Parliament, government, IMF: Will Ukraine break deadlock in relations?
The final plenary week of the Verkhovna Rada in March is approaching. This week has been set by the International Monetary Fund as a deadline for Ukraine to pass a series of legislative amendments involving tax increases for businesses and households under the latest four-year credit program approved last month.
In other words, the time available to fulfill our obligations to the IMF in order to receive financial assistance is running out.
The deadline is approaching, but there is no certainty that the Verkhovna Rada will approve the IMF-mandated amendments. On the contrary, the parliament is highly likely to fail the vote this week. This is unless the deadline (and the vote along with it) is postponed to finally conduct all necessary consultations and negotiations to find compromises between the Verkhovna Rada and the government, and consequently, between Ukraine and the International Monetary Fund.
Much has been said and written about why the parliament is currently in a state of partial paralysis. Reasons include a deep existential crisis within the "Servant of the People" mono-majority faction, the strained relationship between a significant portion of the deputies and the NABU and SAPO, and both public and non-public echoes of "Mindichgate." Furthermore, there is a lack of understanding between the deputy corps and the government. A misunderstanding that has recently devolved into mutual animosity and conflict, or what is succinctly described as "bad blood."
It is precisely this state of relations that has become the primary reason why Ukraine has currently reached a deadlock in its situation with the IMF.
Let us recall the chronology of recent events. After the Verkhovna Rada failed the vote on government bill No. 14025, which provides for the taxation of income generated through digital platforms (such as OLX, Prom.ua, Uklon, Bolt, and others), public discourse regarding the lack of understanding between the government and the parliament reached a new level.
On the one hand, commentators cited the crisis within the mono-majority faction and its inability or unwillingness to vote on "issues of paramount importance to the state." On the other hand, attention was drawn to the arrogance of the government and its head, Yuliia Svyrydenko, towards the parliament; and to the populism of a whole range of Cabinet of Ministers' decisions (primarily, the fascination with cashback practices and generous "population support programs," which are questionable during harsh wartime).
The government was also reproached for the fact that, given the full understanding (or lack thereof) of how painful the IMF demands are for broad sections of the population, Svyrydenko and her colleagues first failed to inform the Verkhovna Rada about the details of the negotiations with the IMF, and subsequently failed to establish proper communication with the parliament.
"They are used to ignoring the parliament and receiving instructions directly from the Office of the President," said dissatisfied deputies of the (formally existing) mono-majority faction. "But the times have come when this attitude of patricians towards the plebs must be changed, and they have to talk to us."
Opposition deputies, in principle, said the same thing, only adding: "We have not been used to it under Zelenskyy
Partly in an attempt to change the state of affairs, government representatives appeared twice at the meetings of the parliament's Conciliation Board the week before last.
"This happened after the vote on digital platforms failed," says MP Serhii Vlasenko (Batkivshchyna). "Understandably, they in the government got moving and came running. The first meeting was attended by Minister of Finance Serhii Marchenko and Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration Taras Kachka. The second was attended by the prime minister and the first deputy prime minister, who is also the minister of energy, Denys Shmyhal. And they heard many unpleasant things, which they are told both publicly and privately."
"THE HEAD OF THE GOVERNMENT LAST VISITED OUR FACTION... NEVER. FOR SOME OTHER FACTIONS, IT IS THE SAME..."
The head of the parliamentary Committee on Anti-Corruption Policy, Anastasiia Radina (Servant of the People faction), described the essence of the misunderstandings between the government and the parliament in her Facebook post as follows:
"So why is the Rada actually failing the necessary reforms? The answer should be sought in the relationship between the mono-majority faction and the government.
Deputies do not understand why the government can finance all possible options for handing out money, but is shy to submit a bill to parliament on raising taxes for individual entrepreneurs, even though it was the government that signed such a commitment to the IMF. Colleagues believe that there is no "backroom deal" between the Rada and the government, that some should keep their hands clean, while others act as scapegoats, taking unpopular initiatives upon themselves. Moreover, colleagues are convinced that such a deal, even if it existed, does not work against the backdrop of a lack of communication between individual government officials and committees, boilerplate replies instead of answers to inquiries, and so on.
The government also bears responsibility for the failure to fulfill international obligations. A simple example: the anti-corruption strategy, which, according to the Ukraine Facility, must be adopted by parliament by the end of June this year, has not yet been submitted by the government for parliament's consideration. Furthermore, the NACP has not submitted the draft for the Government's consideration. Consequently, it is practically impossible to adopt such a large-scale document, which affects the issues of absolutely all parliamentary committees, within the stipulated timeframe and through no fault of the Rada."
