Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Hidden precursors in printer cartridges: the director of PROMARK fined nearly 45 thousand hryvnias 🖨⚠️
An attempt to import thinners for industrial printers ended for the Dnipropetrovsk company LLC “PROMARK” with court proceedings and fines. The reason was the failure to declare substances subject to special state control in the customs declaration.
This was reported by the Telegram channel “Sudom po skhemakh” with reference to the decision of the Halytskyi District Court of Lviv in case No. 461/5530/26.
🕵️♂️ Details of the chemical incident
On 18 March 2026, a declaration was submitted to the Lviv-North customs post for the import of a shipment of cartridges and ink thinners from the UK manufacturer Cyklop Needham Limited consigned to LLC “PROMARK” (Kryvyi Rih).
The declaration was made by a customs broker based on documents provided by the manufacturer — invoices, packing lists, and safety data sheets (MSDS) — which stated that the products did not contain precursors above permissible limits.
However, customs officers decided to take samples and send them for examination to the Specialized Laboratory of the State Customs Service. The test results were unexpected:
• The samples of chemical solutions contained methyl ethyl ketone and acetone with a total concentration of 69,4 mass %.
According to CMU Resolution No. 770, such mixtures fall under control measures as restricted precursors (List No. 2 Table IV), which should have been declared during customs clearance. The total value of the detained goods containing precursors was estimated at 90 147,64 UAH.
⚖️ Defense and court position
The lawyer for the director of LLC “PROMARK” emphasized in court that the company acted in good faith. The enterprise ordered the goods strictly according to the specification, where the content of butanone should not exceed 79%, and there should have been no acetone at all. The manufacturer provided official MSDS that made no mention of controlled substances. The defense stressed that the importer itself became a victim of the British counterparty’s bad faith and had no reason to doubt the official documents.
However, Judge Khrystyna Mysko rejected these arguments. The court stated that using the manufacturer’s documents does not exempt the declarant (the holder of the customs regime) from the obligation to ensure submission of accurate information. The court interpreted the failure to verify the composition of the goods as negligence.
📌 Court decision
On 15 September 2026, the Halytskyi District Court of Lviv found the director of LLC “PROMARK” guilty of committing a customs offense under Art. 472 of the Customs Code of Ukraine (failure to declare goods) and imposed:
• Fine: 50% of the value of the goods — 45 073,82 UAH.
• Disposition of the goods: the seized goods are to be returned to the owner (or authorized person) for mandatory removal from the customs territory of Ukraine.
• Additional costs: 1 529,21 UAH were charged in favor of the customs authority for storage of the property and 665,60 UAH in court fees.
💡 Advice from “Sudom po skhemakh”:
The PROMARK case is a classic example of how an official safety data sheet (MSDS) from a foreign plant can become a “trap” for a Ukrainian importer. Customs authorities and courts in Ukraine take a strict position: you are responsible for what is actually in the box, not for what is written on paper.
• Check chemicals before declaring: If you import complex solvents, varnishes, paints, or inks, demand laboratory protocols for specific batches from the foreign supplier, not generalized safety sheets.
• Preliminary sampling: If there is the slightest doubt about the chemical composition or the presence of explosive/precursor substances, use the right to a preliminary inspection and sampling with customs participation before submitting the final customs declaration. This will protect you from fines and confiscations.
Telegram publication
