Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Finances

Cashless payments for first‑group sole proprietors postponed: state admits not everyone will be ready by 2026

Minister Sobolev, in an interview with LIGA.net, explained that three years of preparation have not resolved problems with equipment availability and costs. The Cabinet of Ministers has postponed the requirement until the end of martial law — what this gives entrepreneurs and what risks remain.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

December 31, 2025 · 2 min read

Cashless payments for first‑group sole proprietors postponed: state admits not everyone will be ready by 2026

In brief

On December 29 the Cabinet of Ministers approved a postponement of the mandatory use of RRO/PRRO for FOPs — payers of the single tax in group 1, vending‑machine sellers, mobile traders and those who sell produce they have grown. This rule was supposed to come into force on January 1, 2026 under Cabinet Resolution No. 894 of July 29, 2022, but it was deferred until the end of martial law.

"The state gave three years to prepare for this decision, but we hear that some entrepreneurs are still not ready, in particular because of the cost of terminals"

— Oleksii Sobolev, Minister of Economy, Environment and Agriculture (interview with LIGA.net)

Why the decision was made

The reason is not bureaucracy, but economics and security. Entrepreneurs with minimal levels of activity are already feeling pressure from the war: logistics are more expensive, incomes are unstable, and the cost of POS terminals and their maintenance creates an additional financial burden. These were the arguments the minister cited in talks with journalists.

"The postponement will, in particular, help entrepreneurs who have minimal levels of activity... avoid additional financial and administrative burden during the period of martial law"

— Oleksii Sobolev, Minister of Economy, Environment and Agriculture (interview with LIGA.net)

What this means in practice

There is no need to immediately buy a POS terminal. The law does not require installing a POS device specifically: an FOP can accept cashless payments via payment apps, transfers to the FOP's IBAN account, or QR codes (through a bank or independently). The main requirement is to have an open FOP account and accept payments to it; instructions on QR payments are available on the National Bank's website.

Who this matters to

This decision is a respite for the smallest businesses that operate solo and are not allowed to hire. But the postponement does not solve the systemic problem of digital infrastructure and access to affordable payment instruments, which could slow the digital transformation of small business after the war.

What FOPs and customers should do right now

FOPs: check that you have an open account for receiving payments; review the QR options from your bank; compare banks' offers for free or low‑cost payment acceptance tools. Customers: use cashless methods where convenient — it simplifies recordkeeping and makes the payer more protected.

Consequences and risks

The postponement reduces the burden now, but leaves questions open: will the state support the availability of payment solutions in the regions, will subsidies for equipment appear, and how will control over the shadow economy change after martial law ends. Analysts and business representatives point to the need for a public‑private dialogue to create simple and inexpensive payment acceptance mechanisms.

Conclusion

The postponement is a pragmatic step in wartime that protects the most vulnerable entrepreneurs. But it also underscores that digital accessibility of payments is not only a regulatory issue, but an investment in infrastructure. Whether the state will turn the postponement into a plan for support and access to electronic payment services will determine how quickly small businesses adapt after the war.

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