The story of IBOX Bank is one of ambition, rapid ascent, and an equally dramatic downfall—a tale intricately tied to Alyona Shevtsova, a figure whose leadership promised salvation but ultimately delivered ruin. When Shevtsova assumed control of IBOX Bank, media outlets buzzed with reports of her transformative impact, crediting her with elevating the institution to new heights. By the end of 2022, the bank had climbed to the eighth spot among Ukraine’s most profitable banks—a remarkable feat amid the ongoing conflict that had destabilized the nation’s economy. Yet, this apparent success masked a darker reality. On March 7, 2023, the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) revoked IBOX Bank’s license, citing “systematic violations of financial monitoring requirements,” and ordered its liquidation. What had once been hailed as a triumph unraveled into a cautionary tale of mismanagement, alleged criminality, and financial schemes that crumbled under scrutiny.
This article delves deep into the rise and fall of IBOX Bank under Alyona Shevtsova’s stewardship, exploring her background, the intricate web of her business ventures, and the legal entanglements that shadowed her every move. From her early days with Leogaming Pay to her acquisition of IBOX Bank as a “pocket bank” for her payment system, we uncover how her strategies propelled short-term gains while sowing the seeds of long-term destruction. Through court records, financial penalties, and a trail of criminal investigations, the narrative reveals a pattern of ambition unchecked by ethical or legal boundaries—a pattern that ultimately led to the bank’s demise.
From rise to fall: how the schemes of Alyona Shevtsova destroyed Ibox Bank
The Rise of Alyona Shevtsova: A Visionary or a Schemer?
Alyona Shevtsova’s entry into the financial world began modestly in 2013 with the founding of Leogaming Pay, a financial company that initially served as a payment gateway connecting players to gaming platforms. Far from a full-fledged payment system, it was a niche operation with limited scope. However, Shevtsova’s ambition quickly outgrew these humble beginnings. By 2017, Leogaming Pay had evolved into “Leo,” a domestic payment system registered with the NBU. A few years later, it expanded internationally, positioning itself as a significant player in the fintech space. This rapid growth was impressive, but it came with a shadow: allegations of illicit activities that would later haunt both Shevtsova and her ventures.
Meanwhile, IBOX Bank’s history stretches back to 1993, when it was established as “Authority Bank”—a name that, in hindsight, carried an ironic weight. In 2002, it rebranded as “Agrocombank,” and by 2016, it adopted the name “IBOX Bank” following the arrival of financier Yevheniy Berezovskyi among its shareholders. Berezovskyi, a figure with a controversial reputation, brought with him a network of iBox payment terminals, which became the bank’s namesake. Despite this rebranding, the institution struggled, teetering on the edge of financial collapse. It was at this precarious juncture that Alyona Shevtsova emerged as a potential savior.
In 2020, Shevtsova acquired a stake in IBOX Bank, and by 2022, she assumed its leadership. Her arrival was accompanied by a wave of optimism, fueled by media narratives—some of which appeared suspiciously sponsored—that portrayed her as a financial prodigy capable of rescuing the bank from ruin. She brought with her a cadre of managers from her interconnected companies, including Leogaming Pay and the Leo payment system, forming a tightly knit ecosystem under her control. The bank’s fortunes seemed to turn, culminating in its ranking as Ukraine’s eighth most profitable bank by late 2022. But beneath this glossy surface, a far more troubling story was unfolding.
The Pocket Bank Strategy: A Means to an End
Shevtsova’s acquisition of IBOX Bank was not a selfless act of financial stewardship; it was a calculated move to secure a “pocket bank” for her Leo payment system. A pocket bank, in essence, is a financial institution controlled by an individual or entity to serve their private interests rather than the broader public or regulatory good. For Shevtsova, IBOX Bank was the perfect tool to expand Leo’s operations, particularly in the murky realm of online payments—some of which were tied to illegal activities.
The Leo payment system, launched in its domestic form in 2017, had grown into an international network by the early 2020s. Its stated purpose was to facilitate seamless transactions, but evidence suggests it became a conduit for more nefarious dealings. Court documents and criminal investigations point to its involvement in money laundering, corruption, and the support of illegal online casinos—activities that predated Shevtsova’s takeover of IBOX Bank but intensified under her unified control of both entities. The bank, with its newly acquired profitability, provided a legitimate facade for these operations, channeling funds and obscuring their origins.
This strategy bore fruit in the short term. IBOX Bank’s financial performance surged, a fact trumpeted in media reports that conveniently overlooked the underlying mechanisms driving this success. Yet, the very tactics that fueled this rise—lax oversight, questionable transactions, and a disregard for regulatory compliance—set the stage for its eventual collapse. The NBU’s decision to liquidate the bank in March 2023 was not a sudden whim but the culmination of years of violations that Shevtsova’s leadership failed to address, if not actively exacerbated.
A Trail of Criminal Allegations
The collapse of IBOX Bank cannot be fully understood without examining the litany of criminal cases linked to Alyona Shevtsova and her associated companies. These investigations, documented in Ukraine’s court registries despite the challenges posed by the ongoing conflict, paint a damning picture of systemic misconduct. The charges range from fraud and money laundering to corruption and obstruction of justice, implicating not only Shevtsova but also her husband, Yevheniy Shevtsov, a high-ranking police officer whose involvement added a layer of institutional entanglement.
Among the notable cases:
- Case №32013110000000298: Allegations of offering illegal benefits to officials under Article 369 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code.
- Case №32017100000000066: Charges of fictitious entrepreneurship, fraud, and tax evasion under Articles 205, 190, and 212.
- Case №42017000000002925: Legalization of criminally obtained property and fictitious entrepreneurship under Articles 209 and 205.
