Ukraine decided to “regulate” the cryptocurrency market. Billions of dollars worth of capital turnover is at stake. How this next epic of the “multi-armed regulatory state Shiva” will end is an intrigue.

So, let’s first analyze how “Ivan Ivanovich and Ivan Nikiforovich quarreled,” or why the NBU and the Verkhovna Rada cannot divide the “digital millions”.

Let's start with the innovations of parliament. The Verkhovna Rada adopted in the first reading bill No. 102325-d “On amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine and some other legislative acts of Ukraine to regulate the turnover of virtual assets in Ukraine”. This draft law defines the specifics of taxation of transactions with virtual assets.

[see_also ids\u003d"

The purpose of the bill is obvious - to register and tax. All transactions with digital assets become subject to personal income tax (PIT) at a rate of 18% and military duty at a rate of 5%. That is, the total indicator of the fiscal burden is the traditional 23% (if compared, for example, with deposits; Personal income tax does not apply to transactions with government bonds).

The profit from transactions with virtual assets is traditionally defined as the difference between the proceeds from the sale and the costs of acquiring such virtual assets during the year.. In addition, in the event of a loss, a negative result is transferred to the calculation formula during subsequent tax periods until such a minus is fully repaid.

Here we immediately see another ghost of fiscal “Potemkin villages”, of which there are many in the Tax Code novelties.

Let's start with the fact that in the case of virtual assets there is no tax agent. If an individual in Ukraine places a deposit in a bank, then it is the financial institution that collects such tax and transfers it to the state. The same applies to transactions with securities - here a similar function of a tax agent is performed by a securities dealer.

Of course, cryptocurrency exchanges will not perform the function of a tax agent.

[see_also ids\u003d"

Therefore, the question arises: how to regulate? So far the state cannot bring order even with the taxation of residential real estate of individuals. All the information about the area of \u200b\u200bapartments seems to be there, the purchase and sale agreements themselves are notarized, but there is still a huge amount of real estate that has not yet been included in electronic registers.

And “catching” profits from transactions with virtual assets is like driving a sparrow into a field on your knees.

On occasion, we note that to conduct transactions with virtual assets, a professional intermediary in the form of a securities trader is not always needed, which is why there is no such “tax watchman”.

And the option to carry forward losses to the next year makes the process of taxation of transactions with crypto even brighter, because the owner of the same bitcoins can at the end of the year, with losses, throw their “coins” into a fake crypto wallet somewhere in Indonesia and at the beginning of the year return these assets back, forming the necessary minus.

Legislators fully understood all of the above comments, which is why innovations were introduced into the law that it is an individual who must keep separate records of transactions with virtual assets, independently declare income and pay taxes.

Otherwise they can catch you if they can. Great threat in war and its inherent risks.

In general, the introduction of such complex, from a taxation point of view, mechanisms as the fiscalization of transactions with virtual assets is a rather dubious undertaking.

It's like shearing a pig - there's a lot of squealing, but not enough wool..

[see_also ids\u003d"

However, easy paths are not for us, and parliament passed this law in the first reading.

Although the basic motivation of the deputies is clear. According to various estimates, Ukrainians have invested a lot in cryptocurrencies, almost $50 billion. , and a significant part - during the war. If we take the effective rate at least at the level of 10%, this is up to $5 billion. tax revenues to the budget.

Perhaps one of the officials dreamed of the laurels of US President Donald Trump, who also decided to “regulate” the digital virtual assets market.

Let us remind you that in the United States the following legislative acts are currently being considered in Congress or have already been adopted:.

Anti-CBDC Act - Fed ban on issuing digital currency;

GENIUS Act - description of the architectonics of the private cryptocurrency market;

CLARITY Act - legalization of the issuance of private money for business and the population.

But Trump’s actions have a slightly different character - this is not regulation, but deregulation, when the state very gently creates new rules of the game. Trump acts harshly only once - when he plans to prohibit the Fed from issuing a digital dollar, or CBDC (a digital, virtual form of a national fiat currency that is issued not by a private company, but by a central bank).

[see_also ids\u003d"

That is, Trump acts harshly in relation to the quasi-state monetary authority, limiting its influence on the virtual asset market, and not in relation to market players.

But let's get back to our stuff.

Most likely, the goal of legislators is different. They understand perfectly well that they won’t be able to catch anyone for non-payment of “virtual income” (except on a targeted basis, by order).

On the other hand, this law creates a mechanism for legalizing our “crypto-corruption” at a rate of 23%. Officials have been making a lot of jokes in crypto, so 23% are not sorry, because otherwise questions will arise regarding the legalization of these funds abroad.

In parallel with the parliament, the head of the NBU, Andrei Pyshny, also made a statement, who in the context of virtual assets has not yet decided whether he is with the conventionally “beautiful” or the “smart”.

What is meant by this chimerical dichotomy

The NBU, as the central bank and monetary authority of the country, must make only one conceptual decision: it is in favor of issuing digital hryvnia, that is, it belongs to that part of the world that relies on CBDC; or cedes this right of emission “birthright” in favor of private companies that receive the right to issue their own digital money.

[see_also ids\u003d"

The United States, as we have seen, has relied on CBDC, and the countries of the Global South are gradually leaning towards CBDC, although they do not prohibit private digital money (except for China, where ICO mechanisms, that is, the issuance of private project cryptocurrencies, are now prohibited).

Moreover, Pyshny’s distant “evolutionary ancestor” in the position of head of the NBU, Yakov Smoliy, actively advocated the issue of digital hryvnia and even organized significant technical advancement of the regulator in this direction.

