Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Finances

The norm that was already canceled for EU accession was stolen again into a "stealth" bill — along with $8 billion from the IMF as collateral

A bill on parcel taxation, upon which the unblocking of IMF financing of over $8 billion depends, includes the cancellation of lifetime PEP status — a provision that Parliament has already reinstated as a condition for EU accession negotiations.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 6, 2026 · 3 min read

The norm that was already canceled for EU accession was stolen again into a "stealth" bill — along with $8 billion from the IMF as collateral
Фото: Верховна Рада

People's Deputy Olha Vasylevska-Smagluk revealed a fact not contained in the bill's title: into Motovylovets' draft law No. 15112-1 on taxation of international parcels, a provision was inserted limiting the status of PEP for national public figures — from lifetime to three years after the end of their term of office.

What is lifetime PEP and why has this been an issue before

The status of Politically Exposed Person (PEP) obliges banks and financial institutions to conduct enhanced financial monitoring of officials, their relatives, and business partners. The lifetime nature of the status — that is, without time limits after leaving office — corresponds to FATF recommendations and EU anti-corruption directives.

In 2023, the Council already traveled this path in the opposite direction: first, MPs voted to abolish lifetime status, and then — under pressure from the IMF and as a final condition for starting negotiations on EU membership — adopted law No. 9296-d, which restored it. Then, as noted by Livo bereg, the IMF demanded strengthening control over PEP in the spring as a structural benchmark for the new program, and MPs needed almost half a year to vote on the revised version.

The same provision, a new carrier bill

Now the same provision is returning — but no longer as a separate draft law, but as an attachment to a technical document on customs taxation. This is a classic legislative technique of "rider": a controversial change is attached to a needed draft law that has a chance of being voted on.

«The Motovylovets bill on parcel taxation 15112-1 was inserted with a provision limiting the status of national public figures subject to lifetime financial monitoring to three years after the date their term of office ends».

Olha Vasylevska-Smagluk, People's Deputy of Ukraine

The stakes are not abstract. According to Bloomberg, the IMF requires the parcel taxation bill as a condition for unlocking funding of over $8 billion. That is, a document on which the receipt of external funds depends now contains a provision that contradicts the anti-corruption standards of those same partners.

Whose dissatisfaction stands behind this provision

As Forbes reported, the desire to avoid enhanced control is supported by a significant number of MPs — this is stated by four deputies from the financial and anti-corruption committees. Lifetime PEP status means that a former official, even a decade after leaving office, remains under banking monitoring — and cannot inconspicuously put assets acquired during service into circulation.

  • Within 12 months of dismissal, banks are obligated to review a PEP's risk profile — this is already in current law.
  • If a person explains the source of funds and has no offshore accounts, the bank can service them as a regular client.
  • But canceling the status itself after three years is different: removing the monitoring obligation altogether.

Olena Shcherban, representative of the Anti-Corruption Center, explained back in 2023: after three years, former officials will be able to freely use assets acquired through corruption, and any limits on PEP do not correspond to FATF recommendations and EU directives.

Bloomberg recorded that Ukraine is already approaching the IMF with a request to soften PEP rules — and the fund «is demonstrating greater flexibility». If the IMF agrees to relax requirements to preserve the financing program, this will become a precedent: an anti-corruption requirement has been removed not through reform, but through the creditor's financial dependence on the debtor.

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