Author name: admin

. Fate of commercial contracts concluded before the reform: The Law of Ukraine “On the Specifics of Regulation of Legal Entities of Certain Legal Forms during the Transitional Period and Associations of Legal Entities” (dated January 9, 2025, No. 4196-IX) does not provide special transitional provisions for commercial contracts concluded under the Commercial Code of Ukraine (CCU) and referring to its norms; Contracts concluded before the effective date of Law No. 4196-IX, which repeals the CCU, remain in force and retain their legal effect until expiration or termination; If a contract contains references to CCU norms, such provisions cease to apply. Instead, similar provisions of the Civil Code of Ukraine must be applied — it is recommended to amend such contracts accordingly (!); From the moment of CCU repeal, all contractual provisions will be governed by the Civil Code of Ukraine and, where applicable, special legislation; Important (!) — references to CCU norms do not invalidate the contract, as the law has no retroactive effect. 2. Essential terms of the contract: how it was — how it will be: Essential terms can be grouped into: mandatory terms for any contract; mandatory terms for specific types of contracts and/or those required by one of the parties. Current version (Part 3, Article 180 of the CCU):Parties must agree on the following when concluding a commercial contract: subject matter; price;   Starting August 28, 2025 — under the Civil Code of Ukraine (Part 1, Article 638):A contract is considered concluded if the parties agree on all essential terms: subject matter; terms defined by law as essential; terms necessary for that specific type of contract; any other terms which either party identifies as essential. 👉 After the CCU repeal, more contract terms will be deemed “essential” by party will, not by law. From August 28, 2025, parties must: carefully identify essential terms; define and agree on them in detail,to avoid legal uncertainty in the future. 📅 August 12, 2025, at 11:00 AM — webinar:“Abolition of the Commercial Code of Ukraine: Consequences for State and Municipal Enterprises or How to Act Under New Rules”Speaker – Legal Advisor of WINNER Law Firm, Doctor of Law Natalia Shcherbakova. Registration link available on the corporate Facebook page of WINNER Law Firm. https://youtu.be/BAu08iebqrI?si=kWro0pQA2DAjdzeS

   Cash registers (POS systems) and software-based POS (Soft POS) have become an essential part of doing business in Ukraine. However, entrepreneurs often make mistakes that can lead to fines or operational blocks. Let’s review the most common ones. 🔹 1. Unjustified Non-Use of POS/Soft POSIssue:Entrepreneurs (sole proprietors) often believe they are allowed to operate without POS systems, even though the law requires them — especially for online sales, delivery, electronics, food services, beauty, and medical services.Consequences:– fine of 100% of the transaction value for the first offense (Law of Ukraine No. 265/95-VR dated July 6, 1995),– 150% for repeated violations within a year. 🔹 2. Lack of Fiscalization of TransactionsIssue:A receipt is issued but not submitted to the State Tax Service’s fiscal server (non-fiscalized). For example:• client receives a PDF receipt with no QR code,• receipt is issued in demo mode or from a local version of the software.Consequences:– the receipt is invalid,– the buyer may file a complaint via Diia or the Taxpayer e-Cabinet,– fine as for a transaction without a POS system. 🔹 3. Incorrect or Fake Product Descriptions in ReceiptsIssue:Generic names are used instead of actual products: “Item 1”, “Product”, “Service 001”.Consequences:– violation of Law No. 265/95-VR,– 100% fine on value sold for the first offense,– 150% for repeat violations. 🔹 4. Untimely Opening/Closing of Shifts or Missing Shift ReportIssue:• A shift isn’t opened in the software, but receipts are still issued,• A Z-report (daily summary) is not generated at the end of the shift.Consequences:– inability to confirm reporting,– administrative fine up to UAH 510 (under Art. 155¹ of the Administrative Code),– receipts from that shift are invalid. 🔹 5. Operating with an Unregistered or Incorrectly Registered Soft POSIssue:Entrepreneurs run a POS app without completing registration (form 1-SoftPOS not submitted or no fiscal number assigned).Consequences:– receipts are not recorded in the Tax Service system,– activity is considered as operating without POS. 🔹 6. Confusion Around KORO and RK (Transaction Log and Receipt Book)Issue:• Some entrepreneurs maintain a KORO for Soft POS (which is not required),• Others fail to maintain a KORO for regular POS systems (which is required).Consequences:– breach of accounting procedures,– possible fine under Law No. 265/95-VR. 