Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
“Pidlasa-gate”: “conflict of interest,” business ties and the fight against “Yatsenko platforms”
Roksolana Pidlasa, a deputy from Servant of the People and co-author of laws regulating small business, is accused of a conflict of interest.
Some deputies say Pidlasa, as an entrepreneur, received payments from those who could now benefit from laws she helped write. The deputy denies the accusations and says she is being pressured because of her fight against so‑called “Yatsenko schemes” related to property valuation, which have already caused a scandal and a rift within the Servant of the People faction. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty compiled the most important known facts about this conflict and asked the parties for comment.Deputy from Servant of the People Roksolana Pidlasa, leader of the cross‑factional group “For FOPs,” who co‑authored laws on cash registers 1053-1 and on cashback 1073, has a conflict of interest in this area: this is claimed, among others, by former MP Boryslav Bereza and current European Solidarity deputy Nina Yuzhanina.According to them, before becoming a deputy Pidlasa was herself an individual entrepreneur (FOP/FOP‑status), simultaneously worked in government as an adviser, and at the same time received funds from a civic organization whose founders are two companies: one develops software for cash registers, and the other is connected to the current head of the State Tax Service Serhiy Verlanov.Simple coincidence or conflict of interest?Boryslav Bereza wrote about these ties, which he considers a conflict of interest, on his Telegram channel.“This ‘servant’ received, when she was an FOP, 540 456 hryvnias from the ‘Fund for Reform Support in Ukraine,’ which she declared as income from entrepreneurial activity. (...) But there is one caveat. The founders of this NGO are two entities: the law firm ‘Saenko Kharenko’ and the ‘Scientific‑Production and Commercial Limited Liability Company EKVO.’ That Serhiy Verlanov worked part‑time at ‘Saenko Kharenko’ and today holds the post of chairman of the State Tax Service — that, of course, is a coincidence. But that LLC ‘EKVO’ is the developer of the software package for cash registers — that is not a coincidence. Or is it?” the former deputy writes.Later, in a conversation with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Bereza emphasized that such links between deputies and potential beneficiaries of their bills mean that current corrupt “schemes” persist in Ukraine and new ones are being created.“For example, we all know about ‘the Anton Yatsenko scheme,’ through which we all pay about one million hryvnias daily to his intermediary. Once that was the ‘exchange’ by the Groysman government for votes provided by the ‘Yatsenko group.’ Now we see how this (creating schemes) continues, but already with Servant of the People,” Bereza said.On her part, European Solidarity deputy and member of the Verkhovna Rada committee on finance, tax and customs policy Nina Yuzhanina points not only to Pidlasa’s connections with specific companies that would benefit from introducing cash registers for small entrepreneurs. In her view, the deputy’s past activity as an FOP also raises questions.In fact, in 2018 year Ms. Pidlasa was both an FOP and a ministry employee, writes Nina Yuzhanina“Judging by Pidlasa’s declaration, in 2018 year she received income both as an entrepreneur and as an adviser to the Minister of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine. The MER&T site indicates that she was appointed adviser to the minister in December 2017. What entrepreneurial activity did she carry out in parallel? Considering her functions at MER&T — presenting the ministry’s position in communications with the media and at public events — it’s not hard to guess. (...) In fact, in 2018 year Ms. Pidlasa was both an FOP and a ministry employee,” Yuzhanina writes.She notes that formally this is not prohibited: in 2016 year ministers’ advisers were removed from the scope of the Law of Ukraine “On Civil Service.”In a comment to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Yuzhanina said she was surprised by the moral side of the issue. “When they say that expenses are optimized through the ‘third group,’ even people who now allegedly fight such phenomena used it,” Nina Yuzhanina“When receiving over 500 thousand hryvnias a year on the ‘third group’ (single tax payers) — this looks like a payment that allowed optimizing payroll accruals, which was paid to her as such income. When they say that payroll accruals are optimized through the ‘third group,’ here is an example that even people who now allegedly fight such phenomena used it,” Yuzhanina told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.Recently accusations of dishonesty against Roksolana Pidlasa were voiced by Servant of the People deputy and deputy chairman of the tax committee Oleksandr Dubinsky.What of the allegations is true and