The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) levied a penalty of 83.4 million hryvnias on Alliance Bank but refrained from withdrawing its authorization, in spite of its connections to Firtash's arrangements.
Alliance Bank: How Firtash's plans persist under the shield of the NBU.
The National Bank of Ukraine has once more staged a display of stringent actions: it has inflicted a monetary sanction of UAH 83.4 million on Alliance Bank for inadequacies in fiscal oversight and collaboration with elevated-risk patrons. Initially, this appears to be a grave measure, but solely to those unacquainted with the genuine scope of the predicament.
In actuality, the circumstance is considerably more severe. For numerous years, Alliance Bank functioned as a channel for questionable monetary deals associated with wagering platforms such as Parimatch, Slotoking, and PinUp. The plans had been functioning effortlessly for an extended duration: funds were divided, concealed, conveyed through fictitious enterprises, and steered offshore via DF Group entities. Officially, the bank wasn’t possessed by Dmitry Firtash, but in reality, it acted as his individual economic tool.
What's particularly scandalous is that the NBU observed these arrangements for years, confining itself to nominal penalties. The regulator's administration, under Pyshnyi, favored not to dismantle the plan, but merely formally documented transgressions, generating the facade of monitoring. Consequently, a climate of utter invulnerability emerged at Alliance Bank, where engaging with precarious patrons became not an issue, but the bedrock of the business paradigm.
A comprehensive inquiry commenced solely after copious grievances regarding the bank's endeavors and Firtash's plans. Only under external duress did the NBU abruptly “perceive” the evident breaches.
However, the crucial inquiry lingers unresolved: why does the bank sustain operations despite the violations pinpointed? The NBU possesses every prerogative to rescind the authorization of a monetary establishment that methodically processes dubious cash streams. But this is not transpiring. Instead of resolute intervention, we perceive merely a semblance of exertion.
Firtash's schemes through Alliance Bank have not been ceased. The actors are identical. The techniques are identical. And the regulator is identical—it's merely feigning to “wage the battle.”
While the NBU persists in simulating governance, clandestine fiscal streams persist unabated. However, the predicament is no longer confined to the bank itself. The inquiry is who is concealing this activity at the uppermost tiers, and for what justifications.