One can agree with Radina on virtually everything except for the curious phrase that the essence of the conflict "should be sought in the relationship between the mono-majority faction and the government."
In reality, the IMF-mandated amendments are not being embraced by the rest of the deputy corps either.
"I think finding the votes for these laws will be very difficult," says Solomiia Bobrovska (Holos faction). "Especially regarding the tax hikes. Everyone understands how this will hit people's pockets, particularly with the rise in fuel prices. Here, both the carrot and the stick might fail to work. Although the government is at the center of decision-making, who will people blame? Correct, the deputies who voted. And the deputies understand this."
"The 'ES' (European Solidarity) faction meeting will only take place at the beginning of the week, and we have not yet discussed in detail this new bill presented by the government (recently, the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine presented a bill integrating Ukraine's tax obligations to the IMF into a single document)," says Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, an MP from European Solidarity. "But I do not see us supporting, for example, VAT for individual entrepreneurs. Personally, I find it incomprehensible how, against the backdrop of the populism and budgetary generosity the government is displaying, it expects to find the votes for this. I do not think our faction will agree to vote for it."
Yuliia Tymoshenko's faction also clearly does not intend (at least for now) to vote for the IMF requirements. However, in a conversation with Censor.NET, Batkivshchyna MP Serhii Vlasenko subjected the government to scathing criticism, not from an ideological standpoint, but from a professional one:
"I have conducted many different negotiations in my life. And I do not understand how one can enter negotiations without a mandate, take on obligations, and then come and say: 'Well, here you go, vote for it.' Why they do this, I do not know. If they do not know how to negotiate, they should come out and say: 'Sorry, we don't know how to negotiate—replace us.'"
In Vlasenko's view, Ukraine will not emerge from the deadlock in this situation without close coordination between the government and the parliament.
"I have said many times: involve the parliament in the negotiations. Yes, formally, the parliament is not a participant in these negotiations, because the IMF traditionally negotiates with the government. But it does so, keeping in mind that the government supposedly enjoys the support of the parliament. The IMF operates on the understanding of how it works in any normal civilized country, where the government will never do something that would be impossible to pass through the parliament. But ours act the way they do, and then problems begin. Let's say, I am sure that some part of the 'European demands' is what we promised ourselves. They said: Fine, if you propose this, let's write it down. And then the government comes to the parliament, and the latter says: we are not ready to do this."
Vlasenko concludes his indignant monologue with the statistics of meetings between top government officials and parliamentary factions.
"The head of the government last visited our faction... never. I know that for some other factions, she also visited... never. And this is the head of the government! Note: when she was deputy prime minister and negotiated the mineral deal with the US, she went around all the factions of the parliament; this is true. But now, she has not appeared before us a single time. The same goes for Taras Kachka. The same goes for the Minister of Finance and the key person in interaction with the IMF, Serhii Marchenko, he was at our faction for the last time — never. So what are we talking about in the context of communications?"
And one more remark: the tension in relations between the parliament and the government has been ongoing for months, yet there has not been a single joint meeting of the Servant of the People faction and top government officials during this time.
PASSING THROUGH FROM BRUSSELS: HOW THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER MET WITH MPS
With so much similar criticism leveled at the government recently, some proactive communication attempts on its part have finally emerged. Thus, last Friday, Deputy Prime Minister Taras Kachka held a Zoom meeting with the heads of parliamentary committees, with the participation of ministry representatives.
"The intentions were good," confirms Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze (European Solidarity), head of the parliamentary Committee on Ukraine's Integration into the European Union, in a conversation with Censor.NET. "I think he had just returned from Brussels and had fresh information after speaking with the European Commission about how the parties view their obligations, provided the European loan is unblocked. Therefore, he took the initiative to tell the parliament something about this. However, we received the notification about this Zoom meeting in the morning, and everything was supposed to start in just two hours. And this caused outrage among everyone, because it should not be the case that everyone postpones their affairs just because the deputy prime minister has called..."
Criticism was also sparked by the fact that only the heads of parliamentary committees and ministry representatives were invited to the meeting.
"I understand that relevant committees needed to be invited," the MP says. "But one must understand that today there is no majority, and, accordingly, votes must be gathered by involving political forces. And among the committee heads, aside from the 'Servant of the People' representatives, I was the only one who joined the conversation. I consider this approach incorrect if there is a desire to achieve a result. And I said that if there is such a good intention, it would have been worth gathering the heads and representatives of factions and groups first and foremost. We add the committee heads, and then this coordination process will be more effective... Taras promised that he would make an effort to organize a meeting in such a format."
