The Central Bank of the Russian Federation’s (CBR) central bank digital currency (CBDC) project has been developing rapidly. The first news about the initiative appeared in 2020, and a regulatory bill was introduced in 2022, which has now passed through its final reading in the parliament’s lower chamber, the Duma.
However, the final rollout of the “digital ruble” among the general public will not happen until 2025–2027, as CBR First Deputy Governor Olga Skorobogatova recently revealed.
The timeline still looks optimistic in the global context. According to a recent PwC report, only about 24 CBDCs may be live by 2030. But for a country actively seeking ways to trade internationally under heavy financial sanctions, such timing may feel relatively slow.
Ups and downs of the digital ruble
In 2017, the CBR announced its interest in exploring the idea of a digital currency. At the time, Skorobogatova emphasized that developing a CBDC was a priority and that the CBR would investigate soon. However, the bank’s governor, Elvira Nabiullina, didn’t consider it a top priority and regarded it as something to be explored in the medium to long term.
In 2022, the CBR revealed it planned to introduce the digital ruble across all banks in the country by 2024. It explained that the implementation would be done in stages and involve extensive testing and infrastructure development. According to the central bank, the digital ruble would coexist with traditional cash and non-cash payment systems, giving consumers more flexibility in their transactions.
CBR governor Elvira Nabiullina in an interview. Source: MarketWatch.
In February 2023, Skorobogatova made a public announcement regarding the first consumer pilot of the digital ruble, scheduled to commence on April 1, 2023. The trial would include the participation of 13 local banks, numerous merchants and real consumers.
That same month, Gazprombank, a banking subsidiary of state-owned energy corporation Gazprom and one of the pilot’s participants, publicly proposed giving banks more time before implementing the CBDC.
Indeed, the bank’s concerns were understandable, as one report from auditing firm McKinsey estimates that Russian banks could lose $3.5 billion in commissions and fees in five years to a CBDC.
The amended bill establishes key legal definitions such as “platform,” “participants” and “users,” while also outlining general guidelines for the CBDC ecosystem.
Under the current framework, the CBR assumes the role of the primary operator for the digital ruble infrastructure and holds the responsibility for safeguarding all the stored assets.
As the primary objective of the CBDC is to serve as a payment and transfer method, users of the digital ruble will not have the option to open savings accounts. Individual customers will enjoy free payments and transfers, while corporate clients will incur a fee of 0.3% of the payment amount.
Waiting for 2025?
On July 6, CBR’s Skorobogatova said every citizen would be able to open the wallet, receive digital rubles and use them “on the horizon of 2025–27.”
Skorobogatova specified that a lot depends on banks and their readiness to adopt the necessary infrastructure, as private banks would facilitate digital ruble transactions within their standard apps, with the whole process of the central bank’s mediation more or less invisible to the final customer. Skorobogatova emphasized, “The digital ruble is not a cryptocurrency or a stablecoin, where there’s often no emitter or you don’t know one.”
Aleksandr Podobnykh, head of the Saint Petersburg branch of the Association of Chief Information Security Officers — a cybersecurity consulting firm involved in CBDC legislation — believes the 2025–2027 deadline is realistic and that test infrastructure is ready to pilot the digital ruble:
“Now about 30 legal entities are involved in testing — these are banks, retail and individual entrepreneurs. Until 2027, up to 1,500 subjects (including individuals) will take part. Upon completion of the testing, recommendations for scaling will be developed.”
Podobnykh also mentioned the upcoming updates to Federal Law 115, regulating Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing procedures. The proposed amendments would take into account new forms of exchange to help financial monitoring agencies analyze CBDC transactions.
Elena Klyuchareva, senior associate at Russian law firm KKMP, also sees no anomalies in the 2025–2027 deadline.
“The delay in digital ruble implementation may be connected mainly to technical aspects,” she told Cointelegraph. “The infrastructure envisaged by the CBR concept is complicated and shall facilitate not only online but also offline transactions and ensure a high level of cybersecurity.” And, Klyuchareva added, such infrastructure will be based mainly on domestic software solutions due to international sanctions:
“According to prior comments of the CBR, they do not want to intentionally speed up the process but wish to ensure that the digital ruble platform functions properly and is safe and secure.”
