Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

ARMA cancels auction for 460 hectares of Borzhava — risk of assets being returned and appeal to NABU

Confiscated 460 hectares on the Borzhava polonyna will remain under state administration for now: ARMA found signs that bidders were connected, referred the case to NABU and is preparing a repeat auction. Why this matters for state property and confidence in the asset-recovery system — a brief analysis.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

February 9, 2026 · 2 min read

ARMA cancels auction for 460 hectares of Borzhava — risk of assets being returned and appeal to NABU

What happened

The National Agency for the Search and Management of Assets (ARMA) annulled the results of the auction for the sale of 460 hectares on the Borzhava polonyna (Zakarpattia Oblast). The auction took place on 8 January 2026; the decision was published on the agency’s website.

“Signs of relatedness were detected, which, by international asset recovery standards, could create a risk of the property effectively returning under the control of the former owners.”

— ARMA, statement on the agency’s website

Why it matters

A post-publication review of participants revealed risks that could nullify the purpose of the confiscation — returning the property to state ownership. This is not only a matter of legal technicalities: it is about preventing corrupt networks from regaining control over assets that should serve the state.

The expected value in ARMA’s drafts exceeded 1 billion UAH, while the final bid amounted to only 89.57 million UAH — a discrepancy that heightens suspicions about the transparency of the auction.

Who this concerns

Buyers were listed as Andriy Vingranovskyi (the husband of former MP Yuliya Lyovochkina, sister of MP Serhii Lyovochkin) and Ihor Vlasiuk — a co-founder of a company whose ultimate beneficiaries are named as Vingranovskyi and Renata Huseynova (the common‑law wife of the former head of the State Investment Project, Vladyslav Kaskiv). The lands were placed under ARMA’s management by the verdict of the High Anti‑Corruption Court dated 5 July 2024.

“With the support of MP Lyovochkin, Kaskiv is hatching plans to build an all‑season resort ‘Borzhava,’ the core of which was supposed to be these 460 hectares.”

— Bihus.Info

What will happen next

ARMA has referred the matter to the National Anti‑Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti‑Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) for procedural evaluation. After their conclusions, the agency will carry out a new appraisal and organize a repeat auction.

Experts stress that this is a test for the asset recovery system — whether we can not only confiscate, but also retain and effectively manage the property. A transparent repeat auction and public justification of decisions are key to restoring trust and securing real economic benefits for communities.

Conclusion

The cancellation of the auction is not the end of the matter, but an opportunity to correct the process. The upcoming decisions by NABU, SAP and ARMA will determine whether declarations about returning assets translate into real benefits for the state, rather than a mechanism for restoring old corrupt schemes.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026