Despite the feeling that the government team is learning right now, on the fly, how to establish contact with their deputy colleagues, the meeting turned out to be informative. Because it dealt with matters of paramount importance for the country's survival.
"Firstly, we heard that it is important for the European Union that we unblock cooperation with the IMF," Klympush-Tsintsadze recounts. "And this 90 billion loan is also tied to the continuation of cooperation with the IMF.
They also discussed exactly how the funds will be provided to Ukraine once these 90 billion euros are unblocked. It was mentioned that there will be a separate track for allocating funds for security and defense; this is the first mechanism. Another part of the funds will be allocated through a budget support mechanism via macro-financial assistance. And the third mechanism will work through the update of the Ukraine Facility Plan, in which specific amounts are linked to the fulfillment of specific indicators."
And, finally, there was an attempt to coordinate actions—precisely the reason why such meetings are worth holding.
"Taras informed us that the European Commission plans, in the updated conditions for the Ukraine Facility for 2026, to primarily insist on what correlates with the European integration tasks in the 'Fundamentals' cluster (rule of law, anti-corruption, democratic institutions) and tasks in the energy sector. And Taras asked us, if possible, to draw the deputies' attention to these things."
THE LAST WEEK OF MARCH. "NOW THE PRESSURE ON THE PARLIAMENT FROM SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES WILL BE COLOSSAL!"
So, what do we have at the beginning of the Verkhovna Rada's final plenary week in March 2026?
The new government bill (with the IMF-mandated amendments), judging by what we have heard, has no chance as of right now if it is submitted to the parliament. Based on the failed vote on digital platforms, the maximum it can gather is about 170 votes "in favor." And considering that the government bill contains all 4 unpopular IMF topics, including the taxation of individual entrepreneurs, there could be even fewer votes. "A mass grave," as deputies sardonically joke. They also say (this is a generally popular opinion in the parliamentary lobbies, and not only there) that "both the deadline will be postponed, and the requirements will be improved—the Europeans understand everything and will not leave us without money. They simply have no other way out. They will make demands, but not in a way that outright bans us."
Meanwhile, a Servant of the People MP sends a message to the author of this article: "Now the pressure on the parliament from small and medium-sized businesses will be colossal! I read Facebook posts and comments, and everyone who says they might introduce VAT for individual entrepreneurs is simply destroyed in the comments! As it is, 90,000 Ukrainian individual entrepreneurs have already opened in Poland due to the war, and the taxes there are lower than ours. And if they introduce VAT plus the military tax (and we must not forget about the single social contribution), businesses will simply close."
Halyna Yanchenko, a Servant of the People MP and member of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Economic Development, also told Censor.NET on Friday that the government bill currently has no chance. And a Saturday conversation with another Servant of the People, Mykyta Poturaiev, head of the parliamentary Committee on Humanitarian and Information Policy, began with the following dialogue:
- So, will the government bill with the IMF-mandated amendments be submitted to the parliament on Monday?
- It will be submitted, but the Rada is currently paralyzed. It seems we will not even gather on Tuesday, but only on Wednesday or Thursday. Why? Because negotiations are underway among all factions and, as I understand it, the government as well. The factions are represented in these negotiations by their leaders.
- Okay, but even if the leaders do reach an agreement (under certain conditions) to pass the bill with the IMF-mandated amendments, they will still have to persuade their MPs, right?
- Of course. This is a multi-level dialogue. If they manage to agree among themselves, they will then go to their factions and groups, they will talk to them, and what will happen there—who knows?
- Is there a possibility that the IMF will agree to postpone the deadline by at least a couple of weeks? Because the deputy corps is in extremely severe time trouble, especially considering the fierce resistance of many deputies to the International Monetary Fund's demands?
- Well, obviously, the IMF understands that the deadline needs to be postponed...
Meanwhile, no faction confirmed the fact of any negotiations with the government to Censor.NET. However, the situation this week may change almost hourly. The issue is too important; too many people and institutions are interested in resolving it (read: a long-suffering compromise between the parties).
And as František Škvor from "The Good Soldier Švejk" used to say:
"How it was, so it was, but somehow it always was.
It has never yet been that it wasn't somehow."
Yevhen Kuzmenko, "Censor.NET"
