The scandal surrounding the 2025 report of the Bureau of Economic Security (BES), during which the leadership of the law enforcement agency was accused of using unreliable data on compensation for damages to the state, requires a thorough internal investigation and disciplinary action against the responsible officials. This opinion was expressed by retired judge Oleksandr Sytnykov in an exclusive comment to UNN.
Scandal surrounding the BES report
During the hearing of the BES report on the results of work for 2025, the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Finance, Tax, and Customs Policy, Danylo Hetmantsev, publicly questioned the reliability of the data provided in the document.
According to him, representatives of the Bureau claimed compensation to the state of 3.8 billion UAH in damages based on the results of work in 2025. At the same time, an analysis of documents conducted by committee members showed that about 2.8-2.9 billion UAH of this amount consisted of revenues from 2022–2024.
You won't let me lie, I am one of the first on my channel to publicly express sincere gratitude to the BES if something positive happens. But if you publish and announce unreliable data, you discredit yourself, us, and our entire cause. This cannot be. Look, you stated in the report that based on the results of 2025, damages to the state were compensated in cash—you just confirmed this—in the amount of 3.8 billion hryvnias. Our analysis of the information you provided to us indicates that 2.8-2.9 billion hryvnias are not from 2025 at all. This is from 2022 to 2024. Why are you writing unreliable data in the BES report?
Hetmantsev noted that if only actual revenues for 2025 to the relevant budget accounts are considered, the compensation amount is only about 47 million UAH, not 3.8 billion UAH as the BES tried to claim.
Lies in reporting must be investigated
According to retired judge Oleksandr Sytnykov, it is first necessary to establish who exactly formed the relevant indicators and why data that raised questions from the parliamentary committee was included in the report.
There should be an appeal to the BES to conduct an internal investigation into who provided such data and why. That is, first there should be an internal investigation, and then disciplinary responsibility
According to him, any person has the right to contact the Bureau of Economic Security with a request to conduct such a check, and the law enforcement agency is obliged to respond to such an appeal.
The BES is a law enforcement agency. Any person can apply for an internal investigation, and they are simply obliged to react
Sytnykov noted that manipulating data in BES reporting is misleading not only to the relevant parliamentary committee but also to society, as this is public information that must correspond to reality.
At the same time, the President of the All-Ukrainian Association of Retired Judges, Denys Neviadomskyi, believes that the consequences for the leadership of the Bureau of Economic Security could be much more serious than disciplinary responsibility. This concerns possible official misconduct and even criminal prosecution of officials.
These are official crimes. In addition to general articles for official forgery (Art. 366 of the CCU) and abuse of power (Art. 364 of the CCU), special norms apply in this case: obstructing the activities of people's deputies and committees (Art. 351 of the CCU) – providing deliberately false information upon request or during reporting to a committee of the Verkhovna Rada is punishable by a fine, arrest, or restriction of liberty for a term of up to three years
Crisis of confidence in the BES
The scandal over the reliability of reporting has become another episode in a series of complaints against the work of the Bureau of Economic Security. Recently, the BES has been in the spotlight due to corruption scandals, as well as criticism regarding attempts to pressure the aviation business, which threatens the existence of the industry as a whole.
Crisis of confidence in the Bureau
Recently, complaints about the work of the Bureau of Economic Security have significantly intensified, in particular due to the exposure of BES employees in corruption, criticism from the business community regarding the use of criminal proceedings as a tool of pressure, and discussions about the need to review cases investigated by the bureau.
According to Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, in two separate criminal proceedings, a senior detective of the BES territorial department in the Kyiv region and an analyst of the Bureau's central office were exposed for using their official position to obtain illegal benefits.
One, according to the investigation, demanded 15 thousand dollars from a man who had previously appeared in a case regarding the manufacture and sale of counterfeit money, in exchange for not prosecuting him again. The other promised a representative of an enterprise to facilitate the issuance of a license for fuel storage through his connections in the tax service for 2 thousand dollars.
A system that is supposed to protect the state's economy cannot be a place for those who try to use their position for personal enrichment
People's deputies interviewed by UNN stated the need for an audit of criminal proceedings investigated by the BES for their potential "contractual" nature. They also point to the need for a reboot and cleansing of the law enforcement agency.
A series of criminal proceedings against air carriers could become an indicative case for checking the legality of criminal proceedings investigated by the Bureau of Economic Security. As UNN reported, the BES is investigating a number of cases regarding at least five Ukrainian airlines, including UIA, "Constanta Airline", "Urga", "H3OPERATIONS", and "Skyline". These air carriers lease aircraft abroad from non-resident companies of Ukraine. The Bureau is convinced that the airlines should pay royalties in Ukraine, i.e., a fee charged for the use of intellectual property. At the same time, the fact that transport is not intellectual property is completely ignored, and Conventions on the avoidance of double taxation are in force between Ukraine and a number of countries. According to these agreements, Ukrainian companies pay taxes specifically for leasing in the countries where the leasing companies are residents.
It is on this legal construction, unsupported by legislation, that criminal proceedings for tax evasion are based. However, the problem is that such a position contradicts both international practice and court decisions that have already been established in Ukraine.
Ukrainian courts have repeatedly considered similar disputes regarding the rental and leasing of vehicles from non-residents and have sided with business, indicating that vehicle leasing is not a royalty.
This position is shared by specialized lawyers, tax experts, and specialists in the field of international taxation interviewed by UNN. They emphasize that international conventions on the avoidance of double taxation take precedence over internal interpretations of tax authorities, and leasing payments for transport cannot be equated to royalties.
That is why criminal proceedings against airlines increasingly resemble not a fight against economic crimes, but an attempt to create an artificial tax dispute through criminal prosecution mechanisms.