Cryptofriendliness of Russian banks: myths and reality ahead of new regulation
Complaints about blocked accounts and transfers related to cryptocurrency have become a familiar backdrop for the Russian market. However, my analysis shows: the root of the problem lies not in banks' biased attitude toward the technology, but in the rigid structure of legislation and the risk-oriented models that credit institutions are forced to apply.
Why blocks happen: not "crypto," but risk indicators
The key reason for rejections is not a negative attitude toward digital assets, but the requirements of federal laws. Banks are obligated to monitor transactions, request documents, and suspend suspicious transactions in accordance with Federal Law No. 115-FZ, block recipient accounts under Federal Law No. 161-FZ, and, starting in 2025, bear financial liability for missed fraudulent transfers under Federal Law No. 369-FZ.
The consequences of Federal Law No. 369-FZ turned out to be paradoxical. Seeking to protect clients, banks over-insured themselves: it is far more profitable to freeze a hundred suspicious transactions than to reimburse a loss out of their own pocket once. Crypto transactions fit perfectly into this logic, especially under the "triangle" scheme, when the seller of assets receives money from a fraud victim and becomes the last link in the chain.
My analysis shows that the set of triggers is nearly identical across all banks. Among them: a sharp increase in turnover and frequent transfers from different individuals, splitting of amounts and transit operations, transactions inconsistent with the client's profile, lack of economic rationale, activity through P2P, and, of course, direct wording in the payment purpose such as "USDT" or "exchange."
It is important to understand: a bank's "loyalty" under such conditions is an extremely unstable criterion. Today a transaction goes through, tomorrow the risk model changes, and the client receives a document request or a block. This is not malicious intent, but a systemic response to regulatory pressure—many banks fear losing their license, so they prefer to tighten controls.
From "gray lists" to the Central Bank registry: what will change from September 1
The official term "loyalty to cryptocurrency" does not exist, and no bank publishes a list of permitted operations. It is only about differences in monitoring practices. However, the situation will change dramatically after the law "On Digital Currencies and Digital Rights," adopted on July 21, 2026, comes into force.
From September 1, 2026 (certain provisions—from 2027), a Bank of Russia registry will be introduced for exchanges, brokers, management companies, and exchangers. After a transition period lasting until July 1, 2027, operations will only be possible through regulated intermediaries. Banks will be required to refuse to process "gray" transactions. For non-qualified investors, a limit of about 300,000 rubles per year through one intermediary will be set, and the available assets will be the most liquid ones—Bitcoin, Ethereum, and USDT.
Special attention should be paid to requirements for exchangers: activity involving two or more transactions per month totaling over 3.5 million rubles will be recognized as exchange activity, requiring inclusion in the Central Bank registry, membership in a self-regulatory organization, own capital of at least 15 million rubles, and storage of transaction data for no less than ten years. For the first time in Russian practice, an obligation is introduced to compensate the client for the value of stolen assets.
It is telling that giants such as Alfa-Bank, T-Bank, VTB, and Sber have already announced their intention to provide crypto services. As the legal infrastructure launches, "loyalty" will mean not leniency toward gray schemes, but the presence of one's own licensed crypto service.
Conclusions and forecast
The situation on the market is changing fundamentally. There is no crypto-loyalty among Russian banks, and there never will be—there is only a varying degree of strictness in applying anti-money laundering requirements. Blocks will not disappear entirely, but within the legal framework they will become predictable and justified. For "gray" P2P and transit schemes, requirements will, on the contrary, tighten.
My practical advice: keep proof of transactions, do not split amounts, do not accept payments from third parties, and avoid words in the transfer purpose that reference cryptocurrency. And most importantly—do not look for a bank that asks no questions, but build a transparent operating model. In the new reality, this is the only way to avoid frozen funds.