Crypto news

The Russian crypto framework is being built with an eye on cross-border settlements, but sanctions pressure is gradually narrowing the corridor for entering the international arena. This paradox calls into question the economic feasibility of the entire structure. However, as practice shows, the demand for digital financial instruments within the country not only exists—it is growing, and the regulatory framework only strengthens this trend.

Who the crypto framework is being created for

In my analysis, the crypto framework is not a single product but a multifaceted ecosystem beneficial to different categories of participants. For foreign trade settlements, it becomes a natural extension of the EPR (experimental legal regime), giving companies additional powers. Investment divisions gain new digital products, including digital financial assets (DFAs), and the ability to attract international capital. Financial and credit institutions expand their lending range—from long-term to short-term, including factoring and securitization. The state, represented by the Central Bank, the Ministry of Finance, and the Federal Tax Service, brings the de facto existing industry out of the shadows, addressing AML/CFT issues and FATF compliance requirements.

The key problem that regulation in Russia solves is access to crypto market tools for large banks and the regulator. Major players are taking over the market, and this is only possible with legislation in place—any kind, as long as legal mechanisms exist.

Sanctions and the framework's resilience

Circumventing sanctions is not the primary goal of the framework. Pressure on it will come—and is already being applied under the 20th EU sanctions package—but market participants are aware of this and are taking measures to reduce risks. Fears that infrastructure elements will fall under secondary sanctions are unfounded. The system will operate smoothly, just as fiat transactions do.

To mitigate sanctions risk, I highlight three key measures:

• Interaction with CIS-licensed solutions and other intermediary links—this helps blur the trail and reduce the burden.
• Managing the issuance of stablecoins based on banks—solves the problem of marking smart contracts and wallets, as it is technically impossible to track and block the entire issuance system at once: it can be easily duplicated, restarted from scratch, and scaled in Russia.
• Using alternative solutions, including DFAs, investment products, and tokenization—will serve as a backup option for the most challenging scenarios.

Does a closed-loop framework make sense

The value of cryptocurrency lies in its cross-border nature. If the framework were entirely closed within Russia, the economic sense would greatly diminish, but such a situation is impossible precisely because of the decentralization of digital currencies. One could try to restrict entry and exit into fiat outside Russia, but this would not fully close the loop—not all countries support Russia's isolation policy, and the DeFi sector is so developed that it is technically impossible to erect all barriers without destroying the corresponding tools.

The economic sense of the Russian framework is to give the market the opportunity to bypass fiat restrictions using cryptocurrency and profit from it.

Who wins and who loses

Opinions diverge here. In my view, only the black market will lose—it will not disappear entirely, but the financial flow through completely unregulated organizations will gradually decline. Everyone else will only benefit in the long term.

A harsher assessment: Russian banks are already building their own infrastructure and know how to work with crypto tools, so they come out ahead. Small and medium capital, as well as startups, lose out—they currently have three paths: migration to other countries, selling to banks in the near future, or creating products that banks lack time for but that are needed by the market and specific client banks.

Regulation will change the market and give the "green light" only to institutional players with large client bases. This refers to a new segment of users of crypto depositories and crypto wallets—existing traditional players, bank clients, individuals, and legal entities who will receive the same service at their preferred bank.

Conclusion: The Russian crypto framework is not a tool for circumventing sanctions but a mechanism for legalizing and scaling an already existing market. Sanctions will only accelerate consolidation around major players but will not destroy the idea itself.