China was the only G20 country that did not support a number of provisions in the final document of the meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors of the “Group of Twenty,” held August 31–September 1, 2026, in Asheville, North Carolina.
As a result, instead of a joint communiqué agreed upon by all participants, the United States, as G20 chair, issued a chair’s statement. The official document from the U.S. Department of the Treasury states that it was endorsed by all G20 members present, except for China, which opposed four sections.
One of the main points of contention was the issue of global trade imbalances. The text, supported by the other countries, calls on nations to abandon non-market policies and practices that exacerbate imbalances. Countries with excessive and persistent external trade surpluses are urged to eliminate factors that constrain domestic consumption and create excessive dependence of economic growth on exports.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated after the meeting that China was the only dissenting participant. He called China’s current account surplus the largest and “unsustainable” and stated that a non-market economic model that constantly increases the supply of cheap export goods cannot be sustainable.
China also did not support provisions to expand the International Monetary Fund’s role in monitoring global economic imbalances. The other G20 members advocated for strengthening the IMF’s analysis, including an assessment of non-market policies, the factors driving external trade imbalances, and their impact on other economies.
Another point of contention was the Strait of Hormuz. The G20 statement expressed concern over ongoing disruptions to energy trade and emphasized the need for free, safe, and predictable shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and other key maritime routes. China opposed the entire relevant section of the document.
In addition, Beijing disagreed with the section concerning sovereign debt restructuring and the continued application of the G20’s Comprehensive Framework for Addressing the Debt Problems of Developing Countries. An official document from the U.S. Treasury Department explicitly states that China objected to paragraphs 4, 10, 11, and 13 of the statement.
Despite the lack of full consensus, the remaining 19 G20 members supported the approach to reducing global imbalances. Reuters notes that the issue has effectively turned into a debate over China’s export model, industrial subsidies, and the growing supply of Chinese products to global markets.
These disagreements come amid growing concerns from the U.S., the EU, and several other major economies regarding China’s manufacturing capacity and its expanding trade surplus. Western nations fear that a glut of Chinese industrial goods could intensify pressure on local manufacturers and increase dependence on specific supply chains.
The meeting in Asheville marked the second gathering of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors under the U.S. presidency in 2026. Key topics included economic growth, global imbalances, public debt, digital assets, financial literacy, and the state of the global financial system.
The G20 currently comprises 19 countries: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Canada, China, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United States, Turkey, France, South Africa, South Korea, and Japan.
In addition, the European Union and the African Union are full members of the G20. Thus, following the African Union’s accession in 2023, the G20 effectively comprises 21 members—19 countries and two regional organizations.
According to Experts.news, Ukraine’s largest retailers continued to increase their revenue in the first half of 2026, with the growth rates of leading chains in most cases exceeding that of the country’s retail market as a whole. ATB remains the leader in terms of revenue, while among the largest companies, Aurora and Fora posted the highest growth rates, according to an analysis by the Experts Club research center based on data from OpenDataBot.
As of mid-August 2026, there were 41,235 companies operating in the retail sector in Ukraine. Their number has been increasing for the fifth consecutive year. Since the beginning of the year, the number of registered retailers has exceeded the number of those that closed by 796 companies, which is practically in line with the pre-war level of net growth—804 companies over a comparable period. A total of 969 new companies were registered in 2026, 32% more than the previous year. (OpenDataBot)
To assess financial trends, OpenDataBot identified 2,073 companies that submitted financial statements for both the first half of 2025 and the corresponding period of 2026. Their combined revenue increased by 18%—from 692.29 billion UAH to 817.14 billion UAH.
The ranking of Ukraine’s largest retailers by revenue for the first half of 2026 is as follows:
ATB-Market – 135.99 billion UAH, up 16.1% compared to 117.15 billion UAH a year earlier.
Silpo-Food – 59.55 billion UAH, +18.2%.
Vygodna Kupka / “Aurora” – 28.26 billion UAH, +30.0%.
Fora – 26.83 billion UAH, +29.4%.
Comfi Trade – 20.16 billion UAH, +27.5%.
Novus Ukraine – 19.65 billion UAH, +20.6%.
RUSH / EVA – 18.02 billion UAH, +21.4%.
Metro Cash & Carry Ukraine – 17.70 billion UAH, +14.5%.
Petrol Contract / WOG – 16.35 billion UAH, +17.2%.
Omega / Varus – 13.72 billion UAH, +21.6%.