what is not? Which points raised by Pidlasa’s opponents are actual legal violations and which are not?To answer these questions Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty gathered information from open sources and reached out to Roksolana Pidlasa for comment.The deputy believes she is being made the subject of a scandal not because of her past activity as an FOP or because of cash registers. The reason, she says, is that she and several colleagues are fighting schemes that enrich intermediary firms involved in property valuation: “I link this to a completely different reason. Because this scandal coincided in time with another scandal — around the vote in the Rada’s Financial Committee on bills 2047 and 2047-1. I am one of the defenders of eliminating the so‑called ‘platforms.’ Perhaps my draft law 2047 simply bothers someone.”Pidlasa also expressed her view on possible motives of some of her colleagues who level accusations against her: “I suspect that Ms. Yuzhanina, with whose help these ‘platforms’ were introduced in 2017 year, is somewhat unhappy that they now want to remove them. But that is only my assumption: I do not accuse anyone, unlike my colleagues.”Roksolana Pidlasa told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty she knows the surname of the main instigator of the scandal about her. However she refused to name this person in a comment, because it could “get a libel suit tomorrow.”The topic of “electronic platforms” or intermediary firms that take a share of payment for property valuation in Ukraine became a leading subject in Ukrainian media after some members of the Financial Committee, including several Servant of the People deputies, refused to vote to abolish this financial scheme. Opponents accused them of receiving material remuneration from deputy Anton Yatsenko. According to an investigation by Nashi Hroshi, all four platforms are effectively connected to him.The algorithm by which a non‑state “electronic platform” gets its share from each property valuation in the state has already been labeled by Ukrainian media as “Yatsenko schemes.”At the same time Anton Yatsenko told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty that he has no relation to such schemes.“For more than a year they have been spreading dirt about me. And of course I have nothing to do with any firms,” Yatsenko responded.But returning to the Pidlasa case: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty lists the theses of all accusations currently made against her and her response to each accusation.What is Pidlasa accused of? “Receiving half a million hryvnias to her FOP account from the ‘Fund for Reform Support in Ukraine’ while working as adviser to the Minister of Economic Development and Trade.”Pidlasa’s response: “This practice exists in many ministries. You can easily google it. The Ministry of Infrastructure, the Ministry of Finance, and there is also the Reform Support Office under the Cabinet. Dozens of people work there. And they all receive salaries through the civic union ‘Fund for Reform Support in Ukraine.’ (...) They pay from a multi‑donor account, which receives funds from the EBRD, the European Union and individual EU countries.” “Receiving an actual salary into an FOP account.”Pidlasa’s response: “I had other clients. These were not employment relationships. This was payment for consulting services. This is not a salary.” “Acquaintance and business ties with the current head of the State Tax Service Serhiy Verlanov.”Pidlasa’s responses: “I met Verlanov last week (the conversation took place 24 October — ed.) on TV channel Ukraina on the program ‘Shuster.’ That was the first time I saw him.” “Conflict of interest: FOP status while also working as a ministry adviser.”Pidlasa’s response: “We consulted with the ministry’s lawyers. And they said there is no conflict of interest. An adviser to the minister is not a civil service position. He has no powers except advising the minister.” “Conflict of interest: a deputy now preparing cash register legislation previously received funds from an NGO whose founding company develops software for cash registers.”Pidlasa’s response: “The founders (of the civic organization — ed.) are indeed two legal firms. But law firms do not develop software, that’s nonsense. Okay, maybe some firm with a similar name develops software... But public information shows the State Tax Service is developing an add‑on for POS software (registers of settlement operations, or cash registers — ed.) that will be provided to all for free. The STS works with eight firms. And among them is not even ‘EKVO.’ So — that is an absolute fake.”Did an NGO backed by the country’s richest law firms, the chief tax official and a deputy head of Poroshenko’s Presidential Administration pay Pidlasa?Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty collected from open sources information about Roksolana Pidlasa, including business connections and acquaintances that critics claim are conflicts of interest. Roksolana Pidlasa has for several years participated in implementing economic reforms in Ukraine as an expert. Thus, current head of the State Customs Service Maksym Nefyodov, one of the main authors of the e‑procurement system ProZorro, says the system took off thanks to the efforts of many people, including Roksolana Pidlasa. He posted a group photo of all the “parents” of ProZorro on social media where Roksolana Pidlasa stands to his right.Her main specialization is “activities in the field of law.” However additional specializations listed include software creation, computer programming and provision of other information services. Whether this refers specifically to cash register programs is not yet known.In fact, there are three companies with that name in Ukraine. The second — the Law Association “Law Firm EKVO” — has the same address and the same founders as the first.But Boryslav Bereza and other critics point to her links with a completely different company — LLC NPP “EKVO,” registered in Kharkiv, with different ultimate owners. Its main activity is software development. In particular, it developed programs for Kharkiv customers, for example for KNTEU named after Kuznets.Yet in reality this namesake company has no apparent links with the NGO that paid for Pidlasa’s FOP services.LLC “EKVO” and the law firm “Saenko Kharenko” are among the most successful law firms in Ukraine: in particular, they are among the ten largest taxpayers in the legal sector, according to State Fiscal Service data for recent years. One of the founders of LLC “EKVO” is Anna Babych. A Nashi Hroshi investigation found she is the common‑law wife of Oleksiy Filatov, who since July 2014 has served as deputy head of the Administration of the fifth president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko.An investigation by Bihus.Info showed Filatov did not declare his common‑law wife in his asset declaration, while the company meanwhile worked successfully with state agencies and companies including the Antimonopoly Committee and NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine.
Anna Babych is a subject of an NABU investigation into illegal enrichment. The law firm “Saenko Kharenko” is connected to another official: the chairman of the newly formed State Tax Service Serhiy Verlanov was one of the partners of ‘Saenko Kharenko’ in 2015-2018 years. Verlanov’s official biography shows that simultaneously he chaired the Legal Policy Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine in 2015-2017 years. In 2015 year Roksolana Pidlasa worked there at the same time as him. She told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty that she was not acquainted with Verlanov then. Now, by circumstance, both Roksolana Pidlasa and Serhiy Verlanov deal with tax policy — the former in the legislative and the latter in the executive branch. As a people’s deputy Roksolana Pidlasa has only two assistants. One of them, Alina Kupriyanchyk, previously worked as an assistant to MP Olena Sotnyk.
Polygraph, “bribes of 30 thousand dollars” and what this has to do with Yatsenko
Accusations of bias and conflict of interest against Roksolana Pidlasa come amid a scandal over some members of the tax committee refusing to support a bill that would eliminate corrupt schemes in property valuation.
On 22 October the head of the parliamentary Financial and Tax Committee Danylo Hetmantsev reported that representatives of the presidential faction did not support bringing the draft law (2047-D) to a vote, which proposed introducing a transparent system of access to the Unified Real Estate Register and abolishing the monopoly of four intermediary platforms. Servant of the People deputies cast only 5 votes out of 11 possible: “The other faction members voted against or abstained. I consider this a mistake that is hard to explain.”
On 23 October the Specialized Anti‑Corruption Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine opened a criminal proceeding on receiving undue benefit by members of parliament.
According to media reports, 11 representatives of the Servant of the People faction — members of the parliamentary committee on finance, tax and customs policy — allegedly received 30 thousand US dollars in undue benefit for voting against the bill to eliminate corruption schemes in property valuation at the committee meeting.
At the committee meeting the “anti‑scheme” bill was supported by: Danylo Hetmantsev, Maryan Zablotsky, Oleh Ustenko, Oleksandr Sova, Oleksandr Kovalchuk (all from Servant of the People), Halyna Vasylchenko and Yaroslav Zhelezniak (both from Holos). Roksolana Pidlasa, who represents the parliament’s economic committee, took part in drafting this bill. But she names Hetmantsev as its main ideologue.
Those who did not support the bill: Oleksii Kovalev, Oleksandr Dubinsky, Oleh Marusiak, Anastasiia Liashenko (all from Servant of the People), as well as independent Ihor Palytsia and Nina Yuzhanina (from European Solidarity).
