x

The Exchange of Tax Information Portal is an initiative of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes. The Global Forum conducts peer reviews of its member jurisdictions' ability to co-operate with other tax administrations in accordance with the internationally agreed standard. The standard provides for exchange of information on request where it is foreseeably relevant to the administration and enforcement of the domestic tax laws of the requesting jurisdiction. Effective exchange of information requires that jurisdictions ensure information is available, that it can be obtained by the tax authorities and that there are mechanisms in place allowing for the exchange of that information. The Global Forum's peer review process examines both the legal and regulatory aspects of exchange (Phase 1 reviews) and the exchange of information in practice (Phase 2). The EOI Portal will track the development of these peer reviews, including changes that jurisdictions make in response to the Global Forum's recommendations.

Peer Review: Ukraine Phase 1 report

This report for Ukraine has been published on 26 Jul 2016. You can buy this report, or browse it online below.

Skip directly to the Executive Summary. You may also want to view the tables of determinations and ratings.


loading...


Determinations and Recommendations

Jurisdictions should ensure that ownership and identity information for all relevant entities and arrangements is available to their competent authorities. (ToR A.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   Ownership information on foreign companies having sufficient nexus with Ukraine (in particular, having their head office or headquarters in Ukraine) and on foreign partnerships carrying on business in Ukraine or deriving taxable income therein is not consistently available.  Ukraine should ensure that ownership information on foreign companies with sufficient nexus with Ukraine and on foreign partnerships carrying on business in Ukraine or deriving taxable income therein is available in all cases. 
Joint stock companies could issue bearer shares prior to February 2006. The Ukrainian law provides certain mechanisms which require identification of holders of the remaining bearer shares. However, they do not ensure efficient immobilisation or conversion of these shares so that all their holders are identified. It is nevertheless noted that the number of bearer shares is limited and cannot expand.  Ukraine should provide clear rules for efficient identification of all holders of the remaining bearer shares. 
Ukrainian law does not require that information on all beneficiaries and settlors of foreign trusts which have Ukrainian resident trustees or are administered in Ukraine is available in all cases.  Ukraine should ensure that information is maintained on all beneficiaries and settlors of foreign trusts which have Ukrainian resident trustees or are administered in Ukraine. 
Jurisdictions should ensure that reliable accounting records are kept for all relevant entities and arrangements. (ToR A.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   Ukrainian legislation does not clearly ensure that reliable accounting records and underlying documentation are kept for foreign trusts which have Ukrainian resident trustees or are administered in Ukraine in all cases.  Ukraine should ensure that reliable accounting records and underlying documentation for trusts which have Ukrainian resident trustees or are administered in Ukraine are kept in all cases. 
Ukrainian law does not ensure that underlying documents are required to be kept for at least five years after the lapse of the three year tax retention period and it is not clear to which extent and for how long are accounting records required to be kept after the liquidation of the entity or arrangement.  Ukraine should introduce clear rules to ensure that all accounting records are required to be kept for at least five years after the end of the period to which they relate. 
Banking information should be available for all account-holders. (ToR A.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
Competent authorities should have the power to obtain and provide information that is the subject of a request under an exchange of information arrangement from any person within their territorial jurisdiction who is in possession or control of such information (irrespective of any legal obligation on such person to maintain the secrecy of the information). (ToR B.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   In order to obtain banking information which the tax authority does not already have at its disposal or cannot be obtained through a written request the tax authority has to apply to the court. The court procedure however poses concerns in respect of the identification requirement of the person on whose bank account information is requested as the name is the only example given as a means of identifying the person and in respect of the criteria under which the information will be disclosed.  Ukraine should clarify its law to clearly provide for access to banking information in accordance with the standard in all cases. 
The rights and safeguards (e.g. notification, appeal rights) that apply to persons in the requested jurisdiction should be compatible with effective exchange of information. (ToR B.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.   When accessing banking information through a court order the Ukrainian law requires the court to notify the person in respect of whose bank account information is requested. It is unclear whether exceptions provided by the law allow for exceptions from prior notification consistent with the standard.  Ukraine should clarify its law to ensure that there are appropriate exceptions from the obligation to notify a person on whom banking information is requested. 
Exchange of information mechanisms should provide for effective exchange of information. (ToR C.1)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement.   Court procedure required under the Ukrainian law in order to obtain banking information which goes beyond the bank account number and the identification of the account holder poses certain concerns which may limit effective exchange of banking information.  Ukraine should clarify its law to clearly provide for access to banking information in accordance with the standard in all cases. 
The jurisdictions' network of information exchange mechanisms should cover all relevant partners. (ToR C.2)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.     Ukraine should continue to develop its exchange of information network with all relevant partners. 
The jurisdictions' mechanisms for exchange of information should have adequate provisions to ensure the confidentiality of information received. (ToR C.3)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
The exchange of information mechanisms should respect the rights and safeguards of taxpayers and third parties. (ToR C.4)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The element is in place.      
The jurisdiction should provide information under its network of agreements in a timely manner. (ToR C.5)
Determination Factors Recommendations
The assessment team is not in a position to evaluate whether this element is in place, as it involves issues of practice that are dealt with in the Phase 2 review.