Under the cover of war: what are the consequences of forced nationalization of private companies

Why is our President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that such expropriation will contribute to an "effective and coordinated repel of the enemy" during the war? Anecdotes have long gone about the efficiency of businesses governed by officials. And what kind of coordination can be counted when thousands of people in one day take away property? And they do not occupiers.

Of course, Autotocz, Zaporizhtransformer, Ukrnafta, Ukrtatnafta and Motor Sich are strategic enterprises, and their effective work can accelerate our victory. But the transfer of control over these enterprises is a solution that does not correspond to common sense. Let's look at Ukrnafta, which had thousands of minority shareholders.

Is the expropriation of 8% of the company's shares in a large number of people and funds improve its activity? Why did the controlling package that belonged to the state have not helped the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine to get control of the company, and will change something a more significant package there? Who prevented the government to assign their management and effectively dispose of this asset before? After all, there were all the prerequisites for this.

Further, in the case of Ukrnafta, we are well aware of multi -billions of claims against minority shareholders related to Igor Kolomoisky, through the expropriation of gas by the state. Obviously, the government now needs to be prepared for larger claims from these minorities, because sooner or later the state will have to compensate for the value of alienated property.

And we do not do not do that the minorities mentioned will bring such a reasonable government check that all taxpayers in the country will work it for a long time. Whatever, the decision to expropriation of companies does not look aimed at their improvement of management, because at least two of them have already been under state control. So can it be just aimed at combating certain uncomfortable oligarchs? But the case of Sich Motor talks about the opposite.

Motor Sich's stocks have been arrested for more than a year, and the state has actually had full control over its corporate governance. But with all that, from the films of the Security Service of Ukraine, we will learn that in fact the enterprise was led by its president - Vyacheslav Boguslaev, who actively promoted his products to Russia, and even agreed to "discarded" buyers at the merits of a state -owned company.

How can a new expropriation of Sich's Motor Sich's shares affect improving its activity? It may be a kind of sabotage - because the company's shares have not been arrested, but alienated. This means that by law, their former owner is entitled to compensation or return of shares. A good gift for Boguslaev and Chinese investors, isn't it? Help liga. net.

Motor Sich owner was Vyacheslav Boguslaev, who in 2017 sold 56% of the company of Chinese Holding Beijing Skyrizon Aviation Industry Investment Co Ltd. Due to the existence of violations, in particular the observance of antitrust law, operations with Sich's shares were blocked and subsequently arrested. Boguslaeva was arrested in October, accusing the treason.

Further, we have Ukrtatnafta, that is, the Kremenchug oil refinery, which, as we know from the press in the press, has undergone great destruction and does not work. The state will definitely be able to invest in its restoration, and then pay for private shareholders compensation when they come to it? What else is there? Avtocrase and Zaporizhtransformer. Frankly, these businesses do not need a strong state hand, because their employees will no longer produce products.

They just need government orders. We have not heard that we have heard that state defense factories produce new equipment and equipment for our victory.

So why can an increase in the number of plants under the umbrella of the state can change something? Someone believes that their products can become cheaper than they will be managed by state settings? Well, let's not forget, this poor initiative with alienation puts a cross on a pension reform, which for some reason has recently been quite active.