Ukrainian supermarkets may source fruit from a company with Russian links

After the restrictions introduced by Russia in late May and early June 2026 on imports of certain vegetable and fruit products from Armenia, Armenian exporters found themselves in a situation where they urgently needed to look for alternative markets.

In particular, from 30 May 2026, Rosselkhoznadzor restricted imports from Armenia of fresh tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, herbs and strawberries. From 2 June, according to Russian media reports citing the regulator, the restrictions were also extended to stone fruits — sour cherries, sweet cherries, apricots, plums, peaches and nectarines — as well as fresh grapes.

For the Ukrainian market, this may mean the arrival of additional volumes of imported produce in the middle of the season. According to EastFruit market sources, one of the companies actively offering products to Ukrainian buyers is the Armenian company Spayka. According to market participants, the company is offering fruit and vegetables on highly competitive commercial terms, including the possibility of deferred payment.

The mere fact that an importer is entering the Ukrainian market is not a violation. However, when it comes to suppliers that have or previously had links to Russian jurisdiction, operated in the Russian market, or were mentioned in regulatory cases related to product origin, Ukrainian retail chains should conduct particularly thorough due diligence.

Why this matters for Ukrainian retail

Since 2022, for Ukrainian businesses, questions related to product origin, supplier ownership structure, links with Russia, and the possible presence of products in temporarily occupied territories have ceased to be purely formal.

For supermarkets and distributors, this is no longer only a matter of price or product availability. It is also a matter of reputational security, sanctions sensitivity, consumer trust and responsibility towards Ukrainian producers.

This is especially relevant for the fruit and vegetable market, where seasonal imports at very low prices can create additional pressure on the Ukrainian sector and push prices down.

What is known about the Russian link

According to data from open Russian business registers, a company called SPAYKA-RUS LLC, TIN 7715870580, PSRN 1117746459830, is registered in Moscow. In the Audit-it service, David Vengerovich Kazaryan is listed as the owner of the company; he is also associated with the Armenian company Spayka. Similar information about the owner is also available in profiles of other Russian business registers, including Kontur.Focus.

This does not automatically mean a violation of Ukrainian law. However, for Ukrainian retail after 2022, this is no longer a neutral detail. An operating company in the Russian Federation pays taxes to the budget of the aggressor state.

Open sources also contain references to products under the Sambiel brand, which is associated with Spayka. In particular, the company itself reported on its website about investments in the production of Sambiel cheeses, while Russian marketplaces and retailers list Sambiel products indicating Spayka as the producer. Spayka products under the SAMBIEL brand are sold in temporarily occupied Crimea. There are numerous reviews and listings related to these products in open sources. Since the company has its own fleet of 320 refrigerated trucks, it is entirely possible that the company’s trucks may have repeatedly crossed Ukraine’s internationally recognised state border, although we have no documentary evidence of this. However, this is an extremely important question for anyone considering cooperation with such a company in Ukraine.

Spayka has also previously been mentioned in public reports related to suspicions of possible re-export of products. One of the most illustrative episodes concerned tomatoes in 2018. After Russian restrictions on imports of Turkish tomatoes, Rosselkhoznadzor stated that there were risks of Turkish products being supplied under the guise of Armenian origin. In this context, the companies Spayka and Greenproduct were directly mentioned in public reports. In particular, the ARKA news agency reported that, according to the Russian side, these companies imported almost 2,000 tonnes of tomatoes within six days, which raised suspicions of possible re-export.

This episode is important not because it proves guilt in itself. Formally, publicly available materials refer specifically to suspicions and inspections, not to a final court ruling or an established violation. However, market professionals understand very well how likely it was that the sharp increase in tomato exports from Armenia happened purely by coincidence at the very moment when Russia, for political reasons, imposed a ban on exports of this product from Turkey.

For Ukrainian supermarkets, this should already be sufficient grounds to classify such a supplier as higher risk. This means that retailers should require a complete package of documents from the supplier: certificates of origin, phytosanitary documents, logistics documents, information about producers, packing facilities and delivery routes.

The tax case in Armenia

Another factor that may be relevant for risk assessment is the tax case in Armenia. In 2019, the State Revenue Committee of Armenia accused Spayka of causing damage to the state amounting to more than AMD 7 billion, or over USD 14 million, due to alleged tax and customs duty evasion.

According to the Armenian state authority, goods from various European countries, including Poland and Belgium, were imported into Armenia via Georgia, but different data were used when submitting documents to customs. At the same time, the company’s director, David Kazaryan, publicly denied the accusations, stating that the amount had been artificially inflated and that the claims concerned another company, Greenproduct.

For retailers and large buyers, the very existence of official accusations by a state authority is a reputational factor that should be taken into account when assessing a potential supplier.

Political and sanctions context

Some Armenian media have also reported on possible political links surrounding Spayka. At the same time, for Ukrainian businesses after the start of the full-scale war, even indirect political or jurisdictional links with Russia are a sensitive factor. This is especially true when it concerns a supplier that plans to work with Ukrainian retail chains, receive payments from Ukrainian buyers and compete with Ukrainian producers during the season.

When dealing with supplies from companies with such a profile, Ukrainian supermarkets and distributors should not limit themselves to the standard checks of price, quality and certificates.

The minimum list of questions for the supplier should include:

• whether the company has active or related legal entities in Russia;
• whether taxes or other payments are made within Russian jurisdiction;
• whether the company’s products or brands are present in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine;
• which documents confirm the country of origin of the products;
• who exactly is the producer, packer and exporter of the goods;
• which route is used to deliver the products to Ukraine;
• whether the company has previously faced regulatory claims related to customs documents, re-export or product origin.

For Ukrainian consumers, affordable and high-quality fruit and vegetables are important. However, consumers are unlikely to want their money to support a company linked to the aggressor state. Moreover, according to official Russian sources, Spayka has significant debts to the budget of the aggressor state. If the Ukrainian market becomes a rescue destination for this business, it is quite possible that money earned in Ukraine could end up in the Russian budget.