “Wanted” register. Proof of fine payment or a favorable court decision is a ground for reversing the wanted status in TRC, police, or other registers. An administrative offense does not constitute grounds for extradition, but during this period consulates may refuse certain services. Criminal proceedings or a conviction are exceptions; in such cases, only case closure, dropping of charges, or successful avoidance of extradition may change the wanted status. Monitoring status updates It is recommended to use online resources of the TRC, police, and consular information services to monitor changes in status (via “Reserv+”, a request to the TRC, or in the state registry’s personal account). Conclusions The cancellation of a wanted status for a person residing abroad requires the synergy of remote legal tools, cooperation with lawyers, and interaction with consular institutions. The advantages in 2025 include the digitization of procedures and the possibility of submitting applications remotely; however, complex cases often require judicial support. In particular, the process of canceling accusations within Interpol is especially complicated, with final consideration taking from several months to a year, but a well-prepared legal strategy supported by modern precedents significantly increases the chances of success. Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner of “WINNER” Law Firm, PhD in Law. https://youtu.be/zTDo7jW1KUg?si=ci-Bu8GXZ-XclKgd

Legislative basis and motives for changeOn August 26, 2025, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine adopted Resolution No. 1048, which significantly changed the procedure for suspending the registration of tax invoices and adjustment calculations in the Unified Register. The updates relate to Resolution No. 1165 from 2019, which regulates the algorithm for blocking tax invoices, VAT payer risk criteria, the system of positive tax history, and methods of unblocking. The main goal is to optimize and liberalize procedures, protect bona fide businesses, and reduce the number of fictitious operations. Main reasons for change: Increased pressure on business due to mass blocking of tax invoices in 2022–2024; Excessive manual checks and registration delays; The need for digitalization and automation of tax administration. Key innovations and criteriaLimits for unconditional registration of tax invoices have been significantly changed: The monthly supply volume increased from UAH 500,000 to UAH 1 million. The supply amount per recipient increased from UAH 50,000 to UAH 100,000. The amount of VAT paid increased from UAH 20,000 to UAH 40,000, including the amount declared for the last month prior to the payment deadline. The director can now officially head up to five companies, previously up to three, without automatically being classified as “risky.” The threshold for registering small tax invoices has risen to UAH 10,000, and the monthly volume for micro-operations to UAH 3 million. For enterprises operating in regions with potential threat of hostilities, automatic registration of invoices is provided—this is a significant relief for businesses in frontline areas. Expansion of the concept of “positive tax history”The criteria for acquiring and losing a “positive history” as a VAT payer have been detailed and expanded: Timely payment of taxes. No overdue reports. Working only with reliable counterparties. Prompt introduction of changes to company and activity data. Businesses that meet these requirements have a greater chance to avoid invoice blocking in the new system. Technical and procedural changesThe algorithm for calculating tax burden and integrating the VAT taxpayer’s data table has been updated. Automatic accounting of this data is provided in the consideration of unblocking issues after the risky status is removed. Some stages of repeated administrative appeals are canceled. A new form of decision on data table non-acceptance is introduced. The conditions for unblocking an invoice after the enterprise’s “rehabilitation” are leveled. Risks of the new systemImmediately after the changes come into force, risks remain: Imperfect algorithms for automatic monitoring of taxpayers. Probability of being classified as “risky” due to atypical operations or new counterparties. Possible difficulties with the updated data table, especially for companies with complex business processes. Judicial practice on unblocking invoices remains relevant: if administrative resolution is impossible, companies have to go to court to confirm the right to a tax credit. Practical advice for business Carefully monitor compliance with the unconditional registration criteria. Timely update all information about activity codes, types of activities, and owners. Maintain an impeccable tax history and work only with verified partners. Respond quickly to blocking: submit documents for unblocking and use the new automatic risk reversal procedure. Conclusions and expected effectThe changes in the procedure for blocking tax invoices, effective from September 2025, are aimed at reducing administrative burden, minimizing the number of blocked invoices, and increasing process transparency for bona fide VAT payers. Most innovations are liberalization based on wartime realities, digitalization, and the demands of the present. At the same time, businesses will need to adapt internal processes, strengthen control over tax risks, and automate the updating of registration data to respond promptly to the requirements of the tax authority. Author — Maksym Bahniuk, Head of Tax and Customs Law Practice at the Law Firm “WINNER”. https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=sfbM6m-qB2IZE_Ip