🔹 7. Violating Storage Requirements for Receipts and Z-ReportsIssue:Entrepreneurs don’t keep Z-reports or back up Soft POS data.Consequences:– data can’t be provided during audits,– fine for obstructing the audit,– risk of POS registration cancellation. ✅ Key Takeaways: How to Avoid Mistakes Regularly track legal updates — the Tax Service posts relevant news. Train your staff — one cashier’s mistake can cost tens of thousands of hryvnias. Automate POS processes — cloud services reduce human error. Hire an accountant or consultant to monitor fiscal operations. Don’t ignore Tax Service alerts: messages in your online account or rejected receipts must be addressed immediately. 👉 At the bottom: a video lecture by Maksym Bahniuk, Head of Tax & Customs Law Practice at WINNER Law Firm, titled“Tax Inspections: How to Act During Audits” https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=hDxlghSJ3NkUnJ1l

Why does this matter to business? Tsyvinskyi represents a generation of detectives who no longer rely on outdated tools like endless interrogations or formal document requests. His style includes: Covert Investigative Actions: wiretaps, surveillance, tracking of fund transfers, and real-time documentation of collusion. Deals with Investigators: actively engaging suspects to cooperate in exchange for leniency — a method that helps gather evidence against the masterminds of schemes and high-level corruption. NABU and SAP, where Tsyvinskyi previously worked, strongly support legislative changes enabling plea deals in corruption cases. These mechanisms enable real cooperation with investigators and restitution of state losses — not just payoffs. This is likely to become the dominant approach at BEB under his leadership. Big Business in the Spotlight Notably, most cases supervised by Tsyvinskyi involved not small entrepreneurs but large business groups, high-ranking officials, and multi-million-dollar schemes damaging the state budget. This indicates BEB may begin with similarly resonant, high-stakes cases. What This Means for the Market: Large businesses must prepare for a new wave of scrutiny from BEB — not just formal audits, but deep documentation using advanced investigative tools. Top management risks are rising. What used to be “manageable” could now turn into real criminal cases backed by solid evidence. Plea deals may become the only option for some suspects. Those who cooperate early may benefit from reduced penalties — but may also become witnesses against their colleagues or leadership. Signals to Business: What to Do Now Review internal compliance procedures. Identifying and eliminating risks proactively can prevent issues. Prepare for potential covert investigations. Keep all communications, transactions, and meetings transparent and legal. Develop a legal response strategy in case of investigation, search, detention, or charges — including preparation for possible plea deals by close associates. Forecast: What’s Next Tsyvinskyi’s appointment isn’t just a reshuffle — it’s a paradigm shift: from formalities to real economic crime prosecution. Under his leadership, BEB is likely to resemble NABU more closely — focusing on high-profile cases, modern tools, and large businesses. “Tsyvinskyi is someone who knows how to document complex economic crimes, handle vast data, and build cases against top-level officials and businessmen.” Conclusions: Businesses — especially large ones — must prepare for the new reality. BEB under Tsyvinskyi means modern investigations, solid evidence, and real verdicts. The first to be targeted: big companies and high-profile cases. Time to prepare. Tsyvinskyi is a challenge for big business — but as always, most entrepreneurs assume “this doesn’t apply to us.” Better fasten your compliance seatbelts now! 👉 Below is a video lecture by Ihor Yasko, PhD in Law, Head of Business Security Practice and Managing Partner at WINNER Law Firm. https://youtu.be/BAu08iebqrI?si=nl9kvVJ-Srknc-F7

In Ukraine, the amount of bail in criminal cases — especially involving high-ranking officials and high-profile corruption charges — is not only astonishing in scale but also significantly differs from European practices. The recent case of Vice Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov, for whom the High Anti-Corruption Court set bail at UAH 120 million, illustrates how bail in Ukraine often transforms from a procedural safeguard into a de facto punishment before any verdict is rendered. Bail in Ukraine: Legal Nature and European Standards   Bail, under both domestic law and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) jurisprudence, is a preventive measure, not a punishment. Its goal is to ensure the suspect appears in court — not to recover damages or impose penal consequences. However, in Ukraine, especially in high-profile cases, the bail amount often exceeds the alleged damage, contradicting European standards and becoming a tool of pressure. “There is a systemic issue in Ukraine of imposing excessively high bail amounts. This denies suspects the chance to be released, effectively