Does Lithuania earn 5% of its exports by selling Ignalina NPP equipment? What the product codes show

Publication date: 3 August 2026

Claim

A guest on the First National Channel of Belarusian Radio claimed that boilers and nuclear energy equipment account for about 5% of Lithuanian exports, supposedly showing that Lithuania still earns money by selling equipment from the closed Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant.

Verdict

False. The figure of about 5% refers to the broad product group 84, which includes computers, servers, air conditioners, refrigerators, engines, pumps, cranes, agricultural machinery and many other types of equipment. The words "nuclear reactors" appear in the official title of the chapter, but they do not describe all exports recorded under it. Heading 8401 separately covers nuclear reactors, non-irradiated fuel elements and isotope separation equipment. The Belarusian Investigative Center found no Lithuanian exports under this heading for the period it checked.

In brief

• International trade statistics organize goods into broad chapters and more specific codes.

• Chapter 84 is titled "Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical appliances; parts thereof", but it contains dozens of very different machinery categories.

• Computers fall under heading 8471, air conditioners under 8415, refrigerators under 8418 and pumps under 8413. All are in chapter 84.

• Nuclear reactors and closely related goods have a separate heading, 8401.

• The Belarusian Investigative Center reported that Lithuania's exports under heading 8401 were zero dollars in the 2025 data it checked.

• The title of a broad product chapter does not establish that goods came from a particular power plant.

Why this matters

Technical labels in trade statistics can be turned into a persuasive but false story. If the first words of a chapter title are isolated from the rest of its contents, ordinary exports of computers or refrigeration equipment can be portrayed as trade in nuclear reactors.

This substitution misrepresents both Lithuania's export structure and the decommissioning of the Ignalina plant. The audience receives a specific conclusion about the sale of plant assets even though the cited figure contains no information about the seller, the origin of the equipment or a particular nuclear facility.

What we checked

We checked:

1. the wording of the claim and the Belarusian Investigative Center's review;

2. the European Union's official description of the Combined Nomenclature;

3. the structure of chapter 84 in the United Nations Statistics Division classification;

4. the separate heading 8401 for nuclear reactors and related goods;

5. the UN Comtrade link for Lithuania's 2025 exports used in the original review.

Evidence

1. The five percent figure covers a broad machinery group, not NPP equipment

The Belarusian Investigative Center reviewed the statement made on 14 July 2026. The broadcast connected the broad category "Machinery, nuclear reactors, boilers" to sales of equipment from the Ignalina plant.

A category title, however, is not a description of every product within it. According to the data cited by the Center, computers and servers were the largest item in Lithuania's exports in this group, valued at 322 million dollars. They were followed by air conditioners, refrigerators, aircraft turbines and filters for liquids and gases. The group also includes printers, agricultural machinery, cranes, pumps and compressors.

None of these products is evidence by itself of a sale of nuclear plant assets.

2. The UN classification shows how broad chapter 84 is

The United Nations Statistics Division describes chapter 84 as "Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical appliances; parts thereof". It then divides that chapter into specific four-digit headings.

Heading 8401 covers nuclear reactors, non-irradiated fuel elements, isotope separation equipment and related parts. Heading 8402 covers steam boilers, 8413 covers pumps, 8414 covers compressors and fans, 8415 covers air conditioners, and 8418 covers refrigerators and freezers. Other headings cover engines, turbines, machine tools and computing equipment.

The total value of chapter 84 therefore cannot be treated as the value of nuclear reactor sales.

3. EU rules require the specific code to be checked

The European Commission explains that the Combined Nomenclature is used for customs classification and trade statistics. Its structure begins with a two-digit chapter, followed by a four-digit heading, a six-digit Harmonized System subheading and an eight-digit EU subheading.

A conclusion about a specific product cannot be drawn from the title of a two-digit chapter alone. A check of nuclear reactor trade must examine at least heading 8401 and, for a more precise conclusion, the relevant subheadings and transaction description.

4. No sales were found under the separate nuclear heading

The Belarusian Investigative Center checked Lithuania's 2025 data and reported zero dollars of exports under heading 8401. This heading, rather than all of chapter 84, is the closest match to the claim about nuclear reactors and related goods.

Even a nonzero value under heading 8401 would not by itself prove that an item came from the Ignalina plant. That conclusion would require information about the seller, the specific item, the origin of the asset and the recipient. The circulated claim provides none of this evidence.

5. A statistical error creates an unsupported causal link

The claim combines two separate facts: the Ignalina plant is being decommissioned, and Lithuania's export statistics include a broad chapter with "nuclear reactors" in its title. It connects them without supporting records.

A proper check would first isolate the narrow product code, establish the trade value and then look for documents showing the equipment's origin. The broadcast replaced those steps with an assumption based on the chapter title.

What remains unknown

Aggregated public trade statistics do not identify every transaction involving assets from the Ignalina plant. Some non-radioactive materials or ordinary industrial equipment could in principle be disposed of through lawful decommissioning procedures. But the figure for all of chapter 84 cannot establish such sales or their share of Lithuania's exports.

Proof would require asset disposal records, contracts, customs codes for specific consignments and evidence of origin. These materials were not presented in support of the claim.

Conclusion

The claim that Lithuania earns about 5% of its exports by selling equipment from the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant is based on a false reading of a trade classification. Chapter 84 covers a wide range of machinery, while "nuclear reactors" is only part of its official title. Heading 8401 separately covers nuclear goods, and the check of 2025 data found no Lithuanian exports under that heading. The connection between the broad export figure and a specific power plant is unsupported.

Sources

1. Belarusian Investigative Center, Is Lithuania selling equipment from the Ignalina NPP?: https://belarusfiles.org/en/fakenews/belarus-radio-lithuania-ignalina-export

2. European Commission, Combined Nomenclature: https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/customs-4/calculation-customs-duties/customs-tariff/combined-nomenclature_en

3. United Nations Statistics Division, HS 2012, code 84: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/classifications/Econ/Detail/EN/32/84

4. United Nations Statistics Division, HS 2012, code 8401: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/classifications/Econ/Detail/EN/32/8401

5. UN Comtrade, Lithuania exports by HS classification, 2025: https://comtradeplus.un.org/TradeFlow?Type=C&Frequency=A&Classification=HS&Period=2025&Reporters=440&Partners=0&CommodityCodes=AG2&Flows=X&Customs=C00&ModeOfTransport=0&secondPartner=0&AggregateBy=NONE&BreakdownMode=CLASSIC

Corrections and updates

If primary records about specific sales of Ignalina plant assets or revised UN Comtrade data become available, we will update this article. Errors can be reported through the Unity Bridge contact channels.