The "business fragmentation" schemes through the registration of employees as individual entrepreneurs (FOPs) are actively used in the trade of equipment in Ukraine and may become the object of increased control by the state. This was stated by lawyer, CEO of the law firm "Bolinsky and Team" Svyatoslav Bolinsky in an exclusive comment to UNN.
Details
We often encounter information that law enforcement and tax authorities incriminate the activities of importers or suppliers of equipment as having signs of business fragmentation. Of course, a business can plan the tax burden, but this is already an area of increased attention
As an example, the expert recalled the recent tax audits of the Yabko network, which came under the scrutiny of regulatory authorities precisely for using similar schemes.
In simple terms, the "gray" market uses "business fragmentation" schemes through the registration of employees as FOPs in order to reduce the tax burden and avoid paying social contributions. Formally, we are talking about cooperation with independent contractors, but in fact, employees perform the same duties as full-time employees. This allows companies to save on taxes and hide real income.
According to the lawyer, there is no single criterion by which one can clearly determine the unfair use of the scheme with FOPs - it is necessary to evaluate at least 5-6 features in aggregate. Each of them requires in-depth analysis, because none of them is decisive separately.
We have identified about 20 signs that may indicate the use of illegal schemes. For example, regular payments of fixed amounts, typical contracts for the provision of "consultation" that do not have specific content, or situations where the FOP simultaneously receives a salary as a full-time employee of the same company, etc.
Among other signs of possible use of "salary" FOPs, Svyatoslav Bolinsky noted regular monthly transfers of the same amounts (for example, 300 thousand hryvnias), which do not correspond to the real content of service contracts, in particular consultations in the field of commerce. Often such services are provided "orally" or have almost no documentary evidence. Another telling point is when a person is simultaneously an FOP and receives a salary as a full-time employee of the same enterprise, performing typical functions of hired personnel.
Another case, according to the expert, is when, after signals from financial monitoring, investigative bodies can deepen the inspection, paying attention to inconsistencies. For example, the FOP declares millions of incomes, but lives in an old house without repairs or is engaged in cargo transportation without the appropriate category of driver's license. Such facts may indicate fictitious activities that are not recorded by banks or tax authorities, but can be established by investigators.
Bolinsky predicts that control over such schemes by the State Tax Service, NABU and banks will only intensify.
There is a trend of working out control scripts. If you do not develop effective tools, there is a risk of either driving business into the shadows, or stimulating it to legalization. But this will definitely affect the end consumer
Svyatoslav Bolinsky refrained from a specific assessment of losses for the budget, but noted that the scale of use of schemes with "salary" FOPs is quite significant. In his opinion, the significant difference between the national level of tax burden on business (about 18%) and the rate for FOPs on the simplified system (5%) creates the preconditions for abuse. He also emphasizes the importance of finding a balance between the fiscal interests of the state and the real conditions in which business is forced to operate today.
Today we need a balance between the interests of the state and business, which is forced to survive in difficult conditions. I am surprised that there is still no effective state program. I remember that in the early 2000s, a program was developed to bring salaries out of the shadows - with a preferential period for adaptation. It was intended to give people the opportunity to work legally and stably. It was projected for years to come. But for some reason, the program was never implemented. Why - it's hard to say
Recall
By saving a few hundred hryvnias when buying equipment from unverified sources, you risk much more - in particular, the security of your data. The threat from "gray" imports has already caused an international reaction, and in Ukraine, experts emphasize that this issue concerns not only the comfort of the user, but also national security. Uncertified devices may contain vulnerabilities that threaten data privacy, system stability, and network security. The growth in gray imports also negatively affects the economy, distorts competition and complicates control over compliance with quality standards.
Often, choosing equipment from "gray" imports, users do not even suspect that they may become victims of fraud. The devices look familiar and work, at first glance, normally, but may contain malicious programs or hidden vulnerabilities. For example, in 2023, researchers discovered that more than a million Android-based devices – such as TV boxes, tablets and automotive systems – were infected with malware that allowed attackers to use these devices for fraudulent activities without the knowledge of the owners.