violating the human right to liberty…” Record-High Bails in Ukraine: Figures and Comparisons Ukraine has repeatedly set European record bails: Yevhen Bakulin (former head of Naftogaz) — UAH 1.5 billion (the largest in Ukraine’s judicial history) Oleksandr Katsuba — UAH 450 million Andriy Kobolyev — over UAH 229 million Oleksiy Chernyshov — UAH 120 million In contrast, in most EU countries, even in corruption or economic crime cases, bail rarely exceeds a few million euros. In Ukraine, amounts in the hundreds of millions of hryvnias have become common among top officials. Bail as Punishment: How It Works Scenario 1: The Person Cannot Post Bail       If the suspect cannot afford the astronomical sum, they are detained in pre-trial custody (SIZO), which is effectively pre-judgment incarceration. This contradicts the presumption of innocence and the ECHR requirement for individual assessment based on financial capacity. “Excessive bail also has a secondary, yet powerful effect: it pushes suspects toward plea deals or abandoning their legal defense…” Scenario 2: The Person Posts Bail        If the suspect does manage to raise the bail, it becomes a media event. Journalists and the public scrutinize the origin of the funds, adding pressure and creating suspicions about the money’s legality. This becomes another tool for discrediting the accused, regardless of case outcome. “Media outlets treat these excessive bail amounts as a form of ‘temporary liability,’ distorting the legal function of bail and encouraging court politicization.” Causes of Excessive Bail in Ukraine Political and public demand for “symbolic justice” Lack of a systemic approach in bail assessment Bail used as a tool of pressure — procedurally and in the media In Ukraine, bail amounts in top cases often range from UAH 50 million to UAH 500 million — vastly surpassing EU levels. For example: In Germany — typically under €2 million In France — from €50,000 to €1 million, with courts required to assess financial status In Poland — usually under PLN 500,000, also adjusted to income and resources Thus, European courts approach bail with individualized care, balancing procedural needs and human rights. Excessive or punitive bail is rare — and seen as a human rights violation. In Ukraine, however, high bails have become systemic, especially in media-driven cases. Bail no longer ensures court appearance but rather serves as pressure or pretrial punishment. Conclusions Bail amounts in the hundreds of millions are the norm in Ukrainian corruption cases Excessive bail acts as either a punitive tool or source of public pressure This practice violates both European standards and criminal procedural intent Reform is needed: case-by-case financial assessments, legal education, new court mindset Ukraine’s “bail as punishment” model is not just a legal defect — it is a deep social issue that requires public and judicial rethinking. Below is a video from the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC), where the WINNER law firm team is defending a client under Part 5 of Article 191 and Part 3 of Article 209 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. https://youtu.be/V6VIYjriyBw?si=1uo7S5ZQrLAL8qJ8

💸 The End of Bank Secrecy: How “Transparency” Became a Tool for Control We’re being told again about EU integration, transparency, modernization. But while some applaud — I read the next draft law carefully. Behind the polished language is another blow to Ukraine’s economy. The bill aims to integrate Ukraine into the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA). On the surface — progress. In reality — deeper financial surveillance. 📜 What does the law propose? Banks, financial institutions, and e-money issuers must report every opened or closed account; Report conclusion or termination of safe deposit box contracts; Data will go to the tax office — and then to: NABU, ARMA, ESB, NACP, State Enforcement Service, private bailiffs, and the Financial Monitoring Service; Penalty for non-compliance: UAH 680 per case; Information will be stored for at least 5 years — even after the account is closed. 🤔 What about account balances and transactions? Formally — no. But with full access to account registries, banks, notaries, enforcement, and finmonitoring — detailed analysis is only a matter of time. 💡 Key question: why do we open up, but Europe doesn’t? This is yet another case where Ukraine is told to open markets, systems, and data — while not getting equal treatment. Like Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” — open systems benefit those who already control the game. For smaller economies, “openness” means defeat. 🛑 Bank secrecy is not a crime. It is the foundation of trust. In Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Austria, and Luxembourg — bank secrecy was for decades a magnet for capital. Even now, data disclosure happens only by court order and in rare cases. In Ukraine, however: Full registry of safes and accounts; Fines for non-disclosure; Access for more than 10 agencies — even private enforcement agents. That’s not transparency — it’s total fiscal control. 