Alona Lebedieva, owner of the industrial and investment group Aurum Group
Selling a state-owned asset and creating an efficient private business are two different tasks. The decree issued by the President of Uzbekistan on August 28, 2026, addresses precisely this divide: the state is lowering the cost of entering a transaction, but the quality of the asset after the sale will still depend not on the auction itself, but on capital, management and the rules that remain in place for the new owner.
The government plans to put up for sale stakes in 84 companies, 1,242 real estate assets and around 8,000 hectares of land for business and urban development projects. Another 85 state-owned enterprises are being prepared for liquidation or restructuring. The combined value of the assets is estimated at approximately UZS 100 trillion, or more than $8 billion. By the end of the year, the government expects privatization proceeds to contribute at least UZS 14 trillion to the budget.
The length of the list is not the most important part. What is changing is the economics of the purchase itself: how much has to be paid upfront, how long buyers have to complete payment, and what happens to lots that attract no market interest.
Entry Is Becoming Cheaper — but Not for Everyone
The initial payment required to purchase a state asset through an online auction is being reduced from 30% to 15%, payable within 30 days. The remainder can be paid in instalments without interest.
For large assets, the terms are even more flexible. Full payment within six months qualifies for a 25% discount. Another option allows the buyer to pay 35% of the price within three months and spread the remaining amount over up to five years. A third option provides for a 50% payment within six months, with the balance payable over up to seven years interest-free.
For a local strategic buyer, this is a significant change. If a large share of capital is tied up at the moment of acquisition, less funding remains available for equipment, repairs and working capital. In effect, the state is financing not only the sale itself, but also the private sector’s ability to buy the asset.
For an institutional investor in London or Singapore, however, a lower entry cost alone solves very little. Such investors need transparent reporting, understandable corporate governance, minority shareholder protection and a clear exit scenario. A seven-year instalment plan is relevant to one type of capital. For another, entirely different conditions determine whether the investment is viable.
If There Is No Demand, the Price Has to Move Toward the Market
Large-scale privatization often runs into a simple problem: an asset remains on the sale list for years because the starting price exists independently of actual demand.
The new mechanism takes this into account. If there is no interest for three months, the price may be reduced gradually — down to as little as 10% of the initial value. Some assets will be sold through a hybrid auction model: the price first moves downward, and once several bidders emerge, it begins to rise again. Previously unsold lots are also expected to be relisted.
This is the right shift: the reference point is no longer book value, but what the market is actually prepared to pay. Yet there is another side to this approach. A low starting price is justified only when there is genuine competition. Without it, privatization can quickly turn into a sale to a limited circle of buyers.
Land Without the Right to Build Is Not an Asset
A separate section of the decree concerns land. Increasingly, plots are expected to be prepared for auction as a “ready package”, including technical conditions for connection to utilities and construction permits.
For manufacturing and development projects, this may matter just as much as the price per hectare. An investor is not really buying land. The investor is buying time to launch the project. If another year after the auction is needed to secure electricity, water, planning conditions and approvals, a cheap plot quickly loses its appeal.
Real estate, land and a systemically important company belong to different markets. For the first two, new payment terms and a prepared documentation package can genuinely accelerate transactions. For a factory or a bank, however, a low entry cost is not the main risk.
The State Still Has a Large Role in the Economy
Privatization in Uzbekistan did not begin this year. According to an assessment reviewed by the President in April, the state still accounts for around 42% of the economy. There were 1,685 enterprises with state participation, even though their number had fallen by roughly 60% over the previous five years.
In 2025, state assets worth almost UZS 30 trillion were sold, generating more than UZS 10 trillion for the budget. At the same time, 362 inefficient state-owned enterprises ended the year with losses of around UZS 4 trillion.
That is why the next stage can no longer be measured by the number of lots. Reducing the list of state-owned companies proves very little if loss-making assets simply change their ownership label.
A Large Asset Is a Different Level of Transaction
The privatization pipeline includes not only buildings and non-core assets. Under the current framework of the decree, it also includes 98.9% of Turonbank, 100% of the insurance company Xalq Sug‘urta, 91.83% of Uzexpocentre, 79.27% of the International Business Center, as well as transport and industrial enterprises. Earlier privatization plans also included much heavier industrial names, ranging from the automotive sector to chemicals and energy.
Selling a building is primarily about price. Selling a systemically important asset is about debt, tariffs, employment, access to infrastructure, investment obligations and the competitive environment.
There is another condition that investors need to understand before submitting a bid. Under the same decree, the state may retain a special participation right in strategically important companies after privatization — effectively bringing back the logic of the “golden share”, which Uzbekistan abolished in 2022. Buyers must be informed in advance, while the special right itself is introduced by a separate presidential decision. Under such conditions, a change of ownership in the register does not necessarily mean full control over the asset.
This is where the real test of the reform begins. Privatization produces an economic effect if the transaction is followed by new capital, equipment, technology, management expertise and access to new markets. Otherwise, only the name in the ownership record changes.
International Capital Is Already Testing the Country — Selectively
There has already been a signal from the public market. In May, the National Investment Fund of Uzbekistan, UzNIF, listed securities in London and Tashkent and raised around $604 million. Demand exceeded the available supply by more than four times.
The significance lies not in the amount itself. International investors need more than a story of rapid growth. They need the ability to enter and exit under understandable rules. If large Uzbek companies follow the same logic — transparent reporting, strong governance and shareholder protection — the country will gain access not only to local capital, but also to institutional investors. For now, however, this remains a test rather than a new standard for the privatization programme as a whole.
Speed of Sale Is a Poor KPI
The weakness of the process is also well known. International financial institutions have repeatedly noted that privatization of large companies and banks is progressing more slowly than expected, while the continuing weight of the state still limits competition. The figure of “84 companies” proves nothing on its own.
The real indicators are different. How many assets will actually be sold? How many bidders will participate in the auctions? Who will acquire systemically important enterprises? What will happen to those companies two or three years later? And will the state retain the ability to intervene in decision-making after the transaction?
Budget proceeds are easy to measure. Modernization is not.
What Investors Should Check Before Submitting a Bid
A lower entry cost does not replace basic due diligence. Before purchasing an asset, investors should separately assess:
For investors, the current wave of privatization does broaden the entry map: industry, real estate, land, energy, transport and infrastructure. But the key indicator of this stage is not the total value of assets sold. What matters more is how much additional private capital these assets attract after the sale and whether that results in new production, technology and exports.
Uzbekistan has already learned how to reduce the number of enterprises with state participation. The next test is more difficult: whether privatization will improve the quality of the asset, rather than simply change its owner.