Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed legislation that establishes a regulatory framework for cryptocurrency exchanges and permits domestic retail trading for the first time. The ban on using crypto to pay for goods and services inside Russia stays in place.
The law, reported by TASS and confirmed by The Block, sets rules for crypto exchanges, custodians, brokers, clearing houses, and investors. Bitcoin Magazine corroborated the signing and the retention of the domestic payment ban. The statute takes effect Sept. 1, 2026, per The Block’s reporting on the TASS dispatch. Some provisions governing the issuance and circulation of crypto assets come into force a year later, on Sept. 1, 2027.
In practice, Russians can legally buy and hold the most liquid cryptocurrencies through registered exchanges. They still cannot buy a coffee or settle a domestic invoice with bitcoin. Crypto remains barred as legal tender within the country.
The law draws a line between two classes of investors. Retail investors may purchase only the most liquid cryptocurrencies and are capped at 300,000 rubles ($3,700) per year, per intermediary. Qualified investors face no such limit. They may buy any crypto asset. Both categories must pass what the statute calls “special suitability testing,” and retail investors can earn qualified status based on their crypto transaction history. Neither source specified which assets qualify as “most liquid” or what the suitability test entails.
For exchanges, the requirements are concrete. Platforms must join a “special registry” to operate legally and maintain minimum equity of 15 million rubles ($185,200). They must also join a financial market self-regulatory organization. Existing exchanges get a grace period until March 1, 2027, to come into compliance. The Bank of Russia released draft regulations the prior week outlining the first framework for “organized trading” of digital assets and digital rights, including requirements for crypto exchanges and digital depositories.
The cross-border provisions carry the law’s strategic weight. The statute allows crypto for foreign trade settlements between residents and non-residents. That is a pathway Russia began exploring in 2024, when it first permitted crypto in international trade to counter Western sanctions, according to The Block, citing Reuters. The new law formalizes that lane.
The carve-out matters. Conventional dollar and euro settlement channels for Russian entities have narrowed under successive sanctions rounds since 2022. A regulated domestic exchange infrastructure gives Russian firms a documented, onshore venue for acquiring crypto to settle foreign trade contracts. Whether foreign counterparties will engage through these registered platforms is an open question. The sources do not address it.
The State Duma passed the legislation last month, The Block reported. The bill cleared its first reading in April. Neither outlet quoted Russian officials directly. Both attributed their reporting to TASS. No industry reaction appears in either source.
Separately, The Block reported that the Russian government issued a decree banning crypto mining and participation in mining pools in Moscow, the surrounding Moscow region, and parts of the Kursk region. The ban is effective Aug. 15 through the end of 2032. That restriction sits alongside the new trading framework rather than within it. Moscow’s approach is selective, not permissive across the board.
This is the third major crypto-related legislative move from Russia since 2024, when the government began permitting cross-border crypto settlement and separately moved to regulate mining in certain regions. What the law does not do is lift the domestic payment prohibition. That ban has been in place since 2020 and remains the bright line in Russian crypto policy.
What remains unclear: which specific cryptocurrencies will be designated as liquid enough for retail access, how the suitability testing will be structured, and whether the Bank of Russia’s forthcoming implementation rules will tighten or relax the caps set out in the statute. The sources did not address those questions.