Abstained, did not vote or did not attend the meeting — Oleksii Leonov, Yuliia Didenko, Olha Vasylevska‑Smaguluk, Anna Kolesnyk, Oleh Voronko, Andrii Kholodov, Ella Repina, Iryna Alakhverdieva, Daria Volodina, Viktoriia Kinzburzka and Yevhen Petrunyak (all from Servant of the People), Yurii Solod, Taras Kozak and Ihor Abramovych (OPZZh), Olha Belkova and Andrii Nikolayenko (Batkivshchyna), as well as independents Oleksandr Hereha, Oleh Kulinich and Robert Horvat.
All members of the Verkhovna Rada committee on finance, tax and customs policy must undergo a polygraph test, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky declared on Facebook after this incident.
He said an honest and impartial investigation should remove all questions and provide answers “no matter how bitter they may be.”
“If suspicions are confirmed, we will say goodbye to such deputies,” Zelensky promised.
Holos faction deputy and first deputy chairman of the parliamentary committee on finance, tax and customs policy Yaroslav Zhelezniak denies that representatives of deputy Anton Yatsenko could have offered money for the “right” committee vote on bill 2047-D to all members of the committee rather than only allegedly to ‘servants.’ He said this in a comment to the new Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty project “Newsroom.”
“That is, at minimum, illogical and impossible. Neither I nor my colleague (Halyna Vasylchenko — ed.) were approached with such offers, but if we learned of such facts, if anyone approached us, we would have made a big deal out of it and created a scandal,” Zhelezniak stressed.
He does, however, suggest that Anton Yatsenko could have had an interest in the committee’s vote on this bill, but according to Zhelezniak Yatsenko did not come to the committee in person.
“Perhaps he worked by other methods,” the Holos deputy supposes.
After the failed vote on 18 October, committee members, he says, immediately decided to refine bill 2047-D.
According to him, the document envisages eliminating the so‑called “valuation platforms,” which have the additional function of property valuation.
He says the existing “platforms” have nothing except a “corrupt component.”
European Solidarity faction deputy and member of the parliamentary committee on finance, tax and customs policy Nina Yuzhanina doubts that Anton Yatsenko bribed members of the committee, but does not rule out his other influence on deputies. She said this in a comment to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
“I don’t want to comment on that part because it seems to me that this (offering money) could definitely not have happened. But there is probably no smoke without fire: not regarding money, but in another part,” Yuzhanina said.
She also said she does not understand why the committee’s vote on bill 2047-D (on eliminating the “platforms”) went beyond the committee and provoked a corruption scandal.
“It seems it was done by someone thoughtless or to harm a colleague. I don’t know the motives, but that’s clearly an unhealthy person. It seems to me this whole problem was created by some individual who cynically slandered colleagues. I don’t want to defend anyone, but if someone was accused without seeing or knowing exactly, that’s simply incorrect,” Nina Yuzhanina believes.
She says she proposed during the controversial vote “to definitely hear the government’s point of view” regarding the “valuation platforms.”
The case of accusations against deputy Roksolana Pidlasa and other ideologues of bill 2047-D to eliminate the schemes is directly tied to beneficiaries of those schemes, some experts say. In particular, Vitalii Shabunin, head of the Anti‑Corruption Center, wrote about this on social media.
“The scheme pulls one million hryvnias a day out of Ukrainians. For the time ‘given’ to him by the Servants, Tosha (deputy Anton Yatsenko — ed.) fattened up by more than a million dollars. So he can buy ‘servants’ even monthly. He even has money for a campaign against the bill’s authors 2047. By smearing Roksolana Pidlasa, Dubinsky messed up again, mixing up campaigns. Somebody please finally tell him about the EDRPOU code,” Shabunin wrote on Facebook.
I have worked as a journalist at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty since 2008. I was born in 1979 in the city of Melitopol, Zaporizhzhia region. I graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of Zaporizhzhia National University. As a journalist I am most interested in economic, environmental and social topics. In my free time I enjoy gardening and mountaineering. [email protected]
9news.livejournal.com
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "«Підласа-гейт»: «конфликт интересов», бизнес-связи и борьба с «площадками Яценко»". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: ANTIKOR.
