Lawyer: Acting Deputy Head of the State Tax Service Sokur may have violated legislation in the field of financial control

Yevhen Sokur, acting deputy head of the State Tax Service of Ukraine, allegedly violated financial control legislation by failing to declare information about his live-in girlfriend for years. The official may be held administratively or criminally liable for this. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive commentary to UNN by Dmytro Kasyanenko, attorney at law of Kasyanenko & Partners Law Firm.

Earlier UNN reported that the acting deputy head of the State Tax Service, Yevhen Sokur, had allegedly entered inaccurate data in his 2023 declaration. In particular, he did not indicate in the document the information about his partner. During the investigation into the alleged assassination attempt, Sokur himself told law enforcement officers that since 2016 he had been living with a girl named Alina in an apartment at 6-D Lobanovskoho Avenue. Following a deputy appeal by Nina Yuzhanina, a member of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Finance, Taxation and Customs Policy, the NACP launched an investigation into Yevhen Sokur. Kateryna Butko, head of the NAPC's Public Council, noted that the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption is checking whether Sokur and his live-in girlfriend, Alina, had a common life.

The Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" requires civil servants to declare not only their personal property and income, but also the property and income of their family members, which also includes persons who live together, have a common life and have mutual rights and obligations (Article 1 of the Law). If Yevhen Sokur has been living with his cohabitant since 2016, but did not indicate this information in his declarations, this may be a violation of the financial control legislation,

According to him, the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption's arsenal of tools includes lifestyle monitoring. It is carried out by the NACP to check whether the declared data corresponds to the real state of the declarant's property and income.

In the course of such monitoring, the NACP checks whether the real expenses and lifestyle of the person correspond to what he or she indicated in the declaration. If the monitoring reveals that Sokur failed to declare property or income related to his cohabitant, this may be considered as submitting false information in the declaration,

The lawyer clarified that in case of revealing false data in Sokur's declaration in the amount of 100 to 500 subsistence minimums (about UAH 268,400 - UAH 1,342,000 for 2024), a fine of UAH 17,000 to 42,500 is provided.

If the false information in the declaration relates to the amount of more than 500 subsistence minimums (about UAH 1,342,000), this is subject to criminal liability under Article 366-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - submission of knowingly false information in the declaration. The sanction of this article provides for a fine of UAH 42,500 to 51,000, or restraint of liberty for up to 2 years, or imprisonment for up to 2 years with disqualification to hold certain positions for up to 3 years.

If it is proved that Yevhen Sokur failed to declare information about his cohabitant that, according to the law, should have been included in the declaration, he may face both administrative and criminal liability, depending on the amount of false information,

Recall

Earlier, UNN reported that the assassination attempt on the acting deputy head of the State Tax Service of Ukraine, Yevhen Sokur, raises many questions about its authenticity. It could have been staged to divert attention from the criminal proceedings against Sokur for abuse of office.

This is a criminal proceedingopened on November 4, 2022 under Part 3 of Art. 365 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, on the fact of abuse of office by the acting Deputy Head of the State Tax Service of Ukraine Yevhen Sokur, who on October 26, 2022 issued an order to revoke the license of PJSC Ukrtatnafta for the production of fuel. Such actions of Sokur, according to the investigation , caused serious consequences for the company and the state in the form of the inability to fulfill the mobilization tasks of the Ministry of Defense for the production and supply of petroleum products for the needs of defense and defense capability of the state.