💸 What’s next? Capital will flee — not out of tax evasion, but fear; Trust in banks will drop — people will move to cash, crypto, Polish safes; SMEs and entrepreneurs will be pressured — data is a weapon; Oligarchs will remain untouched — they’re not in registries. They’re in London, Vienna, Dubai. 💬 Transparency is great — but only if it’s mutual Right now it’s: “You open up — we’ll decide what to take.”We support honest markets — but not weaponized compliance against business. ⚖ As a lawyer, I must say: This bill is a clear move toward financial centralization, loss of privacy, and rising conflict between the state and business. Soon it will impact anyone with a bank account — even salary cards. Today, you must: Know how to protect your assets; Assess risks before opening accounts; Build capital strategies for new realities; Work with lawyers who see through the PR. Respectfully, Managing Partner of WINNER Law Firm, PhD in Law, Attorney Ihor Yasko https://youtu.be/J9EOsCgwkfQ?si=X2OWxgoMb7T7Hc_P

A notice of suspicion is an official procedural act that means a person has been formally informed of being suspected of committing a crime. In Ukraine, this procedure is regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code and requires that the suspect be informed of the nature of the suspicion, their rights, and obligations. The delivery of this notice marks the beginning of a new stage in the criminal process, after which investigative actions may intensify, and the suspect obtains procedural status with the associated guarantees of legal defense. Suspicion Against Oleksii Chernyshov: Facts and Context On June 23, 2025, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) announced a suspicion against Deputy Prime Minister — Minister of National Unity Oleksii Chernyshov. He is suspected of abuse of office and receiving unlawful benefits in an especially large amount for himself and others in a case involving the allocation of land plots in Kyiv for construction purposes. According to the investigation, other individuals close to Chernyshov were already suspects in this case — including his former advisor, a former state secretary of the Ministry of Regional Development, and a Kyiv-based developer. Chernyshov stated that he voluntarily appeared before NABU, had a constructive dialogue with the detectives, and confirmed his willingness to cooperate with law enforcement. Media Coverage: Influence on Public Opinion and the Judicial System The role of the media in covering high-profile criminal cases is extremely significant. On one hand, transparency and access to information increase public trust in the judicial system, promote societal oversight, and help shape informed public opinion. On the other hand, excessive emotionality, manipulations, or distortions in the media can misrepresent reality and foster bias — both in society and among judges. In Ukraine, especially during wartime and political turbulence, the media space is extremely sensitive to such news. The media actively cover not only the facts of the notice of suspicion but also the personal circumstances of those involved (e.g., Chernyshov’s family traveling abroad), the political context, and the reactions of other officials. This creates additional pressure on those involved in the case, including law enforcement and the judiciary. Media Influence on Judicial Impartiality Judicial independence is a key prerequisite for fair justice. However, judges, like any people, are not isolated from society and media influence. Media publications, especially those with negative or accusatory tones, can shape judges’ views about a case even before the trial is concluded.Below in the video, the team of attorneys from WINNER Law Firm is defending clients at the High Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine. https://youtu.be/V6VIYjriyBw?si=C476pExKVd9x90Fr

     Fines in the transportation sector remain a pressing issue. The year 2025 brought both new approaches to oversight and increased responsibility for carriers. The State Service of Ukraine for Transport Safety (Ukrtransbezpeka) continues to be one of the main regulators for businesses engaged in the transportation of passengers and cargo. Main types of fines and grounds for imposition Ukrtransbezpeka monitors compliance with legislation in the field of road transport, and fines represent not only financial losses but also reputational risks. In 2025, the main recorded violations included: Violations of cargo and passenger transport regulations — a fine of UAH 3,400 or revocation of driving privileges for 3 to 6 months Overloading — fines ranging from UAH 8,500 to UAH 34,000 depending on the extent Failure to stop a vehicle when required — fine of UAH 3,400 