eOselya After Four Years: How the Program Became the Foundation of Ukraine's Mortgage Market and What Hinders New Housing

In early October 2026, the affordable housing program eOselya turned four. In a column for RBC-Ukraine, Olena Shuliak, Head of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on State Power, Local Self-Government, Regional Development and Urban Planning, summarizes the results of the mechanism launched in the autumn of 2022 and analyzes why it should be viewed primarily as an economic tool rather than merely a social measure. According to her, over the course of four years, more than 29,000 families have acquired housing through the program, and banks have issued 51.6 billion UAH in loans; these families, per the author's data, are raising over 19,000 children.

From Skepticism to the Main Mortgage Instrument

The author recalls that at the program's launch, doubts were raised: who would take out a twenty-year loan during wartime. In her assessment, demand proved resilient, growing from dozens of applications per week to hundreds. In 2026, according to the cited figures, 6,426 loans totaling 12.8 billion UAH were issued starting in January, of which 8.4 billion UAH came in the first half of the year compared to 5.5 billion UAH in the same period the previous year—an increase of over 50%. Shuliak emphasizes that eOselya accounts for 93% of all new housing loans in Ukraine, meaning the program has effectively become the country's primary mortgage market. At the same time, she points to another figure: only 0.4% of Ukrainian households hold a mortgage, and about 3% of housing transactions pass through the program, which, she says, signifies the beginning of the journey.

Who Buys Through eOselya

According to Shuliak, nearly half of the borrowers are military personnel, law enforcement officers, and veterans; they are followed by citizens without their own housing, internally displaced persons, medical workers, teachers, and scientists. To illustrate, the author cites data from a single week in early October when 159 families received loans: 46 veterans, 33 military personnel, 45 first-time homebuyers, 18 displaced families, nine medical workers, seven teachers, and one scientist. These figures illustrate the program's social composition, although in the column text they are presented as the author's assessment rather than comprehensive agency statistics.

Economic Impact: Construction, Banks, and Market Structure

Shuliak describes eOselya as a multiplier: behind every apartment in a new building lie orders for cement, reinforcement, windows, doors, wiring, and furniture, while the construction sector's share in Ukraine's GDP, she notes, remains noticeably lower than that of European neighbors. In 2025, according to the cited data, about a third of transactions in new buildings went through the program, and in March 2026 the market, she says, set a record for the number of mortgage transactions in new buildings; several construction market representatives, according to her, note that without the program, some projects would have stalled. The mortgage portfolio reached an estimated 50 billion UAH, growing by 35% over the year. The author also points to a shift in demand structure: the share of transactions priced above 3 million UAH decreased from 37% in 2025 to 24% in March 2026, while apartments under 50 m² were chosen by 62% of borrowers, which, she says, encourages developers to design compact, functional apartments.

Barriers: Materials, Personnel, and Procedures

The column lists the constraints that can cause state demand to translate into rising prices rather than new square meters. According to Shuliak, prices for construction materials have risen by 20–25% since the beginning of the year, and if the program's cost limits fail to keep pace with the market, some apartments will fall out of the mechanism. Separately, the author points to labor shortages: due to mobilization and outflow, the industry has lost personnel, and construction that previously took a year can now stretch to a year and a half. Among the necessary measures, she highlights retraining programs, attracting women to the profession, protecting business from pressure, and digitalizing permit procedures.

Author's Assessment

Summarizing, Shuliak characterizes eOselya as one of the state's most effective economic instruments in wartime, which simultaneously supports construction, the primary market, the banking system, and local budgets through wages and taxes at construction sites. The key task, in her formulation, is to synchronize the program's limits with the market and ensure sufficient supply so that demand is converted into real square meters rather than price inflation.