But Pyshny decided not to go into the empyrean realm of such worldview topics as the CBDC dilemma, and reduced everything to a simple conditional: “Let them buy, as long as they don’t pay for potatoes in bitcoins” (this, of course, is not the author’s quote, but an allusion to it).

On the one hand, Andrey Pyshny admitted a significant volume of transactions: in the first half of 2025, the turnover of companies in the field of virtual assets in Ukraine amounted to about $7 billion.

On the other hand, the head of the National Bank added: “So far, the adopted document is not perfect, but we are determined to finalize it for the second reading together with the relevant committee of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, international partners, and market participants.”.

The red lines for the NBU in the context of this bill are the inadmissibility of using virtual assets as a means of payment for goods and services on the territory of Ukraine: “It is important that virtual assets do not become a tool for circumventing NBU restrictions, and their legalization should not fuel the shadow sector. The scope of tasks is large - but we are already working on them"

[see_also ids\u003d"

I don’t know what kind of “scope” there is, but there is bad news for Andrei Pyshny: virtual assets are ALREADY used to bypass currency restrictions of the National Bank and are ALREADY exchanged for other currency values, in particular the dollar. Actually, the possibility of these options explains the enormous popularity of cryptocurrencies in Ukraine.

Here you can even determine some dependence: the more the NBU squeezes the hryvnia in a regulatory vice, the more Ukrainians “go” into crypto.

Although the regulator can also be understood. Legalization of cryptocurrencies as a means of payment means the creation of an additional monetary aggregate and an expansion of the quasi-monetary supply by about $50 billion. equivalent. And this monetary aggregate will not be regulated by the NBU, with corresponding inflationary consequences. In simple words, if we now pour the equivalent of $50 billion into the money market. quasi-money, for price stability it will be a tsunami effect.

At the same time, there are also purely utilitarian goals - Pyshny wants to know who will personally regulate this market in Ukraine: the NBU or the National Commission for Securities and Stock Market (NCSM)?

Based on the logic of regulation of Ukrainian financial markets in recent years, only one regulator survives in our country. The State Financial Services Commission was liquidated, the market for insurance services and investment insurance has already been “divided” between the NBU and the National Securities and Stock Market Commission.

The National Securities and Stock Market Commission is now engaged in an exciting task - it regulates something that does not exist, that is, the stock market, which 90% consists of transactions with government securities, where there is nothing special to regulate.

[see_also ids\u003d"

In fact, now there is only one real regulator of the financial market - the NBU, and it is unlikely to allow the rule that the regulator of the virtual assets market is determined by the Cabinet of Ministers to be passed through law.

Meanwhile, Ukraine is increasingly immersed in the world of cryptocurrencies, and the lack of government regulation (in parallel with extremely high regulatory pressure in other segments of the financial market) is undoubtedly a significant driver here.

In particular, according to the global ranking of the crypto-asset market by Chainalysis, Ukraine ranks sixth in the world (in terms of the volume of cryptocurrency transactions; using DeFi, that is, decentralized services; retail user activity).

Top ten Chainalysis rating:.

India.

Nigeria.

Indonesia.

USA.

Vietnam.

Ukraine.

RF.

Philippines.

Pakistan.

Brazil.

It is significant that there are almost no developed Western countries, especially European ones, in the top 10. But there are poor countries, economies with a high level of labor migration abroad, countries with significant restrictions and sanctioned. The only exception here is the USA.

[see_also ids\u003d"

In Ukraine, cryptocurrencies have become a tool for the functioning of the shadow economy, which is increasingly moving from the dollar and cash hryvnia to cryptocurrencies. Ukrainians use crypto to bypass NBU transaction restrictions on the amount of transfers, in particular abroad. This also applies to financial monitoring blocks.

Also, the shine of the “Ukrainian crypt” is a reflection of our corruption. Almost all corruption transactions have shifted to the sphere of virtual assets.

Our crypto market is based on five pillars:.

1) corruption;

2) currency restrictions and transaction restrictions (financial monitoring);

3) shadow economy;

4) risks of war;

5) desire for quick passive income.

Under these conditions, the position of officials would be more logical: “The one who hinders us will help us.”.

Taxing cryptocurrencies in the current conditions is tantamount to taxing the “input” of a potential investment flow into the national economy.

Foreign direct investment, for obvious reasons, has already decreased to 0.5% of GDP. This is critically not enough.

[see_also ids\u003d"

Therefore, Ukraine needs to rely on cryptocurrencies as a tool for crowdfunding, that is, investing in the “national economy”, by creating an ICO mechanism - the private issue of project cryptocurrencies for the actual production of goods and services.

For example, a project for the production of military uniforms issues its own token called “Odnostrіy”, and these coins can be purchased through the ICO mechanism, including for other virtual instruments.

That is, it is necessary to tokenize all major economic projects in Ukraine, allow them to form a puzzle of project “icons” on the smartphone screens of ordinary Ukrainians for investing cryptocurrencies “in one click”.

This will make it possible to attract tens of billions of dollars of investment in the form of virtual assets into the structural restructuring of the national economy during the war..

A unique system of Tokenized Private Investments (TFI) along with private foreign investments (PFIs) and capital investments (CIs).

But for this, the ruling class needs to change the consciousness and tastes for eating the dish “roasted, gutted, plucked goose, hetman style” to “self-renewing economy, cyclical, growing”.

[votes id\u003d"