The decision to postpone the implementation of the Russian digital currency shouldn’t be seen as a failure of the project, but as an attempt to develop a stable, well-balanced solution, Klyuchareva concluded.
Given that only four CBDCs are currently in circulation, Russia will probably be among the first adopters — even if the digital ruble doesn’t launch until 2027.
A “loophole” that allowed a Palestinian family to be granted the right to come to the UK under a Ukrainian resettlement scheme was the subject of a lot of debate in the House of Commons today.
Both the prime minister and leader of the opposition criticised a decision by a judge to allow the family of six the right to enter the UK.
Sir Keir pledged to close the “loophole” after he was asked about it by Kemi Badenoch – but could not elaborate on what it was.
Sky News has read through the judgment given by Judge Hugo Norton-Taylor to understand what happened.
The family of six, a husband and wife and their children aged 18, 17, eight and seven, lived in Gaza and their homes were destroyed after the 7 October attacks and subsequent conflict.
They ended up living in a humanitarian zone and then a refugee camp.
In January 2024, the family applied to come to the UK via the Ukraine Family Scheme form, in a bid to join one of the parent’s brothers, who is a British citizen and has lived in the UK since 2007.
While they acknowledged they were not eligible for the Ukraine scheme, the family chose to apply in an attempt to use the Home Office‘s policy on “applications for entry clearance outside the rules”.
The Home Office rejected the request, saying they were not satisfied there were “compelling, compassionate circumstances” to justify a request outside the rules.
They also noted the lack of a resettlement scheme for Palestinians.
Despite the Home Office saying there were no grounds to appeal, the family launched one against the decision on human rights grounds.
A judge then ruled that the initial rejection constituted a rejection of human rights, and so allowed an appeal.
Part of this appeal was under Article Eight of the European Convention on Human Rights – the right to a family life between the man living in Britain and his family in Gaza.
This appeal was rejected, with a lack of a Palestinian resettlement scheme noted as a reason.
An appeal was launched at a higher tribunal – and one of the arguments was that the case should be considered on its own merits and not allow the lack of a Palestinian resettlement scheme to outweigh other arguments.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
8:44
PMQs: War on immigration
The loophole
It is here that the “loophole” seems to have appeared.
At this point. Judge Norton-Taylor heard the case and allowed the appeal.
In his judgment, he stated that it was “wrong to have taken the absence of a resettlement scheme into account at all”.
The judge added that there was “no evidence” he had seen that the Home Office had made a deliberate decision not to implement a Palestinian resettlement scheme.
He also noted that the lack of immigration rules on a topic should not count against someone.
In layman’s terms, the argument seems to be that just because a scheme to resettle people does not exist it does not mean they are banned from coming to the UK via humanitarian routes.
The judgment said the absence of a “resettlement scheme was irrelevant” to their decision.
What next?
Judge Norton-Taylor went on to back the claim from the family in Gaza based on the ECHR and the right to a family life between them and their relative in Britain.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “The Ukraine Family scheme was clearly set out for Ukrainians. We have been clear that we do not agree with this judgment and we twice vigorously contested this case.
“As the prime minister made clear, article 8, the right to a family life, should be interpreted much more narrowly. It is for the government and Parliament to decide who should be covered by the UK’s safe and legal routes.
“We are pursuing all legal avenues to address the legal loophole which has been exploited in this case. The home secretary is urgently reviewing this case to ensure the correct processes are always followed and existing laws correctly interpreted.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
They added that there was no evidence to support the argument and that data from the government shows a “very small” number of Gazans have been allowed to enter the UK – equal to roughly 150.
Sir Keir said he was planning to close the loophole, but it is not clear what this will entail.
The bill “would make our state the first to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and drive innovation, growth, and financial freedom,” said Senator Schwertner.
The country’s securities regulator will also allow 3,500 corporations and professional investors to open “real-name” accounts on cryptocurrency exchanges as part of a pilot program.