Dneprotyazhmash declared bankrupt: what happened to the industrial giant and why its property was transferred to Russia

2 December 2025 12:50

The Commercial Court of Dnipropetrovs’k region has declared Dneprotyazhmash, one of the largest manufacturers of equipment for metallurgy, pipelines, subways and mining, bankrupt. The company is entering liquidation proceedings that will last until November 17, 2026. This is stated in the court ruling, "Komersant Ukrainian" reports

The decision was made after eight months of insolvency proceedings opened in April 2025. A financial analysis confirmed that the plant was in a state of supercritical insolvency as of the end of 2024.

Why Dneprotyazhmash went bankrupt

According to the case file, Dniprovazhmash’s financial and economic condition as of December 31, 2024, showed signs of supercritical insolvency.

The court and the property manager found a number of systemic violations in the company’s operations.

Alienation of property during arrest

Despite the arrests imposed by the state enforcement officer, the plant’s management carried out

transferring all real estate for free use,
withdrawal of equipment,
transactions with signs of a hidden sale of assets.

A sharp deterioration in financial performance

According to the results of the property inventory, taking into account accounting data, as of September 30, 2025, the carrying value of the plant’s fixed assets is UAH 421.1 million.

Accounts payable consistently exceeded UAH 700-840 million.

Accounts receivable also remained high – up to UAH 318 million.

The management did not carry out effective claims and lawsuits to collect debts.

Supercritical insolvency

coverage ratio – 0.661 (with a norm of 1-3),
own funds coverage – from -0.295 to -0.513 (with a norm of 0.1),
the current solvency ratio was negative in all years.

This means that the company could not pay its creditors, and its assets are not enough to cover its debts.

Dneprotyazhmash manufactures equipment for metallurgical plants, pipelines, subways, and the mining industry.

Was the bankruptcy fictitious?

The analysis showed that there were no signs of fictitious bankruptcy.

The case was opened at the request of Dniprovodokanal, and the company’s profitability was negative. In other words, the plant was not really able to repay its obligations.

Signs of bankruptcy actions: yes

The analysis for 2022-2024 showed a deterioration in three key indicators:

Coverage of liabilities by all assets:
from 1.539 to 1.377
Coverage of liabilities by current assets:
from 0.771 to 0.661
Net assets:
from UAH 453,210.0 thousand to UAH 275,054.0 thousand

The deterioration of all three indicators at the same time is a sign of economic actions that could lead to the company’s sustainable insolvency.

Such actions may include:

conclusion of unfavorable or fictitious contracts;
unjustified payments or transfers of assets;
sale of property at reduced prices;
unrealistic management decisions;
artificial increase of debts;
lack of claim work to collect receivables.

The court’s decision states that, taking this into account, the Guidelines allow us to conclude that there are economic signs of bringing Dneprotyazhmash to bankruptcy.

Assets and shareholders

The founders (collectively over 87% of the shares):

Anton Zinoviev – 55.15%
Slavyana Zinovieva – 22.45%
Yegor Zinoviev – 9.5%

Carrying amount of property, plant and equipment (as of 30.09.2025):
uAH 421.1 million.

What’s next

The company has officially entered the liquidation procedure. All actions with the assets will be controlled by the insolvency officer.

At the same time, a criminal investigation into the possible transfer of equipment to Russia is underway. The National Agency for Asset Recovery and Management (ARMA) has recorded the illegal use of the seized property of Dniprovazhmash.

Earlier, in the framework of criminal proceedings, Dniprovazhmash’s assets (87.1017% of shares, industrial equipment and real estate) were seized and transferred to ARMA by the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv.

“The defendants in the criminal proceedings transferred the company’s equipment and facilities to the Russian Federation for further use in the military-industrial complex and other sectors of the aggressor state’s economy,” ARMA said. “Such actions are qualified under Article 111-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine as aiding the aggressor state.”