Cost and Duration of Economic Examination in a Tax Dispute

Before entering a dispute with the tax authority, the logical first step is to estimate the budget: how much an economic examination will cost, how long it will take, and who ultimately pays for it. There is no universal price list here — the figure is built from the volume of documents, the number and complexity of the questions, and the examination specialty, while the timeframe set by the Ministry of Justice’s Instruction No. 53/5 as a rule does not exceed 90 calendar days. Below I lay out these benchmarks so you can plan both your budget and your strategy in a dispute with the State Tax Service of Ukraine (DPS).

What Determines the Cost of an Economic Examination

“How much does it cost?” has no answer without the details of the case — roughly like asking “how much does a renovation cost” without inspecting the property. Yet every cost factor can be estimated in advance once the materials are gathered. In tax disputes the price is shaped primarily by the following factors:

• Volume of materials — the number of case volumes, primary documents, accounting registers, tax invoices, bank statements and contracts to be examined.
• Number and complexity of questions — each properly framed question is a separate study with its own logic and documentary basis.
• Examination specialty — the study of accounting, tax records and reporting documents (specialty 11.1), documents on the economic activity of enterprises (11.2), or documents of financial and credit operations (11.3) require different methodologies and different amounts of time.
• Period under examination — an assessment for a single reporting period versus several years of activity is a radically different body of reporting.
• State of the documents — organized and complete materials are examined faster than scattered copies of poor quality.

Specialty and Number of Questions — the Main Multipliers

In the state specialized institutions of the Ministry of Justice the cost is not estimated by eye but calculated by norms: the volume of work is converted into expert-hours (standard hours) and multiplied by the established cost of a single hour. That is why two outwardly similar cases can cost differently — it all depends on how many hours the study of a specific body of documents actually takes. A private forensic expert relies on the same logic of labor intensity, but the price is contractual and fixed in the agreement before the work begins.

A common client mistake is to assume that ten questions cost the same as two. In reality, each question in a court ruling or an order is a separate study: its own subject, its own documents, its own calculation. Excessive or duplicated questions therefore directly increase both the price and the timeframe. Conversely, clearly and economically framed questions — for example, “are the tax amounts assessed in the audit report documentarily confirmed” instead of a vague “is everything correct in the accounting” — make the examination cheaper without weakening the evidential force of the conclusion.

How Long the Examination Takes: Timeframes Under Instruction No. 53/5

The procedure and timeframes are governed by the Ministry of Justice’s Instruction No. 53/5. The general rule is that the study is carried out within a period agreed with the body or person who ordered the examination (engaged the expert) and, as a rule, does not exceed 90 calendar days. Within this benchmark the term is set according to the volume of objects and their complexity, rising in gradations:

• small and uncomplicated studies — roughly up to ten days;
• medium in the number of objects or complexity — approximately up to one month;
• large bodies of documents or complex studies — roughly up to two months;
• especially voluminous and the most complex — within the 90-day limit; beyond that term the examination is conducted only with written approval from the body or person who ordered it, meaning the term may be extended.

It is important to understand that the countdown, as a rule, begins from the day the expert receives all the necessary materials, not from the date of the ruling or the contract. On top of the “pure” study time there is also the queue: state institutions often handle cases in order of receipt, so the actual start may be postponed regardless of the case’s complexity. That is precisely why the real term “from door to conclusion” is almost always longer than the purely calculated working time.

What Halts and Extends the Timeframe

• Incomplete materials — if primary documents are missing, the expert files a motion for them and the work is suspended until they arrive. This is the most common cause of delay in tax cases.
• Large volume — thousands of pages of reporting physically require more time.
• Clarification of questions — incorrectly or ambiguously framed questions have to be returned for rewording.
• Complex transaction structure — branched groups of enterprises, multi-stage calculations, transactions in foreign currency.

Who Pays for the Examination in a Dispute with the DPS

This is one of the most frequent questions at a consultation, and the answer depends on the plane in which you are conducting the dispute.

Challenging a tax assessment notice (podatkove povidomlennia-rishennia, PPR) proceeds under the rules of administrative court proceedings. Here the principle of court costs applies: the party that files the motion to order an examination, as a rule, pays the funds in advance — into the court’s deposit account or directly to the expert institution. The court then allocates the costs according to the outcome of the case. Administrative procedure has an important feature — the burden of proving the lawfulness of its decision rests on the subject of authority, i.e. on the DPS body. So if the court rules in favor of the taxpayer, the examination costs may be reimbursed at the expense of the relevant body — the exact mechanism and amount are determined by the court.

Separately there is a criminal dimension: if criminal proceedings have been opened over alleged tax evasion — the pre-trial investigation is often led by the Bureau of Economic Security (BEB) — the examination is usually ordered by the investigator, prosecutor or court, and the costs are initially covered as procedural at the state’s expense. A defense party that engages an expert on its own pays for that work itself. Following the proceedings, procedural costs are, as a general rule, determined by the court within the framework of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (KPK).

Practical tip: whatever the category of the case, agree on payment and the deposit before the examination is ordered — this saves you from a situation where the proceedings stall over non-payment.

Forensic Examination or Expert Study: What’s the Difference

An expert’s conclusion can be obtained by two routes, and the choice affects the price, the timeframe, and the moment the evidence appears in the case.

Criterion	Expert study (on order)	Forensic examination (by court ruling)
Who initiates	A person or lawyer — before or during proceedings	The court by its ruling
When it makes sense	Assess prospects, build a position, add evidence to a claim	When the court needs an independent study of special questions
Who frames the questions	The client (lawyer, person)	The court, considering the parties’ positions
Control and speed	Usually faster, more flexible schedule	Depends on the institution’s queue and workload

Procedural law grants both conclusions the status of evidence, and the court evaluates them under the general rules — together with other evidence, none having predetermined force. In practice a pre-trial study often becomes the foundation of the statement of claim: it shows for which amounts and why the authority’s position is wrong, even before going to court. If a sharp dispute remains between the parties over the calculation methodology, the court often orders an examination by its own ruling. The sensible strategy is not to oppose these routes but to use the pre-trial analysis to properly frame the questions for a possible forensic examination.

A State Ministry of Justice Institution or a Private Expert

Both the state research institutions of forensic examination under the Ministry of Justice and certified forensic experts in private practice work under unified methodologies and within the specialized law on forensic examination and Instruction No. 53/5. The key point: the evidential force of the conclusion does not depend on whether it comes from a state institution or a private expert. What matters is the expert’s qualification — their inclusion in the Register of Certified Forensic Experts maintained by the Ministry of Justice, adherence to methodologies, and the completeness of the materials. The difference lies mainly in pricing (norm-based versus contractual), queue and work organization. For a time-sensitive dispute it is worth finding out the approximate queue at a specific institution in advance so as not to miss procedural deadlines.

How to Speed Up and Reduce the Cost of the Examination

Most delays and overpayments are not about the complexity of the case but about preparation. Here is what genuinely shortens both the time and the bill:

1. Gather the full set of documents in advance. Contracts, delivery and tax invoices, work completion acts, bank statements, consignment notes, accounting registers and reporting for the disputed period. The expert cannot “draw in” missing primary records — a lack of documents halts the work.
2. Frame clear questions in the economic plane. A specific question about confirming an amount is cheaper and faster than a dozen vague formulations.
3. Order a short pre-trial consultation. The cheapest hour in an examination is the one spent before it is ordered: it helps you understand whether an examination is needed at all and to draw up a realistic list of documents.
4. Account for the queue. If the deadline is critical, discuss the choice of performer and the schedule in advance.

Costly Common Mistakes

• Incomplete materials — the main reason for suspension or extension of the term; documents should be kept in order even before the audit, because restoring them after the fact is difficult.
• Legal questions instead of economic ones — the expert does not assess the lawfulness of a tax assessment notice and does not qualify the actions of officials; the court will strike out such questions anyway, and time will be lost.
• Excessive number of duplicated questions — directly increases both the price and the timeframe with no benefit to your position.
• Turning to an expert at the last moment — when the appeal deadlines are already running out, even the highest-quality conclusion may not make it into the case in time.

If you are weighing whether to order an economic examination in a dispute with the DPS and want to understand the real benchmarks of cost and timing in your specific situation, I invite you to a preliminary consultation. Together we will frame the correct questions and outline the list of documents even before going to court, so that the examination becomes reliable evidence rather than a source of delays and unnecessary costs.