or disqualification from driving Violations in technical inspections, missing licenses or documents — fines from UAH 340 to UAH 3,400 How Ukrtransbezpeka inspections are conducted As of May 18, 2025, a new procedure for conducting roadside inspections is in effect. Checks are now only conducted with an official order, and the list of inspectable issues is exhaustive and approved by the Ministry of Development. This allows carriers to clearly understand what documents and procedures are legally required. If a violation is detected, a report is drawn up, citing the specific legal provision breached. The case is reviewed either at the supervisory authority based on the company’s location or where the violation occurred, but no later than two months from the detection date. If the timeline is breached, the fine may be declared unlawful. Appealing fines: possibilities and limitations Legislation provides the option to appeal fines through a pre-court (administrative) procedure — to a higher-level control body. The complaint must be filed within 10 days of the fine’s issuance, and its submission suspends execution of the decision until the case is reviewed. However, in practice, success through administrative appeal is rare, and many cases go to court. At the same time, procedural mistakes by inspectors (e.g., missed deadlines or improperly issued documents) may be grounds to overturn the fine — even if the violation occurred. This creates additional opportunities for business protection, but it requires deep legal understanding. Why legal support is essential for business Modern transport businesses operate under constantly changing laws, increasing licensing demands, vehicle maintenance requirements, staffing rules, and heightened scrutiny. A simple documentation error can result in not only fines but also suspension of operations. Moreover, experience shows that even with a formal violation, a solid legal position and timely response can minimize risks and avoid excessive losses. “We do not encourage businesses to violate inspection procedures, but we do highlight legal gaps that, under certain conditions, may be lawfully used in favor of the business.” What to do if you receive a fine from Ukrtransbezpeka: Immediately obtain a copy of the inspection report and fine decision Check deadlines and procedural correctness Assess the viability of appealing administratively or in court Engage professional lawyers for legal analysis and preparation Conclusion: Legal support as a key to stability In today’s market, where a mistake can cost thousands and time is money, professional legal support becomes essential. Skilled lawyers can protect the carrier in disputes and prevent issues early in business planning. That’s why companies that value their reputation and growth choose partners with years of experience, deep sector knowledge, and a proven record of success. With professionals behind you, you can focus on what matters most — growing your business with confidence in tomorrow. https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=z9yxwC2TJ6qoGwir

             In 2024, Ukraine launched the “White Business Club” (WBC)-a registry of companies and entrepreneurs that are said to demonstrate exemplary tax compliance and transparency. Lawmakers present the initiative as a tool to support honest businesses, reduce inspections, and promote a legal economy. However, despite its noble declared goals, the initiative raises serious concerns about corruption risks, discrimination, and the creation of a new “untouchable caste” within the business environment. 📌 What is the WBC?       A special registry of companies and private entrepreneurs that meet certain criteria: regular tax payments, no debt, transparent salary policies, and no serious violations. Membership grants benefits like: Moratorium on most tax inspections Fast-track case reviews and consultations Personal compliance officer for dealing with the tax authority Ability to reserve some military-age employees 📉 Declared Purpose vs. Real Threats The selection mechanism for WBC is non-transparent and discretionary. Decisions are made by the tax authority based on criteria open to manipulation. 🔺 Key Risks: Discrimination: being outside the WBC labels you as “grey” or “black” Corruption: membership can be “purchased” through influence or bribes Temporary Nature: WBC is active only during martial law, no guarantees afterward Unstable Status: criteria are reviewed quarterly — companies can be excluded anytime Violation of equality: preferential treatment contradicts constitutional principles ⚠️ Why It’s Dangerous for Ukraine: A new group of “untouchables” is forming Tool for pressure on independent businesses Undermines reform efforts and trust in legal fairness 💡 Alternative: Fair Rules for Everyone Equal approach to all taxpayers Transparent criteria and procedures No manual interference Real anti-corruption reforms Conclusion:The White Business Club isn’t a path to transparency — it’s a risky experiment in discretionary favoritism. In a country still battling corruption, such an initiative could become a safe haven only for those with the right connections. Ukrainian business deserves clear and equal rules, not elitist clubs. Respectfully,Managing Partner of WINNER Law Firm, PhD in Law, Attorney Ihor Yasko   https://youtu.be/J9EOsCgwkfQ?si=c2IhiGsjctdKc7Of

