Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

"The state will no longer come without warning: what the new law on business inspections changes"

The Verkhovna Rada has passed a law that replaces a 15-year "come and fine" model with voluntary audits that give businesses a chance to correct violations before inspection. However, a key question remains unanswered: the law defers to subordinate regulations the crucial issue of who will accredit independent auditors and how the accreditation process will work.

Oleg Bazylewicz

By Oleg Bazylewicz

April 8, 2026 · 2 min read

"The state will no longer come without warning: what the new law on business inspections changes"
Фото: depositphotos.com

On April 8, the Verkhovna Rada adopted Bill No. 14030 in second reading with 238 votes — a new law on the basic principles of state supervision (control). It replaces a document that had been in effect for over 15 years and which business had long called an instrument of pressure rather than regulation.

What changes in practice

The central innovation is voluntary audit: a business can itself initiate an inspection of its activities before controllers arrive. If the audit is successful and violations are eliminated, a planned inspection either is not conducted or is postponed. For businesses with low risk, the interval between inspections increases to five years. According to the Ministry of Economy's calculations, the total number of planned inspections should be reduced by 30%, and the time for business to respond to remarks should be cut in half.

Audits can be conducted either by specialists of the state supervision body itself, or by independent accredited organizations — private structures authorized in the respective field. This opens a new market for services, but also raises a new question: who will control the quality of such auditors and whether "independent audit" will become a paid indulgence.

Context: why now

The law is part of the Ukraine Facility package — conditions that Ukraine undertook to meet in exchange for financing from the EU. In parallel, in July 2025, the National Security and Defense Council through Presidential Decree No. 538/2025 introduced a moratorium on "unfounded inspections," which lawyers characterized as largely declarative: without changes to basic legislation, it did not create clear protection mechanisms. Law No. 14030 is intended to fill precisely this gap.

"Inspections must cease to be an instrument of pressure on business and become an instrument of assistance and development"

Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, explanatory materials for No. 14030

What remains unanswered

The law introduces mandatory audio and video recording of all inspections — this is a concrete anti-corruption mechanism. Equally concrete is the provision that stopping production or product sales can only be done by a controller through court in expedited proceedings, not by their own decision on the spot — something business has been demanding for years.

At the same time, the risk-oriented model works only insofar as the business is honestly classified by risk category. The government approved the criteria for determining risks back in September 2025, but the mechanism for appealing an assigned category is outlined in the law only in general terms.

Testing the real effectiveness of the reform will not occur on the day the law is signed, but when the first registry of accredited auditors appears and it becomes clear whether small businesses can afford their services — or whether voluntary audit remains a privilege of large companies.

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