Ukraine’s privatisation story is entering a decisive new chapter. Recently. the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) appointed Dmytro Natalukha as head of the State Property Fund of Ukraine (SPFU), with the backing of 244 MPs. For investors and policymakers, this is more than a personnel change: it signals renewed political commitment to use privatisation as a tool for reconstruction, modernisation and EU integration.
Mr Natalukha arrives with strong economic credentials. As a Member of Parliament and former chair of the parliamentary Committee on Economic Development, he has been closely involved in shaping Ukraine’s reform agenda. His stated priority now is to overhaul how the SPFU manages and sells state assets - shifting from ad hoc, politically driven disposals to a more strategic, transparent and investor-ready pipeline.
Five themes underpin Ukraine’s 2026 privatisation push:
First, a clearer set of priorities. The SPFU is working on a more structured list of priority asset sales, supported by a digital map of state assets. For domestic and international investors alike, information asymmetry has long been a barrier: it has often been easier to know that “something” is for sale than to understand precisely what is on offer, where, under what legal conditions, and with which risks attached. A comprehensive, digitalised inventory is a prerequisite for any credible large-scale programme.
Second, state land is moving to the centre of the conversation. The development of a Land Bank to manage Ukraine’s extensive state-owned land portfolio is intended to improve both efficiency and transparency. Clarifying titles, consolidating holdings where sensible, and making land rights more predictable are all vital for sectors from agriculture to logistics, renewables and industrial development.
Third, ports and logistics assets are getting bespoke treatment. Recent dialogue has focused in part on privatisation specifics in the port sector and the terms of lease agreements in ports. These assets are strategically important for Ukraine’s export-led recovery, and heavily exposed to both wartime damage and future security considerations. Properly designed leases and concession structures can unlock private capital while safeguarding national interests and ensuring that these gateways remain operational and competitive.
Fourth, social infrastructure and sanctioned assets are coming into scope - carefully. Mr Natalukha’s team is looking at how to structure leases of social infrastructure facilities (such as healthcare, education and communal assets) to preserve access and quality of services while attracting investment. The Fund is also grappling with the complex question of sanctioned assets: how to deal with property linked to sanctioned individuals and entities in ways that are legally robust, transparent, and aligned with both Ukrainian law and international obligations.
Finally, there is a deliberate effort to embed this renewed privatisation wave in a broader policy ecosystem. This is where initiatives like The City-Ukraine Hub project, funded by the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), and the targeted workshop series run by the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment (CISI) which are a core part of that, come in.
Those workshops are designed as a structured journey: from the strategic “why now?” of privatisation in a post-war, EU‑aspiring Ukraine, through the institutional architecture and governance of the SPFU, to the nuts and bolts of asset mapping, legal frameworks, valuation, and sale design. They will address uncomfortable but essential topics: corruption risks and integrity systems, labour and regional impacts, and how to measure success beyond headline proceeds. They also draw on concrete case studies - from Ukraine’s own experience in ports and small-scale auctions, through Central and Eastern European comparators, to post-conflict transitions elsewhere.
What emerges is a more mature vision of privatisation: not a quick cash-raising exercise, but a long-term restructuring of the state’s role in the economy. In 2026, under Mr Natalukha’s leadership, Ukraine is attempting to align its privatisation strategy with EU accession requirements, IMF and donor frameworks, and the expectations of global investors who have grown more sophisticated - and more demanding - since the 1990s.
For investors, advisers and policymakers following Ukraine, this renewed energy around the SPFU is a signal to re-engage. The combination of political backing, clearer asset pipelines, and policy-grade capacity building through initiatives like the The City-Ukraine Hub and the CISI workshops show that the country is serious about turning state assets into engines of reconstruction and growth.