      The Supreme Court reasonably upheld the decision of the appellate court, confirming the acquittal of a person accused of committing a criminal offense under Part 2 of Article 369 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine — namely, receiving an unlawful benefit for influencing the decision of an official authorized to perform state functions. The court, supporting the appellate decision, applied the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and the Constitution of Ukraine, specifically Part 3 of Article 62 of the Constitution, Articles 87, 94, and 246 of the CPC, and justifiably found that the pre-trial investigation body had artificially entered data into the URPI under Part 3 of Article 368 of the Criminal Code to obtain permission for covert investigative actions (an abuse of power). Furthermore, the court established and confirmed the fact of an unlawful search of a residence without court permission or voluntary consent. Accordingly, the court ruled such evidence, and any derivative evidence, inadmissible — following the doctrine of the “fruit of the poisonous tree.” The Supreme Court clearly emphasized that covert investigative actions may only be conducted for serious/especially serious crimes (Art. 346 CPC); At the time of conducting the covert actions, there were no legal grounds to qualify the offense as serious/especially serious, leading to the inadmissibility of the resulting evidence (Art. 87 CPC); The qualification was changed by the investigative body from Part 3 of Art. 368 to Part 2 of Art. 369-2 of the Criminal Code only after unlawful evidence was obtained — which constitutes an abuse of law; The search of the residence was conducted in violation of CPC requirements, namely without a judge’s permission (Part 3, Art. 233 CPC); the statement of consent was obtained hours after the search; The court noted that an audio recording made by a private individual can generally be admissible, but in this case, it could not compensate for the inadmissibility of the core evidence; The Supreme Court appropriately applied the standard of proof: if the objective side of the offense is not proven, the question of provocation becomes irrelevant. ⚖️ Thus, the Supreme Court, applying the standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”, consistently protected human rights and properly applied ECHR practice on the inadmissibility of artificially creating grounds for operational actions. If you’re familiar with such situations — it’s better to talk in advance. One timely consultation can prevent many legal problems. WINNER Law Firm is among Ukraine’s leading firms in tax, criminal, administrative, commercial law, and litigation. Our contact: +38 067-755-55-13 Below, WINNER Law Firm attorneys are defending a client in court under Article 191 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine https://youtu.be/V6VIYjriyBw?si=q0FHFadN5C7N23sy

    In today’s foreign trade landscape, compliance with customs law is a top priority for Ukrainian businesses. Article 458 of Ukraine’s Customs Code establishes administrative liability for customs violations, which can have serious consequences for importers and exporters. 📌 What Article 458 Covers:      Applies to non-criminal customs violations such as: False declarations Failure to comply with customs control Unauthorized use of goods under customs supervision Transit deadline violations Penalties include fines and possible seizure of goods or vehicles. ⚠️ Key risks for business: Cargo delays — even minor infractions can disrupt supply chains Fines and extra costs — including storage, expert evaluations, and delivery delays Legal uncertainty — vague regulations lead to conflicting interpretations by customs and courts 📈 Enforcement Trends:  Customs inspections are increasing, but court rulings remain inconsistent. That’s why risk management and legal oversight are critical. ✅ How to protect your business: Introduce internal compliance procedures Train staff on customs procedures Consult with legal experts 👨‍⚖️ How WINNER Law Firm helps: Risk assessment and document review Legal support during customs clearance Filing appeals or lawsuits Strategic advisory on long-term risk reduction 📍 Legal guidance is not just protection — it’s a tool for sustainable international growth. 🎥 Watch the video below: “Tax Inspections: How to Act” by Maksym Bahniuk, Head of Tax & Customs Practice, WINNER Law Firm.   https://youtu.be/rEd6me-Ume4?si=d0RqHOp0uc_XZimC