Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
📌The updated leadership of the State Tax Service of Ukraine began hearing reports from the heads of regional offices, in connection with which they received this letter ⬇️
📥 “How to destroy the State Tax Service during a war? Koniushenko, it seems, decided to demonstrate this in practice.
The instruction is as follows: dismiss competent heads of offices, department directors, place people of dubious competence in leadership positions, paralyze decision-making, and drive professional employees to resign.
The newly appointed deputies haven’t even figured out where their offices are yet, but they have already managed to call their own professional suitability into question.
Judging by the managerial decisions, knowledge of the Tax Code apparently was not a priority when making appointments. The main thing is the position, and understanding taxes, it seems, should be left to subordinates.
The criteria for personnel selection deserve special attention. The ideal candidate is someone of whom there is no mention in the media. Neither negative nor positive. No public professional achievements, no principled positions, no uncomfortable questions. A kind of ideal managerial plankton: remain unnoticed for years, avoid conflicts with anyone, make no enemies, and above all, do not demonstrate one’s own position. Has the absence of professional authority and a public reputation become the new indicator of personnel suitability?
At the same time, experienced leaders who meet plans, deliver results, and implement government tasks and leadership directives are being dismissed. And the most interesting part is the rationale for such decisions: “We don’t see you in this position.”
Excuse me, since when did the STS become a private entity where a person’s professional future is determined not by work results, competence, and legal grounds, but by the personal vision of top management? Is this a civil service or a private club of interests where the main criterion of professional suitability is to please the leadership?
And now pay attention: the annual evaluation of civil servants is coming up. And here the personnel “reform” will take on new colors. People who raise questions even about understanding VAT will evaluate specialists who for years have ensured the fulfillment of government tasks and the inflow of billions to the budget.
Maybe it would be worth evaluating the evaluators first? At least on their knowledge of the basic provisions of the Tax Code. The results could turn out to be much more interesting than any personnel audit.
Meanwhile, employees of the central office in Kyiv survive under shelling, without electricity, water, and heating, but are forced to stay at work until late. Curfew? Apparently, for some managers that’s the employees’ problem.
The result — resignation applications. People who have kept the service going for years on meager salaries are ready to leave so they no longer have to work under such management.
A question to the Acting Head of the STS: did you come to manage the service or to conduct an experiment to see how many professionals it can lose before it stops functioning properly?
Who will you appoint in place of those who are leaving? The next unnoticeable and convenient candidates whose main achievement is the absence of their own position?
And most importantly — when the professionals leave, who will work? You, your deputies, or will the Tax Code itself start administering taxes?
The STS is a state body, not the private property of temporary leadership. Positions here should be filled based on professional qualities, not on a “see—don’t see” principle.
Destroying the personnel potential of an agency that provides budget revenues during a war is not reform. It is a managerial catastrophe for which someone must be held accountable.” 📥
📌If one doesn’t take into account certain “personnel” who have long been overdue to leave, the letter is entirely fair 💪
Telegram publication
