“OLX tax” blocked in Parliament again

The Verkhovna Rada once again failed to move forward with the legislative initiative known as the “OLX tax”: the government’s draft laws on taxing income received via digital platforms (No. 14025 and its related bill No. 14026) once again did not secure the required 226 votes even to be added to the agenda.

Political context of the failure
Key votes on the “OLX tax” in late 2025 and early 2026 kept stalling at the stage of adding the bill to the agenda: some MPs do not want to take responsibility for unpopular tax changes during wartime, while others insist on further refining the model to protect small businesses and occasional sellers, even though the government and the relevant committee point to Ukraine’s international obligations to the EU and OECD to introduce automatic exchange of income data from digital platforms.

Essence of the initiative: who and how was to be taxed
Draft law No. 14025 proposed to make marketplaces and services (OLX, Prom, Rozetka, Bolt, Uber, Airbnb, Booking, Glovo, etc.) tax agents that collect data on users’ income and withhold tax from it, setting a tax‑free threshold of 2,000 euros for occasional sales and, for higher amounts, a rate of 5% personal income tax plus 5% military levy (with a further increase to 18% + 5% for income above UAH 6.6 million), which, according to government estimates, was expected to bring the budget about UAH 14 billion per year.

Why people talk about an “OLX tax” even though it already exists
Formally, income from systematic online sales is already subject to taxation at rates of 18% personal income tax and 1.5% military levy, but most transactions remain “invisible” to the tax authorities because the money goes to regular bank cards and sellers do not register as sole proprietors or file tax returns. The “OLX tax” does not introduce a new levy but changes the administration mechanism: platforms become tax agents that automatically withhold 10% from payments to active sellers and report to the State Tax Service, banks open separate accounts and share information on such transactions, and the media label arose precisely because the initiative is tied to specific platforms.

Arguments for and against
Supporters of the bill stress three key arguments:

• creating a level playing field between traditional businesses (sole proprietors and legal entities that pay taxes and use cash registers) and the “grey” online trade operating without registration;
• meeting international requirements on automatic exchange of tax information, without which Ukraine risks being put on “grey lists”;
• additional budget revenues, which are especially important during the war.

Opponents focus on the risks of excessive control over ordinary citizens who occasionally sell personal items, as well as on the technical and financial burden on the platforms themselves, the banking sector and the State Tax Service. There are concerns that, due to the complexity of the procedures, some small sellers will go into the shadow economy or switch to cash payments or foreign services, which would undermine the reform’s effect.

Why the vote keeps failing
Despite the support of the relevant committee, the plenary hall repeatedly lacks enough votes even to put the bill on the agenda: some factions demand broader public discussion, clearer non‑taxable thresholds and safeguards for occasional sellers. The situation is complicated by the fact that the “OLX tax” is bundled with other sensitive financial laws as part of agreements with the EU and IMF, so the failure of one issue drags down the entire package, and MPs are reluctant to take reputational risks by voting for an initiative that society perceives as a “tax on the classifieds board”, even though formally it applies only to systematic sellers and large volumes of income.

What the latest failure means for sellers and buyers
As long as the law is not adopted, the taxation rules remain unchanged:

• one‑off sales of personal items (clothes, electronics, furniture) without signs of business activity are hardly monitored, although in theory such income is subject to declaration;
• systematic sellers and those who earn money on marketplaces as a business are legally required either to register as sole proprietors or declare their income as self‑employed persons, but in practice a significant part of this income remains in the shadow economy.

For marketplaces, another postponement means there is still no obligation to implement complex tax and compliance processes, but it also means continued uncertainty: Ukraine still has to implement international standards for information exchange, so the political question of “when and in what form” is merely pushed back in time.

If you have questions or issues related to taxation of income from online trade, working through marketplaces or preparing for the possible introduction of an “OLX tax”, seeking professional legal and tax advice will help you choose a safe business model and assess potential risks in advance.

Author: Ihor Yasko, Managing Partner at JSC “WINNER Law Firm”, PhD in Law.