The Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA) has announced a re-tender for a manager of the IDS Ukraine group — the owner of the "Morshynska" and "Myrgarodska" brands. The formal reason: only one proposal was submitted to the first tender, and competitive selection procedures require starting over. But behind this technical glitch lies a far more complex collision.
Why Candidates Didn't Rush
The first tender, announced on November 28, 2025, had a complaint filed with the Antimonopoly Committee even before its completion: potential participants pointed to discriminatory requirements in the documentation. The Kyiv Appeals Court for Administrative Cases (VAKS), for its part, established that direct competitors of IDS Ukraine were admitted to the tender — which contradicts the new "On ARMA" law that came into force after January 30, 2026.
But the main deterrent factor is financial risk for the potential manager. IDS Ukraine itself publicly warned: court orders regarding arrest of its corporate rights contain only a ban on alienation of shares, but not a ban on their use.
"Due to legislative changes from July 2025, ARMA has the right to manage only those corporate rights on which the court has imposed a simultaneous ban on disposal and use. In the case of IDS Ukraine, there is no ban on use — therefore, the management agreement that will be signed with the tender winner will be considered void."
Official position of IDS Ukraine
The consequence: the manager must transfer funds to the state budget monthly — even if the contract is not legally effective. Whoever agrees risks spending their own resources without legal guarantees of their return.
An Asset Worth 5+ Billion Hryvnias with a Ticking Clock
The total nominal value of corporate rights and shares of group enterprises in the new tender is 53.45 million hryvnias. But the actual operational weight is much greater: in 2025, IDS Ukraine generated 7.4 billion hryvnias in revenue, up 8.2% from the previous year.
The assets have been under ARMA management since autumn 2022 — when, by court order, the agency received corporate rights of group enterprises, including the Myrgarodska and Morshynska plants. The first manager, LLC "Carpathian Mineral Waters," took over in March 2023, but in April 2025 ARMA terminated the contract — according to former agency head Olena Duma, the manager itself refused to comply with the conditions because current legislation prohibits operations without coordination with sanctioned persons.
Now another element of time pressure is added to the picture. The Ministry of Justice filed a lawsuit with VAKS in September 2024 seeking to recover IDS Ukraine assets in favor of the state — as property related to sanctioned shareholders: Mikhail Fridman, Pyotr Aven, and Andrey Kosogov. According to the company itself, four court hearings remain until the end of proceedings; a final decision is expected within two to three months. After confiscation, the asset will transfer to the State Property Fund, and ARMA's contract will automatically terminate.
What Changed in the New Rules
ARMA claims that the re-tender is being conducted under updated requirements of the agency's reform: stricter candidate selection criteria, enhanced mechanisms for monitoring the management of strategic assets. Acting ARMA head Yaroslava Maksimenko confirmed that the previous procedure was blocked by technical complaints — and the next round should account for this.
- The tender is conducted through the Prozorro system (purchase No. UA-2026-05-15-012698-a)
- Nominal value of corporate rights: 53.45 million hryvnias
- The manager is obligated to transfer income to the state budget monthly
- Direct competitors of IDS Ukraine will not be admitted to the new tender — in accordance with the new "On ARMA" law
However, none of these clarifications resolves the key legal question regarding the nature of the arrest — which only the court can decide, not ARMA regulations.
If VAKS rules on confiscation before ARMA completes the re-tender and the new manager manages to work for at least a few months — the tender will become a procedure for the sake of procedure. The question is whether there will be a participant willing to knowingly agree to this.
