Appellate court cancels over UAH 1.8 million in taxes and fines for OnlyFans creator

Appellate court cancels over UAH 1.8 million in taxes and fines for OnlyFans creator
Appellate court cancels over UAH 1.8 million in taxes and fines for OnlyFans creator

Court ruling on income from a foreign platform

The appellate court issued a ruling in favour of Valeriya Zharova in a conflict with tax authorities. The court cancelled the main part of the financial claims, which concerned additional tax assessments and fines for income received from the OnlyFans platform in 2022. Meanwhile, some sanctions related to procedural violations remained in force.

This information was published with reference to a court ruling dated 13 October 2026 in case No. 420/29760/25.

Causes of the tax dispute

The conflict began after the Ukrainian tax service received data from British competent authorities. According to the provided information, Fenix International Ltd made payments to Zharova. Tax officials assumed that her annual income for 2022 exceeded 204,000 US dollars. Based on this data, the taxpayer was assessed over 1.8 million hryvnias in additional taxes and fines.

Why the court deemed the additional assessments unjustified

The court ruling noted that aggregated data received from foreign authorities is insufficient grounds for establishing tax liabilities. Tax officials did not provide information on the dates and amounts of specific transactions. Without this data, it was impossible to correctly recalculate foreign currency income at the National Bank of Ukraine exchange rate.

In addition, tax officials did not confirm with primary documents that the relevant accounts belonged to Valeriya Zharova. Due to these procedural and evidentiary gaps, the court cancelled the additional personal income tax, military levy, and fines for failure to file a declaration.

What remained in force

Despite the cancellation of the main part of the financial sanctions, the court retained liability for violating the obligation to provide documents and responses to official requests from the tax inspection during an audit. Thus, the taxpayer was relieved of large additional tax assessments but remained obliged to pay fines for procedural violations.

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first!

Leave a comment

Links are not allowed in comments. The editors may remove comments without explanation.
Back to top ↑