How Much Does a Forensic Economic Examination Cost in Ukraine

“How much will this cost?” is almost always the first question a court or a party asks the moment it considers bringing in a forensic economist. The honest answer from any specialist is the same: there is no single price list. The cost of a forensic economic examination depends on the scope of the study, the number of questions posed, the complexity of the case, and who actually performs the work — a state institution of the Ministry of Justice or a private, certified expert. Below I explain how the price is built in each case, what drives it, and who ultimately pays for it — grounded in the rules currently in force, not in “market average” figures.

Why there is no fixed price

A forensic economic examination is not an off-the-shelf service with a ready price tag; it is an individual study. One report may require checking two delivery notes, another the reconstruction of a company’s accounting over several years from thousands of primary documents. So any “price for an examination” quoted without reviewing the materials is either a rough guess or wishful thinking.

In my practice, the cost is always calculated from the actual labour intensity: how many hours of qualified work are needed to answer the posed questions correctly and completely. This is precisely why two outwardly similar cases can differ in cost several times over.

Two pricing models

In Ukraine, a forensic economic examination may be conducted either by specialised state institutions of the Ministry of Justice (the research institutes of forensic examinations) or by private, certified forensic experts entered in the state Register. The general framework for this activity is set by the Law of Ukraine “On Forensic Examination,” while the procedure for ordering and conducting studies is governed by the relevant Ministry of Justice Instruction (Order No. 53/5). The mechanism for setting the price differs between the two models.

State institutions of the Ministry of Justice: calculation by expert-hours

State institutions calculate the cost by normo-hours (expert-hours). The logic is straightforward:

1. For each type of study there are indicative time-expenditure norms.
2. The number of hours is multiplied by the approved cost of a single expert-hour.
3. The resulting sum is the cost of the examination.

The cost of one expert-hour is not an arbitrary number chosen by the institution — it is a regulated tariff. The Ministry of Justice sets it each year by a separate order, indexing it to inflation (the Consumer Price Index). As of 2026, for example, the expert-hour rate for state institutions is around UAH 458; in previous years it was noticeably lower. For complex studies or shortened deadlines, increasing coefficients may apply — this too is provided for in the regulations.

The advantage of this model is transparency and predictability: the client sees the hour calculation and the fixed rate. The limitation is the queue and workload of the institutions, which can make turnaround times long.

Private certified experts: contractual price

A private forensic expert works at a contractual price. They likewise take labour intensity and complexity as their reference point, but agree the final cost directly with the client in a contract. This offers flexibility on deadlines and format of work and, often, a faster start to the study.

Importantly, a contractual price does not mean “any price.” A qualified private expert holds the same Ministry of Justice certification in the relevant economic specialisations (examination of accounting and tax records, of documents on the economic activity of enterprises, and of financial and credit transaction documents), and their report carries the same evidentiary weight in court as one from a state institution.

Criterion	State institution (Ministry of Justice)	Private certified expert
Basis of the price	Normo-hours × approved rate	Contractual price by labour intensity
Who sets the tariff	Ministry of Justice (annual order)	Agreement in the contract
Flexibility on deadlines	Limited (queue)	Higher
Evidentiary weight of the report	Identical	Identical

What the cost depends on

Regardless of the model, the same factors drive the final sum. They are worth keeping in mind as early as the stage of drafting the motion:

• Number of questions. Each question is a separate line of inquiry. Five questions cost more than one not “because that’s the rule,” but because they demand separate calculations and reasoning.
• Volume of documents. Examining a single contract and examining a company’s records over three years are fundamentally different tasks in terms of labour.
• Complexity. A simple arithmetic check of a calculation is cheaper than reconstructing incomplete records, analysing related-party transactions, or examining signs of asset stripping (often bordering on matters of interest to the State Financial Monitoring Service, Derzhfinmonitoring).
• Urgency. Expedited work outside the general queue increases the cost.
• Condition and completeness of the materials. Chaotic, incomplete, or contradictory documents require more time to organise — and that is reflected in the price.

The practical takeaway: the more clearly the questions are framed and the better organised the materials, the more precise and usually the more economical the calculation.

Who ultimately pays for the examination

This is the second most frequent question after price itself. Here everything depends on the type of proceedings.