According to Experts Club’s calculations, the combined revenue of the top ten companies reached 356.23 billion UAH, an increase of approximately 19.7% compared to the first half of 2025. Thus, the top 10 grew slightly faster than the entire comparable group of retailers.
The ten largest companies accounted for about 43.6% of the total revenue of the 2,073 retailers included in the OpenDataBot sample. ATB and Silpo alone generated approximately 195.5 billion UAH, or nearly 24% of the total revenue of the entire group studied, while the top five companies generated approximately 270.8 billion UAH, or one-third of the total.
ATB remains the undisputed market leader: its revenue is more than double that of Silpo and nearly five times that of Aurora. Furthermore, ATB recorded the largest absolute increase in revenue—18.84 billion UAH over the year.
However, in terms of growth rates, “Aurora” and “Fora” stand out the most. “Aurora’s” revenue increased by 30%, or 6.52 billion UAH, while “Fora’s” rose by 29%, or 6.1 billion UAH. “Komfi” saw an increase of about 27.5%.
Outside the top ten in terms of revenue, FTD-Retail—which operates the “Foxtrot” chain—demonstrated strong growth, increasing its revenue by 4.47 billion hryvnia. OKKO-Light added 3.88 billion UAH, while Glusko Retail—whose gas station network is managed by Ukrnafta—added 2.76 billion UAH.
The financial results also reveal another trend. The combined profit of the companies surveyed grew by 17%—from 14.91 billion UAH to 17.44 billion UAH—but the number of profitable retailers decreased.
In the first half of 2025, 1,354 companies in the comparable group reported a profit; in 2026, that number dropped to 1,272. Their share fell from 65% to 61%.
This means that growth in the Ukrainian retail sector is becoming more concentrated. The sector’s total revenue and profit are increasing, and leading chains are posting double-digit growth rates; however, operating conditions remain challenging for some small and medium-sized companies.
According to Experts Club’s assessment, the discrepancy between the 18% increase in total revenue for the surveyed group and the decline in the share of profitable companies is particularly telling. It may indicate rising operating expenses, labor costs, logistics costs, rent, electricity costs, and financing costs, as well as intensified competition from the largest chains.
At the same time, the financial statements for the first half of the year do not yet reflect the consequences of subsequent massive Russian strikes on distribution centers, warehouses, and other infrastructure of Ukrainian businesses, a point specifically highlighted by OpenDataBot. Their impact may become apparent in the results of the coming quarters.
General government statistics also confirm the continued growth of the consumer market. As previously reported by Open4Business, citing the State Statistics Service, in January–July 2026, the physical volume of Ukraine’s retail trade turnover increased by 9% compared to the same period last year, while its nominal volume reached approximately 1.7 trillion UAH.
Retail turnover of legal entities grew slightly faster over the seven-month period, by 9.1%. In July alone, total retail turnover increased by 8.7% year-over-year and by 4% compared to June, while turnover of legal entities rose by 8.8% and 3.7%, respectively. Overall, Ukrainian retail grew by 8.1% in 2025, so the figures for the first seven months of 2026 indicate that consumer activity continues at a higher pace.
According to the “Serbian Economist,” Serbia’s economic ties with the European Union are now significantly more extensive than its trade with Russia, while Belgrade’s main dependence on Moscow remains primarily in the energy sector, said Andon Sapundži, Serbia’s ambassador to Ukraine.
According to him, about 70% of Serbia’s exports and imports go to European Union countries, with another approximately 15% going to countries in the region that are candidates or seeking to join the EU, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Albania.
“The remaining countries account for the rest of Serbia’s foreign trade, including the United States, China, and Russia. Russia’s share is approximately 7–8%, and a significant portion of this trade consists of energy resources, primarily natural gas,” Sapundži said in an interview with “Apostrophe.”
According to him, dependence on Russian energy resources remains one of the most sensitive aspects of Serbian-Russian economic relations, which is why Belgrade is working to diversify its sources and supply routes.
Separately, the ambassador commented on the situation surrounding Serbia’s largest oil and gas company, NIS, which has come under U.S. sanctions due to Russian ownership stakes.
According to him, the process of changing NIS’s ownership structure is in full swing. Serbia is discussing the company’s future structure with Hungary’s MOL, while negotiations with Russia’s Gazprom Neft are ongoing. To finalize the deal, appropriate approvals under the U.S. sanctions regime are required, among other things.
Sapundži identified Serbia’s two main priorities as maintaining energy security and finding a long-term, sustainable ownership structure for NIS.
The company is of strategic importance to the country’s economy, as it operates Serbia’s only oil refinery in Pančevo.
