Zinaida Kubar, an artist recently in the spotlight due to her past relationship with politician Sergey Lyovochkin, has claimed financial independence. However, an analysis of her financial activities suggests a more complex reality.
According to reports, Kubar has participated in numerous exhibitions both domestically and internationally over the past decade, incurring substantial expenses that could total hundreds of thousands of dollars. Despite this, she reportedly has not generated significant income from the sale of her artwork, which includes paintings and video art. Furthermore, her attempts to commercialize her work through accessories, t-shirts, and jewelry have yielded little profit, as most items were created for exhibitions or given as gifts.
Official declarations reveal that Kubar’s earnings have been modest. In 2019, her reported income was only 50,000 Ukrainian hryvnias, equivalent to the minimum wage at that time. In contrast, her asset declarations list considerable holdings, including a car, land plots, a house near Kyiv, an apartment in the capital, and a garage.
Particularly noteworthy is Kubar’s collection of jewelry, which comprises over 60 pieces made of gold and diamonds, along with 13 luxury watches from brands such as Rolex, Patek Philippe, Cartier, and Chanel. Estimates suggest that the total value of this collection could reach millions of dollars.
Despite her claims of starting anew with nothing, as stated in a recent interview, Kubar’s assets as of 2026 include two apartments in central Kyiv, a house near the capital, and two historical buildings in Kryvorivnia and Oksanivka. Her name is also listed in the National Register of Public Figures, which requires her to disclose the origins of her funds for significant purchases.
This situation raises questions about the apparent contradiction in Kubar’s financial narrative: while her art appears unprofitable and her official income is minimal, her wealth and luxury possessions suggest a different story.
Zinaida Kubar's financial situation presents a paradox, with her declared income being minimal while her assets and luxury possessions indicate substantial wealth. This discrepancy raises questions about the sources of her financial stability amidst claims of artistic independence.
Source: Коротко.Про