In civil, commercial and administrative proceedings

The general principle applies: the party that initiates pays. The party that filed the motion for an examination advances the funds (to the court’s deposit account, or directly to the institution or expert, depending on the established procedure). If both parties request the examination, or the court orders it on its own initiative, the court determines how funds are advanced. This is a typical situation, in particular, in tax disputes with the State Tax Service (DPS), which are often heard under the rules of administrative justice.

The key point clients should understand: advance payment is not the final allocation of costs. Examination expenses form part of the court costs and, at the end of the case, are distributed between the parties. The general rule is that they fall on the party that loses the dispute (in proportion to the claims satisfied). These rules are set out in the procedural codes: the allocation of court costs in civil proceedings is governed by Article 141 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), in commercial proceedings by Article 129 of the Commercial Procedure Code; the Code of Administrative Procedure contains analogous provisions. Separately, the procedural law (for example, Article 139 of the CPC) regulates specifically the costs connected with engaging experts and conducting the examination.

So the logic is:

1. The initiator pays for the examination in advance.
2. The examination is conducted and the report is added to the case file.
3. Based on the outcome, the court reallocates the costs — and the winning party may recover these funds from the opponent.

In criminal proceedings

Here the model is different. If the examination is ordered by a resolution of the investigator or prosecutor (including an investigator of the Bureau of Economic Security, BEB) or by a ruling of the investigating judge, and is assigned to a specialised state institution, the study is conducted at the expense of the state — the party does not pay for it out of pocket. This is provided for by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (KPK) on engaging an expert.

At the same time, the defence has the right to engage an expert independently, including a private one — and such a study is paid for by whoever orders it. In practice, businesses and their lawyers often use this right to obtain an independent report quickly, without waiting in line at a state institution.

When and how payment is made

A common misconception is that the work will be paid for “after the fact,” once the finished report is in hand. Forensic expert practice follows the reverse order: the study begins after payment is received against an issued invoice. This applies to both state institutions and private experts.

The reason is simple and grounded in the regulations: the expert spends working time from the outset, and the amount of that time is known in advance from the calculation. So the typical sequence is:

1. Review of the list of questions and the volume of materials.
2. Issuing an invoice (in a state institution, with a normo-hour calculation).
3. Payment of the invoice by the client, or the advancing of funds under the procedure set by the court.
4. Conducting the study and preparing the report.

Approximate ranges: why read them carefully

Clients always ask for “at least a ballpark.” I will give one, but with an important caveat: it is not a tariff, it is an illustration of scale.

• A simple study with one or two questions and a small set of documents sits at the lower price segment — a handful of expert-hours.
• A multi-episode examination with a large volume of primary records, several years of accounting, and complex questions already runs to dozens of expert-hours, and the cost rises accordingly, several times over.

Any specific sum quoted before the materials are reviewed will be either understated (and later corrected) or padded “just in case.” That is why a proper calculation always starts from the questions and documents, not from a ready price list.

Typical client mistakes

• Framing questions too broadly. “Examine all financial and economic activity” is both slow and expensive. Precise, focused questions make the work cheaper.
• Posing legal questions instead of economic ones. A forensic economist does not decide questions of law (guilt, the legal qualification of an act). Such questions are either rejected or needlessly inflate the scope.
• Submitting incomplete materials. A study without key primary documents is either suspended or yields a limited result — and the time has already been spent.
• Expecting to pay “after the fact.” As noted above, the invoice is paid before the study begins.
• Confusing advance payment with final allocation. In court cases, the advanced funds may be recovered from the opponent — this is decided by the final judgment.

How to optimise the examination budget within the law

1. Narrow the questions to the essence of the dispute. The more specific the question, the fewer hours and the more precise the report.
2. Organise the documents in advance. A systematised set of primary records reduces labour intensity.
3. Consult before filing the motion. A preliminary discussion with the expert helps frame the questions correctly and avoid “empty” lines of inquiry you would have to pay for.
4. Choose the right model. Where deadlines are critical, a private expert with a contractual price may be more rational; where formalised expert-hour tariffication matters, a state institution.

If you are estimating the budget for an upcoming examination or simply drafting the questions for a motion, get in touch for a consultation — I will help determine the real scope of the study and prepare a proper list of questions before you go to court.”