The pledge system in the banking sector is one of the most common mechanisms for securing loan obligations. For financial institutions, collateral serves as a guarantee of loan repayment, while for individuals, it offers the opportunity to obtain loans on more favorable terms. In today’s climate of economic instability, the institution of collateral takes on particular importance because banks seek to minimize credit risks and borrowers aim to find optimal tools for attracting funding. Legal nature of collateralCollateral is a method of securing obligations, governed by the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Law “On Collateral,” as well as a number of specialized legislative and regulatory acts. The essence of collateral lies in the creditor’s right, in case the debtor fails to fulfill their obligations, to satisfy claims at the expense of the collateral. At the same time, the debtor remains the owner of the property, but their right to use and dispose of it may be restricted by the agreement. For individuals, the key aspect is the ratio between the value of the collateral and the loan amount. Banks usually set coverage ratios to reduce the risk of non-repayment—for example, a loan can be issued for 60–80% of the appraised value of the asset. Types of bank collateral for individualsAn individual may pledge a variety of assets. Most commonly, these are:Real estate. Apartments, residential houses, or land plots are traditionally used as the most stable objects of collateral. Such assets allow individuals to obtain significant amounts for long periods.Vehicles. Cars may also be pledged but banks assess not just their market value but also their liquidity, technical condition, and age.Deposits. A very popular tool among individuals, especially for short-term loans. The main advantage is the simplicity of processing and the low interest rate.Movable property. This might include valuables, equipment, or precious metals. However, such assets are less common in banking practice due to valuation and liquidity issues. Collateral arrangement processFor individuals, the procedure for entering into a collateral agreement commonly includes several stages: Preliminary asset valuation. The value of the collateral is determined by an independent appraiser or bank specialists. Submitting documents. The borrower provides ownership documents for the collateral (property certificate, car registration card, etc.). Signing credit and collateral agreements. These must be in written form, often notarized. Registration of encumbrance. Ukraine has a State Register for encumbrances on movable and immovable property, which records collateral relationships. Without proper registration, a collateral loses its legal meaning, so the notarial and registration steps are of key importance. Advantages and risks of collateral for individualsAdvantages: Opportunity to obtain a larger loan amount Lower interest rates compared to unsecured loans Longer loan terms The ability to use different assets as collateral Risks: Loss of property if obligations are not fulfilled Additional costs for appraisal and notarization Restrictions on disposal of pledged property Psychological pressure associated with the risk of losing a home or other important assets Judicial practice and protection of rightsJudicial practice shows that collateral disputes are among the most challenging in the loan sector. Most often, individuals challenge: The order of foreclosure on the collateral; The invalidity of the agreement if not properly notarized; The bank’s right to dispose of the collateral without judicial review (if provided for in the agreement). The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that collateral agreements must be interpreted in light of the principle of good faith; any abuse by the creditor is considered unacceptable. At the same time, an individual must realize that signing the agreement brings a real possibility of losing the property if the loan is not repaid. Latest trendsWith digitalization, Ukraine is actively developing electronic registers, which simplify the process of registering collateral rights. Moreover, microloans backed by deposits and online loans with simplified insurance mechanisms are increasingly popular. Another trend is using the mortgage institution for various purposes—not only buying real estate, but also financing individual entrepreneurs’ business projects. Banks also create special credit packages secured by cars or even registered copyrights, though such cases are currently more experimental. ConclusionBank collateral for individuals is an effective means of obtaining funding and a powerful risk management tool for lenders. Understanding legal nuances, adequately assessing one’s ability to service a loan, and carefully analyzing the agreement help mitigate risks and use collateral as a financial resource effectively. Given the current state of the Ukrainian economy, this instrument will continue to be a key factor in the relationship between banks and individuals, requiring constant improvement of the legal framework and practical procedures. Author: Ihor Yas’ko, Managing Partner at “Winner Law Firm”, PhD in Law. https://youtu.be/k2-1dq7hxcY?si=I1pGo-xjhadMy9KE