USDT is not a digital dollar: why the qualification of an asset determines the fate of a transaction
The Russian crypto market is entering an institutional era, yet even with the emergence of licensed intermediaries and regulatory acts, legal settlement in USDT can fall apart within the company itself. My colleagues in the legal field agree: lawful settlement on the blockchain is not just a txid, but a coordinated set of legal, banking, compliance, accounting, and tax evidence.
Infrastructure is emerging, but the deal may not go through
On July 21, 2026, the State Duma adopted in the second and third readings Bill No. 1194918-8 "On Digital Currencies and Digital Rights," and on July 24, it was approved by the Federation Council. The Bank of Russia has already published draft acts on organized trading, digital depositories, accounts, and registries. The document has been signed by the President and officially published, so its provisions can be considered in force.
The logic of the future regulated market is obvious: intermediaries gain status, the digital asset gains an accounting record, the transaction gains identifiable participants, and the price gains a reproducible source. At the same time, even a licensed intermediary and the correct address do not remove the company's internal challenge: all its departments must describe the same transaction identically.
Imagine a Russian company importing equipment worth $100,000. The supplier is ready to accept 100,000 USDT. For the CEO, this is one payment. For the lawyer, bank, treasury, compliance, accountant, and tax specialist, it is several different events with different objects, dates, and sets of evidence.
The main risk of crypto foreign trade in my practice is not just a "dirty" asset. The deal breaks down when formally correct actions by different functions do not come together into a single evidentiary chain.
A stablecoin is not a ready-made legal category
Even before the contract, the intermediary's account, and the wallet check, it is necessary to qualify the asset itself. "Stablecoin" is a technical and marketing term, not a ready-made legal category. Such tokens are structured differently: one operates as a claim against the issuer and its reserves, another as an algorithmic mechanism without a redemption obligation, and a third as a digital right in a regulated information system.
In its June 2026 consultative report, the Bank of Russia distinguishes between these structures. Asset-backed stablecoins issued abroad, including USDT and USDC, may be classified as foreign digital rights, while algorithmic ones align more closely with the concept of digital currency. So far, this is only a position from the report, not an individual qualification of any token, but it dismantles the dangerous oversimplification that "USDT is just cryptocurrency."
The qualification determines the permissible route for acquiring and transferring the asset, the intermediary's status, accounting rules, the applicability of the special tax base under Article 282.3 of the Russian Tax Code, and the set of documents confirming performance of the foreign trade contract.
The error multiplies, and USDT remains not a dollar
Experts note that an incorrect qualification multiplies across all functions at once. The lawyer writes "digital currency" in the contract, the accountant records a "financial investment," the tax function applies rules for property, and the platform processes the transaction as a foreign digital instrument.
Special attention also requires the perception of USDT as a digital dollar. The issuer claims the token is pegged to USD and backed by reserves, but the terms of direct redemption depend on verification, minimum amounts, and decisions made by the issuer itself. The minimum direct redemption through Tether as of the date of preparing this material is $100,000 equivalent. The issuer's rules also allow for the suspension of services and freezing of tokens in specified cases.
The contractual formula "1 USDT equals 1 USD" is an agreement between the parties on settlement, not a transformation of the token into US currency. I recommend clearly defining the market value of USDT in the agreement with the counterparty. As an alternative, experts suggest linking the moment of value determination to the Bank of Russia exchange rate on the date the tokens are debited.
My conclusion: the market is moving toward maturity, but the legal uncertainty of stablecoins remains the main operational risk. Until companies build a unified internal qualification—from lawyer to tax specialist—even the most progressive infrastructure will not save a deal from collapse. This is not a question of technology, but of discipline and coordination.