Ukraine money-go-round: how $1.7 billion
in bank loans ended up offshore
Send a link to a friend
[January 24, 2018]
By Natalia Zinets and Dasha Afanasieva
ARTSYZ, Ukraine/LONDON (Reuters) - When
Ukrainian company Profit signed a $48.5 million deal with a British firm
in 2014, it became part of what prosecutors in Ukraine say was a
potentially criminal scheme that moved $1.7 billion from the country's
biggest lender to offshore accounts.
With a loan it had raised from PrivatBank in east Ukraine, Profit paid
Trade Point Agro Limited in London on Aug. 18, 2014 for 24,250 tonnes of
polyethylene terephthalate, a polymer used in fabrics and plastic
containers, according to a legal complaint Profit filed in November 2014
to try to recover the funds.
For a graphic on Ukraine money-go-round, click http://tmsnrt.rs/2DsSXIE
But Trade Point Agro failed to deliver the goods and deposited the money
in PrivatBank's Cyprus branch, according to prosecutors. When a
Ukrainian court ruled against Trade Point Agro and ordered it to repay
Profit, Trade Point Agro did not appeal against the ruling but did not
pay the money back.
The deal between Profit and Trade Point Agro is part of a pre-trial
investigation that is still under way into whether officials at
PrivatBank illegally took money from the lender through shady loan
practices involving dozens of companies.
Finance Minister Oleksandr Danylyuk regards the case as a "litmus test"
for the effectiveness of the battle against corruption, success in which
is vital for Ukraine to receive international credits.
In the pre-trial investigation, prosecutors are trying to identify
anyone at PrivatBank who might have committed a crime. They say in court
filings that from May to September, 2014, unnamed PrivatBank officials
moved money out of the bank to companies such as Trade Point Agro which
they believe look "fictitious".
PrivatBank, which was nationalized in December 2016, and Ukraine's
anti-corruption bureau are also investigating whether the bank illegally
provided loans to companies linked to two wealthy tycoons who owned the
bank before the state takeover.
No one has been charged with wrongdoing. London's High Court ordered
some worldwide assets of Ihor Kolomoisky and Gennadiy Bogolyubov,
PrivatBank's former main shareholders, to be frozen last month.
PrivatBank, now controlled by the state, said the court order was
granted on the basis of detailed evidence to the court that they
extracted almost $2 billion from PrivatBank through dishonest
transactions.
"NO EASY ANSWER"
Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov deny wrongdoing, say the loans were repaid and
that the bank was solvent at the time of the nationalization, which
Kolomoisky is challenging in court, saying it was not insolvent and the
state takeover was politically motivated.
An investigation commissioned by the central bank in 2017 found that
PrivatBank had for at least a decade been used for money-laundering and
shady deals where 95 percent of corporate loans went to companies
related to the former owners. Kolomoisky dismissed the findings, made
public this month, as "nonsense".
General Prosecutor Yuriy Lutsenko said in December there was "no easy
legal answer" to the question of whether Kolomoisky and PrivatBank stole
money, and that Kolomoisky believes he agreed to the nationalization
under duress.
"Who is responsible for the stolen money? Kolomoisky's answer: nobody
stole money," Lutsenko said.
Trade Point Agro and Profit did not respond to requests for comment.
Consultancy Gabara Strategies, acting on behalf of Kolomoisky and
Bogolyubov, PrivatBank's two main former shareholders, said: "Loans to
the companies referred to did not result in a loss of USD 1.7 billion,
or indeed any loss, to PrivatBank."
"The loans were repaid and PrivatBank at all times held adequate
collateral for those loans," it said in a statement, describing any
suggestion to the contrary as "unsubstantiated and groundless".
Asked to explain how the loans were repaid, representatives of
Kolomoisky and Bogolyubov did not provide any details.
HALLMARKS OF SHELL COMPANIES
At the time of PrivatBank's nationalization, the central bank says the
lender had a $5.6-billion hole in its balance sheet caused by shady
lending practices, with almost all of its corporate loans made to
related parties.
In an effort to determine what happened to loans made by PrivatBank,
Reuters reviewed court documents related to legal proceedings launched
by Profit and other companies to recoup funds they say they were cheated
out of, and court documents from the prosecutors.
Reuters also reviewed state property registries and company documents,
visited the addresses listed for some of the firms that received loans
from PrivatBank and inspected some of the physical collateral later used
to underpin the loans.