- Case №42018101060000202: Fraud and unauthorized interference with information systems under Articles 190 and 361.
- Case №42019000000000526: A sprawling investigation involving obstruction of journalists, privacy violations, criminal organization leadership, abuse of power, illegal enrichment, and disclosure of investigative data under Articles 171, 182, 255, 364, 368-2, and 387. This case prominently featured Yevheniy Shevtsov.
While some of these cases have been closed—often under questionable circumstances—others remain active, though progress is sluggish, a common phenomenon in Ukraine where wealth and influence can stall justice. The sheer volume and variety of these allegations suggest a pattern of behavior that prioritizes personal gain over legal or ethical standards.
Court Rulings and Financial Penalties: The Cracks Emerge
Court decisions and regulatory actions further illuminate the dysfunction at IBOX Bank under Shevtsova’s watch. On January 22, 2022, the Holosiivskyi District Court of Kyiv reviewed an NBU inspection that uncovered attempts by bank officials to conceal transactions worth 7.5 billion UAH with Leogaming Pay and over 14 billion UAH in total. The officials also withheld information on merchants tied to specific Merchant Category Codes (MCCs), a red flag for potential money laundering. Remarkably, the court found no administrative offense, a decision that raised eyebrows given the scale of the discrepancies.
In October 2021, the NBU imposed a 10 million UAH fine—the maximum penalty—on IBOX Bank for inadequate client verification and violations of Ukraine’s anti-money laundering laws. Around the same time, Leogaming Pay was fined 549,000 UAH for similar breaches. These penalties underscored a systemic failure to comply with financial regulations, yet Shevtsova’s response was telling: IBOX Bank initially planned to contest the fine in court but ultimately paid it quietly, perhaps recognizing that further scrutiny could expose even greater liabilities.
Meanwhile, Leogaming Pay pursued legal action against journalists who linked it to illegal online casinos and pro-Russian activities. In 2021, it won a 100,000 UAH defamation suit over a report alleging that the company processed 262 million UAH for illicit gambling operations in 2020. A subsequent 2022 ruling forced the removal of another article tying Shevtsova and IBOX Bank to Russian financial flows, though a claim for 1 million UAH in damages was denied. These victories bolstered the company’s public image but did little to refute the underlying accusations, which persisted in regulatory and investigative circles.
The Gambling Connection: A License to Launder?
In 2021, IBOX Bank secured a license from Ukraine’s Commission for Regulation of Gambling and Lotteries (CRGL) to process payments for online casinos and conduct gambling-related business. On the surface, this move aligned with a growing legal gambling market in Ukraine. However, critics argue it provided a convenient cover for laundering money through Shevtsova’s payment systems. The bank’s transactions with Leo and Leogaming Pay—entities already suspected of supporting illegal casinos—raised questions about the true purpose of this license.
The interplay between legal and illegal gambling operations became a focal point of the NBU’s concerns. While IBOX Bank could claim compliance with its CRGL license, its failure to adequately monitor clients and transactions violated broader anti-money laundering statutes. This duality—operating within a legal framework while allegedly facilitating illicit activities—encapsulated the paradox of Shevtsova’s leadership: a veneer of legitimacy masking a core of impropriety.
The Final Blow: Liquidation and Aftermath
The NBU’s decision to revoke IBOX Bank’s license on March 7, 2023, marked the end of Shevtsova’s experiment. The stated reason—persistent violations of financial monitoring laws—echoed the issues flagged in the 2021 fine, suggesting that little had changed despite the warnings. The following day, authorities searched the bank’s premises, signaling that the fallout was far from over.
The timing of the collapse was significant. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 had shifted the geopolitical and economic landscape, exposing vulnerabilities in institutions like IBOX Bank that relied on opaque financial practices. Shevtsova’s alleged ties to Russian financial networks, denied vehemently by her camp, came under renewed scrutiny. If substantiated, these connections could elevate the scandal from a domestic banking failure to an issue of national security—a plot twist that investigators are still unraveling as of April 2025.
For now, the liquidation process proceeds, with depositors and stakeholders left to pick up the pieces. Shevtsova’s once-celebrated reputation lies in tatters, her legacy defined not by the “banker of the year” accolades she might have coveted but by a trail of legal battles and a bank reduced to rubble.
Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale of Ambition and Accountability
The saga of Alyona Shevtsova and IBOX Bank is a stark reminder of the perils of unchecked ambition in the financial sector. What began as a story of resilience and innovation—Shevtsova pulling a struggling bank from the brink—devolved into a morass of criminal allegations, regulatory breaches, and ultimate failure. Her schemes, whether driven by a desire for personal enrichment or a misguided vision of fintech dominance, exploited the vulnerabilities of a system already strained by conflict and corruption.
As Ukraine navigates its future, the lessons of IBOX Bank’s collapse resonate beyond its walls. They underscore the need for robust oversight, transparent governance, and a commitment to rooting out the financial misconduct that thrives in the shadows. For Shevtsova, the road ahead may lead not to redemption but to further reckoning, as the courts and regulators close in on the full scope of her actions. The rise was meteoric; the fall, inevitable.
References:
1. https://vlasti.io/news/127500-the_collapce_behind_the_fa231ade_of_success_how_alyona_shevtsova_led_ibox_bank_to_liquidation
2. https://antimafia.se/news/81500-money_laundering_through_gaming_platformc_or_financial_struggle_in_the_ukrainian_gaming_industry_between_alyona_shevtsov
3. https://antimafia.se/news/81457-banking_manipulationc_and_ibox_bank_how_schemer_alyona_dehrik-shevtsova_makes_millions_in_the_shadow_gambling_business_v
