Month: September 2025

Author: Maryna Pokotylo, Partner at F&P

In the current economic environment, domestic government bonds remain one of the most attractive instruments for investors – individuals, legal entities, single taxpayers, and farmers. However, to avoid any surprises with tax liabilities, it is important to understand which income from domestic government bonds is taxable, which is not, and what changes in legislation are relevant as of September 2025.

Main regulatory sources

• The Tax Code of Ukraine (TCU), in particular Section IV of the TCU, Art. 162 (who is a personal income tax payer), Art. 165 (income not included in tax income) and the military fee subsection.

• Law of Ukraine “On Capital Markets and Organized Commodity Markets” No. 3480-IV.

• Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 80 of January 31, 2001 “On Issuance of Domestic Government Bonds” as amended.

• Official explanations of the State Tax Service (STS) and the Ministry of Finance.

What are government bonds?

Domestic government bonds (DGBs) are debt instruments issued by the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine to raise funds for the state budget. By investing in domestic government bonds, the buyer provides a loan to the state. In turn, the state guarantees repayment of the nominal value of the bond within a certain period of time and payment of income, which is usually accrued in the form of interest (coupon payments).

What is income from government bonds

The income that investors can receive from domestic government bonds is generally divided into:

1. Coupon income (interest) – if the bond provides for periodic payment of interest (coupons).

2. Investment income – is the difference between the proceeds from the sale (or redemption) of bonds and their acquisition cost (including acquisition costs, if any).

Peculiarities of taxation for individuals

In accordance with the Tax Code:

• Clause 165.1.52 of Article 165 of the TCU provides that investment income from transactions with government securitiesissued by the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine, including income from domestic government bonds (including exchange rate differences), is not included in the total monthly or annual taxable income of a resident individual.

• Interest income received by the taxpayer and investment income from operations with domestic government bonds are not subject to military duty in accordance with subparagraph 1.7 of paragraph 16-1 of subsection 10 of section XX of the Tax Code of Ukraine.

Thus, a resident individual who receives coupon income or investment income from transactions with domestic government bonds does not pay personal income tax and military duty on such income.

Peculiarities of taxation for legal entities

For legal entities, income from domestic government bonds is included in the pre-tax financial result, which is the basis for calculating income tax (18% rate under Article 136 of the Tax Code). Such income includes:

1. Coupon income: Periodic interest payments on coupon bonds. This income is accrued in accounting on an accrual basis (in accordance with NSAU 13 “Financial Instruments” or IFRS 9 if the entity applies international standards).
2. Investment income: The difference between the selling (or redemption) price of government bonds and their purchase price, adjusted for expenses (e.g., brokerage commissions or bank fees).
3. Income from discount bonds: The difference between the nominal value at maturity and the purchase price amortized at the effective interest rate.

 

Unlike individuals, for whom income from domestic government bonds is exempt from personal income tax and military duty (sub-clauses 165.1.2 and 165.1.52 of Article 165 of the Tax Code), legal entities include this income in their total taxable income.

 

Taxation features for single tax payers

Single taxpayers (individual entrepreneurs and legal entities under the simplified taxation system) should be particularly careful when dealing with domestic government bonds (OVDPs), as such transactions may have tax and legal consequences.

According to the position of the State Tax Service (ІПК № 44/ІПК/99-00-21-02-02/ІПК), the sale of domestic government bonds may be classified as financial intermediation, which is prohibited for single tax payers of groups 1-3 in accordance with subpara. 291.5.1 OF THE TCU. The legislation lacks a clear position on the possibility of purchasing domestic government bonds solely for income (without further sale). At the same time, in the classification of economic activities (KVED), securities transactions can be interpreted as the provision of financial services, which also falls under the prohibition of financial intermediation.

For legal entities on the simplified taxation system, participation in such transactions may result in the loss of the right to apply the single tax if the STS recognizes that they have violated the terms of the simplified taxation system.

Individual entrepreneurs (IEs) are entitled to purchase domestic government bonds as private individuals, provided they use personal accounts rather than business accounts and do not act on behalf of third parties. If these requirements are violated, the transactions may be regarded as financial intermediation, which may result in the loss of the single tax payer status.

One of the problems that has been actively discussed recently is that single taxpayer farmers of the 4th group, who have invested in military government bonds, face the fact that the State Tax Service takes into account the entire amount of repayment of government bonds (i.e., both nominal and interest) when determining total income. This may lead to a violation of the criteria (e.g., the share of income from agricultural activities that must be at least a certain percentage, e.g., 75%) and loss of the single tax payer status.
MPs and businesses are initiating amendments to the draft law No. 13420, which stipulate that when determining the share of income of a single taxpayer of the 4th group income (profits) from securities will not be taken into accountif such income includes income tax has been paid. This should reduce the risk of losing the special regime.

Conclusion

Domestic government bonds are an effective and most legal way to generate investment income, especially for individuals, as Ukrainian legislation exempts such income from personal income tax and military duty. However, for legal entities and single tax payers, there are nuances that can lead to risks if changes are underestimated or income is incorrectly accounted for. Careful analysis, legal support and attention to detail will help avoid undesirable tax consequences.

Author: Anastasia Holovatyuk, Lawyer at F&P

Introduction: Relevance of the topic in the context of modern customs regulation

In today’s global trade environment, imports of goods to Ukraine are an integral part of the economic activities of many business entities. However, along with the need to properly complete customs declarations and pay the relevant fees, special attention should be paid to compliance with the rules for determining the country of origin of goods. This is due not only to the requirements of the Customs Code of Ukraine (the “CCU”), but also to the increased control by government agencies in 2025. Ignoring these requirements may lead to significant negative consequences, including the imposition of fines in the amount of 50 to 100 percent of the value of the goods, confiscation of the objects of violation, as well as initiation of litigation or administrative proceedings.