At the same time, the diplomat emphasized that a change in trade structure does not mean Serbia is completely abandoning its economic relations with Russia.
Belgrade, meanwhile, continues to pursue EU accession. According to Sapundži, European integration remains a strategic priority for the country, although Serbia’s refusal to join sanctions against Russia is creating difficulties in negotiations with Brussels.
On August 27, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order renaming Lake Ontario “Lake America.”
However, it is important to note that this does not constitute an international renaming of the lake. Lake Ontario is located on the border between the U.S. and Canada, and Trump’s executive order applies only to federal agencies and official U.S. geographic names. Canada is under no obligation to recognize the new name and continues to use “Lake Ontario.”
According to Executive Order No. 14420, the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, together with the U.S. Board on Geographic Names, must add the name “Lake America” to the federal Geographic Names Information System within 30 days. After that, the new name must be used in documents, maps, and communications by U.S. federal agencies.
Trump explained this decision by citing the lake’s economic and historical significance to the United States. The text of the executive order highlights the lake’s role in American trade, shipping, and military history, as well as Washington’s investments in protecting the Great Lakes ecosystem.
The decision was made against the backdrop of a new escalation in trade relations between the U.S. and Canada. Negotiations between the two countries on a trade agreement were suspended on August 21 after Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney stated that the terms proposed by Washington did not serve the country’s interests. Canada subsequently announced that it was preparing corresponding trade measures.
The Canadian side did not recognize the renaming. Carney stated that in Canada, the body of water would continue to be called Lake Ontario. The name “Ontario” itself comes from the language of Indigenous peoples and was in use long before the modern United States and Canada came into existence.
While signing the executive order, Trump also floated the idea of further geographical renaming.
“We have a bay, and now we have a lake. We need an ocean,” the U.S. president said, adding that Washington could theoretically consider a new name for the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean—or both. So far, there are no executive orders or official procedures regarding the renaming of oceans.
This decision continues the trend of geographical renaming during Trump’s second presidential term. In January 2025, he ordered U.S. federal agencies to use the name “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico” and restored the name “Mount McKinley” to Denali in Alaska.
Retail sales of Ukrainian retail enterprises—legal entities—increased by 9.1% in January–July 2026 compared with the same period in 2025, according to data from the State Statistics Service of Ukraine.
Thus, retail enterprises grew slightly faster than the country’s retail market as a whole, whose turnover increased by 9% during this period.
In July, enterprise turnover rose by 8.8% compared to July 2025 and by 3.7% compared to June of this year.
Overall, Ukraine’s retail trade turnover—which also includes estimates of the activities of individual entrepreneurs—reached approximately 1.7 trillion UAH over the seven-month period.
The difference between the growth rate of total turnover and that of legal entities is small—just 0.1 percentage points. However, the fact that comparable growth rates have been maintained indicates that the retail market’s growth is driven not only by small businesses but also by the corporate retail segment.
Retail enterprises include, in particular, national and regional supermarket chains, non-food stores, home appliance and electronics chains, pharmacies and specialty retailers, auto dealers, and other legal entities engaged in retail sales.
By the end of 2025, Ukraine’s retail trade had grown by 8.1%, so the figures for the first seven months of 2026 so far indicate that the market is maintaining higher growth rates.
Statistics from the State Statistics Service do not include territories temporarily occupied by Russia or parts of territories where hostilities are ongoing or have taken place.
Retail sales in Ukraine in July 2026 increased by 4% compared to June, and year-over-year growth stood at 8.7%, according to data from the State Statistics Service.
The July data indicate that consumer activity remains fairly high in the Ukrainian domestic market.
Specifically, retail sales by legal entities rose by 3.7% in July compared to June and by 8.8% compared to July 2025.
From January through July, the country’s retail trade turnover increased by 9% year-over-year and reached approximately 1.7 trillion hryvnia in nominal terms.
Retail trade turnover for retail enterprises grew slightly faster over the seven-month period—by 9.1%.
By comparison, for the full year of 2025, Ukraine’s retail trade turnover increased by 8.1%.
Thus, after the first seven months of 2026, the retail market’s growth rate remains slightly higher than last year’s figure.
Future retail trends will depend on real household incomes, inflation, the labor market situation, and energy risks during the fall and winter months.
The State Statistics Service provides data excluding territories temporarily occupied by Russia and parts of the country where hostilities are ongoing or have taken place.
Source: https://stat.gov.ua/uk/releases/prodazh-i-zapasy-tovariv-u-torhoviy-merezhi-misyachna-01-072026
