Limited Liability and Bank Secrecy: Who Will Be Affected by the New Rules on Account Disclosure
20 July 12:48
ANALYSIS 
The National Bank of Ukraine intends to change the rules governing the disclosure of banking secrecy. "Komersant Ukrainian" investigated why this is being done and who it will primarily affect.
The vast majority of Ukrainians who use banking services have no reason to worry. However, those who have debts and have been listed in the Unified Register of Debtors do have cause for concern.
On October 23, 2026, a law will take effect that streamlines the enforcement of court decisions and improves the digitization of enforcement proceedings. The deadline by which ministries and other executive authorities must bring their regulations into compliance with this law expires as early as July.
The National Bank has also begun updating its rules on the use and disclosure of bank secrecy. For example, the NBU expects to obtain authorization to request information subject to bank secrecy not only during audits or official supervisory actions.
It is precisely this information that public and private enforcement agencies will have access to. Moreover, this access will be immediate.
Opportunities for Enforcement Agents
Maximum automation of enforcement proceedings and the replacement of a significant portion of manual procedures with electronic interaction between government agencies, banks, financial institutions, and enforcement agents will allow enforcement agents to significantly reduce the time between identifying a debtor’s assets and taking enforcement actions. This is how Zoryana Zachepilo, an attorney with the “Zakhyst” Law Firm, describes the main advantage of the updated enforcement proceedings.
According to her, whereas previously the search for a debtor’s property, for example, was conducted manually via the Ministry of Justice’s website, it will now be automated and significantly faster.
State and private enforcement agents now have additional options as well.
“The law separately regulates the procedure for seizing funds in deposit accounts. Prior to these amendments taking effect, the legislation did not provide a clear mechanism for such seizures. In addition, the law provides for automated interaction between the Automated Enforcement Proceedings System and the securities depository accounting system, which will allow enforcement officers to promptly obtain information about securities accounts, impose freezes, and receive notifications regarding their opening or closing. “In other words, enforcement officers will be able to more quickly identify bank accounts, real and personal property, as well as other assets subject to enforcement,” the expert emphasizes.
The “Zakhyst” Law Firm also draws attention to a new requirement: from now on, statements of claim and other procedural documents must include the details of a party’s bank accounts or information indicating their absence.
“This means that even at the stage of preparing the complaint, we as attorneys must ensure this information is included—it directly affects how quickly the enforcement officer will be able to begin enforcement once the decision becomes final,” explains attorney Zoryana Zachepilo.
Protection for Debtors
Under the new law, it will be easier for enforcement officers to identify debtors’ bank accounts, e-wallets, and various types of movable and immovable property. However, there is also property for which the law strengthens protection guarantees. This refers to the debtor’s primary residence. To seize such property, the debt threshold has been raised from 20 to 50 minimum wages—from 172,940 UAH to 432,350 UAH.
Presumably to emphasize the importance of this change, Andriy Gaychenko, Deputy Minister of Justice for Enforcement Services, cited the following calculations at the time: it could take about 14 years of non-payment to accumulate the specified amount of debt, for example, for utility services.
The authors of the law also addressed other categories of debtors.
“For military personnel during martial law and for one year after its termination, the seizure of their sole residence is generally prohibited—with the exception of mortgages and compensation for damages resulting from a criminal offense. Also, during martial law, seizures of debtors’ funds are lifted, and entries are removed from the Unified Register of Debtors in enforcement proceedings concerning the collection of arrears for housing and utility services in communities where active hostilities are taking place, and in temporarily occupied territories,” explains Zoryana Zachepilo.
According to her, certain procedures have also been simplified for debtors. If the amount to be collected does not exceed 10 times the minimum wage (approximately 86,470 UAH) and the debt is paid, removal from the Unified Register of Debtors and the lifting of the freeze on funds will occur automatically—without the need to file a separate motion. If an enforcement document is resubmitted, the proceedings will be resumed rather than reopened as a new case—this is important for calculating procedural deadlines.
Experts also advise debtors to closely monitor changes to their status in the registry, as some actions that previously required an application will now take place without the debtor’s involvement.
As for the protection of bank secrecy during the exchange of information between the Automated Enforcement Proceedings System, banks, and depository institutions, the “Zakhyst” Law Firm believes that the transparent and secure operation of the new mechanism will depend precisely on the subordinate legislation currently being drafted.
The association agrees with the position of the National Bar Association of Ukraine that the digitization of enforcement proceedings must be accompanied by adequate safeguards for the protection of personal data and effective oversight of the actions of enforcement officers.