Reuters found some of the firms that were granted loans or received
payment for goods they did not deliver bear some of the hallmarks of
shell companies. Correspondents visited the addresses where nine of the
companies in London and Ukraine are listed but found none at these
locations.
[to top of second column]
|
A man leaves a branch of Privatbank in Kiev, Ukraine December 14,
2016. REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko/File Photo
Reuters has also seen a copy of a central bank assessment in 2016 of
part of PrivatBank's collateral that has not been made public. The
assessment valued the collateral, which included physical assets, at
$3.5 million compared to PrivatBank's own assessment of $91 million.
The central bank says this suggests the value of physical assets
used as collateral for loans was artificially inflated by PrivatBank
officials to give the impression the $1.7 billion of loans were
insured against default.
The collateral included a Soviet-era petroleum storage depot in
Artsyz, 600 km (373 miles) south of the Ukrainian capital Kiev,
which was valued at more than $12 million by PrivatBank but
considered worthless by the central bank, according to the central
bank's assessment seen by Reuters.
A Reuters reporter who visited the depot found sheep grazing there
and was told by Artsyz Mayor Volodymyr Mikhov: "It has not operated
for at least 10 to 15 years."
Deputy Central Bank Governor Kateryna Rozhkova says over 400 legal
cases connected to the nationalization have been launched by the
former shareholders and parties related to them against the central
bank, PrivatBank and the finance ministry.
She said this pointed to unwillingness by the former shareholders to
restructure and pay off the debt as promised, and was designed to
"destabilize" the efforts of PrivatBank, the central bank and the
finance ministry to recover the loans.
The statement to Reuters on behalf of PrivatBank's two main former
shareholders said that by October 2016 the bank was performing well
and implementing a plan agreed with the central bank, but the
central bank "tore up the agreed plan and engineered an 'insolvency'
event, which allowed the Government to nationalize the bank for
political reasons."
Rozhkova denied nationalizing PrivatBank was a conspiracy.
RETURN TO SENDER
From May 28 to Sept. 1, 2014, 42 companies registered in the
Dnipropetrovsk region of eastern Ukraine transferred $1.7 billion to
three firms registered in Britain and three in the British Virgin
Islands, according to claims submitted by the 42 companies to the
region's commercial court.
All 42 borrowed money from PrivatBank, whose headquarters is in the
city of Dnipro, to pay in advance for goods ranging from manganese
ore and fuel oil to cranes and mechanical diggers.
None of the six firms delivered the goods and all deposited the
money they received with the Cyprus branch of PrivatBank, according
to the statements filed by the Ukrainian companies in court cases in
which they are seeking back the money they paid.
A Reuters correspondent who visited the addresses listed in London
for the three British-registered companies -- Trade Point Agro,
Teamtrend Limited and Collyer Limited -- found no sign of them
there.
Two of the London-listed companies, Trade Point Agro and Teamtrend,
used to have a common director, while Teamtrend and Collyer have
common company secretaries and directors. Letters to the firms
requesting comment went unanswered.
Reuters also sent two letters to each of the three firms registered
in the British Virgin Islands -- Rossyn, Milbert Ventures and
Ukrtransitservice. They also went unanswered.
The deal between Trade Point Agro and Profit was typical of those
outlined in the filings to the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Commercial
Court.
Trade Point Agro pulled out of the contract two months after signing
it, saying it would no longer deliver the goods on the agreed terms,
and agreed to pay the money back by Nov. 4 but failed to do so, the
Dnipropetrovsk court's records show.
Although the records also show the court ruled on Dec. 8, 2014 in
favor of Profit's $48.5-million claim against Trade Point Agro,
prosecutors say the money has never been paid back.
A Reuters correspondent was unable to contact Profit using the
information provided in the state register of business and could not
find Profit at the address where it is registered -- with three
other firms that received loans from PrivatBank -- in Vozyednania
Street in Dnipro.
Reuters also sent requests for comment to the registered addresses
of all 42 companies by courier but all the letters were returned.
Twenty-six of the 42 firms registered in Ukraine share the same
registered address with one or more companies involved in court
cases, company documents show.
(Additional reporting by Alessandra Prentice in Dnipro, Writing by
Matthias Williams, Editing by Timothy Heritage)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |