The discussion in the State Duma about redistributing the powers of the Bank of Russia is gaining momentum. The leader of the "A Just Russia" faction, Sergey Mironov, has proposed dividing the functions of the mega-regulator, which in the long term could also affect digital assets. In my assessment, this is not just a political gesture, but an attempt to call into question the very architecture of financial supervision in the country.
The essence of the initiative and its rationale
Mironov insists: the Central Bank is failing to ensure the availability of loans and reduce the debt burden on citizens. He points to a paradox — the key rate is falling, while loans are becoming more expensive. In August, the total cost of consumer loans approached 30% per annum, and real rates on micro-loans continue to rise. The politician estimates the banking sector's excess profits at 3.5–3.8 trillion rubles and sees this as a direct consequence of the regulator's reluctance to use the available levers of influence.
The deputy's logic is simple: issuing central banks should be responsible for the stability of the financial system, while separate structures should handle credit policy, as is done in a number of Western countries. He suggests considering such a model in Russia as well, and recommends that those who disagree with this approach prove otherwise.
What this threatens for the crypto industry
The direct connection between this initiative and the crypto market is obvious. It was the Bank of Russia that became the key regulator of digital currencies after the adoption of the law "On Digital Currencies." The agency is responsible for the registries of crypto exchanges and digital depositories, and the strictness of rules for market participants is determined not so much by the text of the law as by the Central Bank's by-laws.
In recent months, the regulator has been actively building the framework for legal circulation: it published a draft of margin trading rules, set a limit of 300,000 rubles per year for unqualified investors with each intermediary, and Central Bank Deputy Chairman Mikhail Mamuta promised to punish misselling. Industry experts, including RAKEB Executive Director Alexander Brazhnikov, have already called this threshold "the most distinctive feature" — it cuts off retail investors and shapes a market for the select few.
If Mironov's initiative gains traction, oversight of digital assets could move to a new structure or remain with the Central Bank. In any case, this will create uncertainty at a time when the by-law framework is only just being formed.
My conclusion: for now, this is merely a political statement, but the very fact of the dispute over the regulator's powers is an alarming signal. Any redistribution of functions will affect the rules for exchanges and depositories, and the market currently needs stability, not experiments with supervisory architecture.