The songs of praise appear in media almost every day. Their authors are trying to persuade the community and members of the Parliament that this draft law is supported almost by entire Ukrainian business and only NIBULON allegedly “because of unknown reasons is against the river due”.
A little known and small Association “Rivers of Ukraine”, which supported the introduction of the river due, creation of the River Waterways Authority and the draft law of Ukraine “On inland water transport” (No. 2475 a), decided to become the voice “the Ukrainian business”.  
The Association claims that NIBILON allegedly misrepresents the facts, considering our company’s position as baseless one.
According to the Association, benefit of the river due is obvious. It is also claimed that a new approach will serve as a powerful impetus to develop business, and simple calculations show that the efficiency of water transport will increase significantly.
Before analyzing the position of this Association in terms of its gist and impact on the Ukrainian Parliament, one should pay attention to the business interests it represents in Ukraine.
The Chairman of the Association is Oleksandr Lysiuk. The members of the council are: acting Manager of Pershyi Ekspedytsiinyi Zahin Pidvodnych ta Hidrotechnichnych Robit PJSC and the former manager of Zahin Richbud Ltd. Oleksand Kozachuk and the acting administration of Ukrrichflot shipping company: CEO Dmytro Moskalenko, Director of Shippimg  Kyrylo Taran, and an employee of the legal department Vitalii Teliushchenko.
Thus, the Association unites mostly companies with co-founders, ultimate beneficial owners (controllers) who live anywhere (in the Russian Federation, Switzerland, Cyprus, and Bulgaria) but not in Ukraine, registered at the same address and belong to the same financial and industrial group founded by a citizen of the Russian Federation.
Association’s position may hardly represent river transport of Ukraine (industry) in general and to be considered a representative and patriotic one.
In fact, this association reflects the position of a financial and industrial group, known for its involvement in high-profile corporate scandals and scandals related to tenders, including the ones related to raids.
Thus, it isn’t surprising that the position of the Association on the draft law “On inland water transport” is being shaped at offices of Ukrrichflot PJSC and Enerhetychnyi Standard financial and industrial group.
The fact that investors and the ultimate beneficial owners (controllers) of Ukrrichflot PJSC are non-residents of Ukraine, explains the reason why the Association makes considerable emphasis on the issue that the draft law “On inland water transport” may interest foreign investors.
Indeed, shipowners who will use vessels under the foreign flags will benefit from this draft law, the draft law “On Amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine regarding rental payment for special water use and land taxation of inland waterway transport” (No. 2 476a dated 08.04.2015), “On amendments to the Merchant Shipping Code of Ukraine (regarding the promotion of navigation in Ukraine)” (No. 2712 dated 23.04.2015), and “On amendments to the Customs  Code of Ukraine (regarding the promotion of navigation in Ukraine)” (No. 2713 dated 23.04 .2015) the most.
It should be recalled the number of fleet built at the Ukrainian shipyards which Ukrrichflot PJSC imported under “beneficial” flags, having re-registered vessels to the companies which are non-residents and changed their names.
We think, this can explain a strong desire of the Association to lobby for the draft laws on inland water transport for the benefit of the financial and industrial group with Russian roots.
Perhaps, the main purpose of the Association is not the revival of navigation under the Ukrainian flag and Ukrainian river transport and shipbuilding but lobbyism, under the mask of care about navigation safety, to ease the conditions for access to the inland waterways of Ukraine to non-resident companies associated with the ultimate beneficial owners (controllers) of the financial and industrial group (Ukrrichflot PJSC belongs to it), and the legitimization of non-payment for the benefit of Ukraine.
NIBULON´s position on the issue of the river due remains consistent, systematic, and unchanged. At present, there is no need to create another state monopoly in river industry, i.e. River Waterways Authority akin to the notorious Ukrainian Sea Ports Authority. The idea of the river due is unacceptable for transport industry, since the introduction of the new tax for river transportation will block the increase in cargo transportation, revival of river transport, construction of new and renewal / renovation of existing tonnage on the rivers of Ukraine, deprive Ukrainian shipbuilding industry of work, discriminate Ukrainian shipowners and carriers; it will be especially critical for water passenger transportation.
Along with the changes envisaged by the draft laws No. 2476, 2712 and 2713, the version of the draft law of Ukraine “On inland water transport” supported by the Association is beneficial only to foreign shipowners or the associated Ukrainian companies and financial and industrial groups, which are artificially derived fleet to offshore jurisdiction, having re-registered it under “beneficial” flags, and intend to exploit its at a cheap rate on inland waterways of Ukraine, avoiding taxes and duties to the State and local budgets and other mandatory payments to the state.
However, the list of inconsistencies between Association´s position and interests of river transport go beyond this.
Calculations made by NIBULON´s experts show that if the river due of UAH 0.005 per ton per 1 km is charged, disbursement expenses for grain transportation along the Dnipro River by non-self-propelled vessels and tugs under the Ukrainian flag will not reduce but will increase. Moreover, the expenses will increase with the distance of cargo transportation.
On the other hand, income from the river due will still be insufficient to provide full funding for the maintenance and safe use of inland waterways.
It’s said that despite the fact that the draft law on inland water transport has not even been considered by the Parliament, and the River Waterways Authority hasn’t been created, its future manager is defined.
Given that the managers of Ukrrichflot PJSC repeatedly participated in the competitions for appointment of heads of the state enterprises in the transport sector, in particular Ukrvodshliakh SE, one cannot exclude the fact that the mentioned financial and industrial group intends to lobby for the appointment of someone who is related to them for the position of the head of the River Waterways Authority.
Under such circumstances, the river due will be spent by River Waterways Authority for its maintenance but not for needs of river navigation.
Moreover, the Association’s offers don’t take into account regional peculiarities of river transportation by certain waterways.
Thus, the increase in disbursement expenses of vessel’s shipowners operated under the Ukrainian flag, transporting cargoes and passengers along the Southern Buh River, will be higher than transportation along the Dnipro River; it is connected with peculiarities of port dues, charges and fees in a corresponding region.
This not only will block the water transport revival which has been started along Southern Buh River, but also will lead to decline of the second, in terms of importance, water transport artery Ukraine and loss of its navigation purposes.
In turn, this will deprive Mykolaiv of interregional water connection, increase the load on the roads of the region and Mykolaiv city dramatically, anthropogenic impact on the environment, and worsen the living conditions of the inhabitants of the settlements where the highways are located.
Perhaps, at first, the Association should consult with other participants of the river transport market, local authorities, local communities and local representative bodies of local self-government before lobbying for openly anti-Ukrainian laws and to lobby the interests of a particular financial and industrial group with foreign roots at the Parliament.
Unfortunately, the Association´s activity regarding the lobbying for the draft law of Ukraine “On inland water transport” and other draft laws in sphere of river transport doesn’t surprise as it isn’t a single case when big business uses “pocket” non-governmental organizations for the benefit of financial and industrial groups and certain “businessmen” who get income through the state.
In particular, the former head of the Mykolaiv Sea Port SE Vasil Kapatsina, known for participation in many scandals, created and extensively uses the association Mykolaiv regional public organization Dnipro-Buzka Association of Marine Business to promote his own interests, mostly the ones related to the use of the state property.
Therefore, the members of the Parliament and the Ministry of Infrastructure should be more prudent and careful when listening to the views of various associations and to take decisions which meet the interests of the state, not the ones of separate financial and industrial groups.