According to the State Customs Service of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the “SCS”), in 2025 there is a tendency to increase the number of violations detected related to inaccurate information about the country of origin. This is due to both geopolitical factors and the introduction of new legislative control mechanisms. In this article, we will review the key legislative innovations, document requirements, statistics of violations, practical recommendations, case studies and conclusions based on the current regulatory framework.

Legislative innovations in the field of customs control over the country of origin of goods

In 2025, Ukrainian customs legislation underwent certain changes aimed at strengthening administrative liability and clarifying procedures. In particular, on March 25, 2025, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted Law No. 4323-IX “On Amendments to the Customs Code of Ukraine and Other Laws of Ukraine on Certain Issues of Administrative Liability for Violation of Customs Rules”.

The key novelties are the separation of approaches to determining the amount of fines depending on the nature of the violation and the strengthening of sanctions for the use of fictitious documents or false information about the country of origin.

These amendments are aimed at harmonizing Ukrainian legislation with international standards, in particular with the provisions of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, and at preventing customs evasion through manipulation of the country of origin.

Documents confirming the country of origin of goods: legal requirements and verification procedures

Pursuant to Article 41 of the CCU, the country of origin of goods is determined based on the criteria established by international agreements and national legislation. The documents confirming the country of origin are:

1. A certificate of origin issued by an authorized body of the exporting country;
2. Certified declaration of origin;
3. A declaration of origin drawn up by a manufacturer or exporter;
4. Certificate of regional designation of origin.

The country of origin shall be declared in the customs declaration by indicating its name and a reference to the relevant document. In case of delivery of goods in batches in disassembled form, the country of origin is determined by the last batch, unless otherwise provided by the rules.

If the customs authority has doubts about the authenticity of the documents, an inspection is carried out after the customs clearance is completed. Such verification may include contacting the competent authorities of the exporting country and/or transit customs.

Violation statistics and control trends in 2025

An analysis of the SCS statistics shows that control over compliance with customs rules has intensified. In January-February 2025, about 1,467 cases of violations worth UAH 825 million were recorded. In the first half of the year (January-June), the number of violations increased to 4,873, worth UAH 6 billion. In the first seven months (January-July), there were 5,682 violations amounting to UAH 6.8 billion, and in the first eight months, there were 6,437 violations amounting to UAH 7.7 billion.

The main causes of violations include false information about the country of origin, the use of fictitious documents, registration through fake companies, and errors in the name, quantity, or value of goods. This often leads to evasion of anti-dumping or preferential duties. The growing trend of violations is associated with the strengthening of post-customs control and the introduction of automated inspection systems that allow for real-time detection of risks.

In practice, we note that the number of cases when the customs authorities of Ukraine suspect that the country of origin of goods is Iran or sanctioned countries has increased significantly, even in the absence of direct evidence. In such situations, customs often stops the goods for sampling and laboratory tests, which can take a considerable amount of time. At the same time, the customs authority addresses the customs authorities of transit countries and companies involved in the supply chain (manufacturers, carriers, freight forwarders) with inquiries about the origin of the goods. If indirect doubts arise during the inspection process (for example, discrepancies in transit documents or unconfirmed letters from logistics companies), the customs draws up a protocol on violation of customs rules and temporarily seizes the goods.

The court practice in such cases is ambiguous. On the one hand, the courts often side with importers, noting that there is no direct evidence of the falsity of the declared origin of the goods, and that the indication of the country of origin (e.g., Turkey instead of Iran) does not affect the amount of customs duties if the duty rates are the same and no preferences or prohibitions are applied.

On the other hand, a number of decisions show a negative trend: the courts support the position of the customs, even in the absence of conclusive evidence that the declarant has indicated an unreliable country of origin. This may be due to increased control due to geopolitical factors or assumptions about possible sanctions evasion. In such cases, courts rely on indirect data (e.g., information from automated systems or correspondence with transit companies).

Practical recommendations for importers: how to avoid risks

To minimize the risks, importers are advised to take the following measures:

1. Thoroughly check the documents: Before submitting a customs declaration, ensure that you have original or certified copies of certificates and declarations. Additionally, use packaging, technical documentation, and waybills to confirm origin.
2. Compliance with the procedures of the new legislation: To take into account changes in administrative liability and ensure that declarations comply with the requirements of the articles of the Commercial Code.
3. Responding to requests from customs authorities: In the event of a request for confirmation of origin, provide a reasoned response with copies of documents within the prescribed timeframe to avoid blocking goods.
4. Cooperation with reliable suppliers: Choose partners whose documents can withstand scrutiny and conduct due diligence on their reputation.
5. Engaging legal counsel at the stage of import preparation will help avoid common mistakes and optimize processes.

Conclusions: The strategic importance of compliance for business

Changes to the customs legislation of Ukraine in 2025 indicate a systematic strengthening of control over the determination of the country of origin of goods. These changes are aimed at protecting the national market, preventing smuggling and ensuring fair competition. For importers, a proactive approach is key: unification of documents, their thorough confirmation and readiness for inspections. Failure to comply can lead not only to financial losses (fines, confiscation), but also to reputational risks and restrictions on further business. Legal support, including consultations with customs law experts, is an effective tool for navigating these conditions and minimizing potential threats.