Crypto news

July 1, 2026, was set as the deadline for the enactment of the bill "On Digital Currency and Digital Rights." However, the adoption of the law has stalled: after a successful first reading in April, the document "bogged down." Authorities claim it is ready for a second reading, with a new deadline moved to September 1. But industry experts doubt that this date will be met either.

While lawmakers hastily finalize the text, I conducted my own analysis of how some of the most notable market players—exchangers and so-called private "money changers"—are adapting to the upcoming changes. The picture is ambiguous.

In April 2026, when the July 1 date still seemed realistic, I interviewed three key representatives of this sector. At that time, none of them were seriously preparing to work under the new rules—all took a wait-and-see approach. A representative of the exchanger The Hermes Exchange noted that no practical changes had occurred and that deadlines were constantly being pushed back, so there was no point in rushing to register. At the same time, the company emphasized that obtaining a license would not be difficult if necessary. Dmitry Stepanin, head of the Satoshkin project, continued working using old methods, focusing on cash transactions and licensed services in "friendly" countries. An anonymous source from Sochi, who engages in private exchange, deliberately refused to legalize, seeing no advantages in coming out of the shadows.

Several months later, the situation has changed, not so much due to the law as due to external pressure. The Hermes Exchange is still in no hurry to introduce any restrictions, operating as usual. However, private "money changers" have become noticeably more cautious. The main reason is the EU sanctions that have targeted the Russian crypto sector. Even one of the largest crypto exchanges, HTX, came under pressure due to its ties with Russia. A new package of sanctions is already on the horizon. The combined actions of European regulators make cryptocurrency associated with the Russian circuit toxic. No one wants to work with "dirty" crypto.

As a result, "money changers" have begun to:

• more carefully select clients, preferring verified ones;
• use AML services to exclude potentially "dirty" addresses;
• refuse to split large transactions.

Additionally, my source noted that they prefer to work with TRC-20 standard tokens instead of Ethereum. This choice is driven by a desire to maintain anonymity and avoid attracting unnecessary attention. Although technically TRC-20 is no more anonymous than ERC-20, the bulk of "gray" USDT turnover passes through Tron, allowing individual transactions to get lost in the overall flow. Moreover, Tron is cheaper, faster, and less densely covered by Western AML tools.

Conclusions:

While authorities have not yet gotten around to establishing a regulatory framework, market participants are changing the rules of the game on their own. The changes are driven by a single principle—maintaining security in conditions of complete uncertainty. Due to the chaos, "inhabitants of the crypto seas" are trying to protect themselves by any available means. The result is an even deeper descent into the shadows of an already extremely gray market. For a country where the vast majority of crypto enthusiasts prefer to "keep a low profile," the authorities' chosen tactic of delay could cause serious damage.

Expert comment: The market is already adapting to the regulatory vacuum on its own, and this process is moving toward strengthening "gray" schemes. The longer the adoption of the law is delayed, the harder it will be to bring participants back into the legal fold. The authorities should hurry, or they risk losing control of the situation entirely.