Russia’s stance on digital assets is evolving as policymakers seek to balance economic strategy with tighter oversight of a rapidly growing crypto market. The Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank of Russia have agreed to legalize the use of…Russia’s stance on digital assets is evolving as policymakers seek to balance economic strategy with tighter oversight of a rapidly growing crypto market. The Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank of Russia have agreed to legalize the use of…

Russia moves to legalize crypto in foreign trade

2025/10/22 20:48

Russia’s stance on digital assets is evolving as policymakers seek to balance economic strategy with tighter oversight of a rapidly growing crypto market.

Summary
  • Russia’s finance ministry and central bank have reportedly agreed to legalize cryptocurrency use for foreign trade payments.
  • The move formalizes activity that has already seen Russian entities use digital assets like the A7A5 stablecoin for cross-border transactions.
  • Regulators aim to integrate crypto into trade while tightening oversight to prevent misuse and sanction evasion.

The Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank of Russia have agreed to legalize the use of cryptocurrencies for foreign trade payments, according to local media on Oct. 22. The decision was announced by Finance Minister Anton Siluanov on October 21 after a strategic session focused on economic efficiency and fair business conditions.

Siluanov emphasized that cryptocurrencies are not only capable of facilitating payments but can also be used to move currency out of the country. He noted that with legalization, it is crucial for regulators to strengthen control measures to ensure order and compliance in this new market segment.

This move aligns with earlier remarks from financial industry leaders who suggest that 2026 could mark the start of balanced regulation for the local crypto market. Per the report, local estimates show that Russian citizens and businesses currently hold over 2.5 trillion rubles in digital assets, with crypto usage reducing dependence on foreign currencies. 

The legalization effort highlights a major shift in Russia’s approach to digital currencies, aiming to integrate them safely into international economic activities while maintaining regulatory oversight. 

Russia’s long-standing use of crypto in global transactions

Prior to the latest policy shift, the country had long used digital assets for transactions locally and internationally. For years, crypto has played a quiet but significant role in its economic activities, operating in the grey areas of global finance.

One of the most notable examples is the A7A5 stablecoin, a ruble-backed token linked to sanctioned Russian entities. Reports this year have traced over $15 billion in under-the-radar transactions linked to it, even as the U.S. sanctioned associated operators.

The token’s circulation has continued despite restrictions, reflecting how crypto tools have become central to the nation’s cross-border payment networks. The funds are reportedly used to support political and financial operations, evading traditional banking oversight. 

Taken together, these revelations show that Russia’s crypto integration predates its new legalization plans. As regulators now move to formalize crypto use in trade, how existing informal networks are managed to enforce compliance remains to be seen.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

What Is Jawboning? Jimmy Kimmel Suspension Sparks Legal Concerns About Trump Administration

What Is Jawboning? Jimmy Kimmel Suspension Sparks Legal Concerns About Trump Administration

The post What Is Jawboning? Jimmy Kimmel Suspension Sparks Legal Concerns About Trump Administration appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Topline Legal experts have raised concerns that ABC’s decision to pull “Jimmy Kimmel Live” from its airwaves following the host’s controversial comments about the death of Charlie Kirk, could be because the Trump administration violated free speech protections through a practice known as “jawboning.” Jimmy Kimmel speaks at Disney’s Advertising Upfront on May 13 in New York City. Disney via Getty Images Key Facts Disney-owned ABC announced Wednesday Kimmel’s show will be taken off the air “indefinitely,” which came after ABC affiliate owner Nexstar—which needs Federal Communications Commission approval to complete a planned acquisition of competitor Tegna Inc.—said it would not air the program due to Kimmel’s comments Monday regarding Kirk’s death and the reaction to it. The sudden move drew particular concern because it came only hours after FCC head Brendan Carr called for ABC to “take action” against Kimmel, and cryptically suggested his agency could take action saying, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way.” While ABC and Nexstar have not given any indication their decisions were influenced by Carr’s comments, the timing raised concerns among legal experts that the Trump administration’s threats may have unlawfully coerced ABC and Nexstar to punish Kimmel, which could constitute jawboning. Jawboning refers to “the use of official speech to inappropriately compel private action,” as defined by the Cato Institute, as governments or public officials—who cannot directly punish private actors for speech they don’t like—can use strongman tactics to try and indirectly silence critics or influence private companies’ actions. The practice is fairly loosely defined and there aren’t many legal safeguards dictating how violations of it are enforced, the Knight First Amendment Institute notes, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled it can be unlawful and an impermissible First Amendment violation when it involves specific threats. The White…
Share
2025/09/19 07:17
Share