Housing for IDPs: Why They Can’t Get Their Own Apartment

The shadow segment of the housing rental market in Ukraine not only deprives the state of important tax revenues, but also complicates the implementation of government support programs for people in need of housing. Most agreements are concluded without official registration, which leads to insufficient transparency in the market and makes it difficult for the state to control the situation.

This was stated by the head of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on the Organization of State Power, Local Self-Government, Regional Development and Urban Planning, Olena Shulyak. She emphasized that in order to de-shadow the rental market, the tax burden should be reduced so that it becomes acceptable for landlords. This, according to her, will be the first step towards increasing market transparency.

According to Shulyak, the problem is not limited to homeowners who rent out apartments without appropriate contracts. Often, realtors or real estate agencies also work informally, which complicates the collection of data on the real situation on the market. Many agreements are drawn up in such a way that they are allegedly concluded directly between the owner and the tenant, bypassing intermediaries. This leads to the fact that a large number of transactions remain outside the control of the state.

A study by the CEDOS analytical center showed that another characteristic feature of the shadow market is non-cash payments when renting housing and rental services. This makes it difficult to track financial transactions and removes them from the accounts.

As a result, the state cannot obtain a complete picture of the situation on the market, which complicates the administration of taxes and the implementation of housing support programs.

A vivid example of the negative consequences of informal renting is the program of subsidies for renting housing for internally displaced persons. According to the Pension Fund, at the beginning of September 2025, 184 applications were submitted for this subsidy, but only 86 payments were actually assigned. Shulyak noted that one of the reasons for the low demand for the program is precisely the informal nature of rental relations.

She also emphasized that even with the presence of state support programs, their effectiveness is at risk if a significant part of the market remains in the shadows.