Russia’s Duma advances crypto mining and cross-border settlement bills

On July 24, 2024, Russia’s State Duma approved in first reading two linked bills that would bring cryptocurrency mining under a federal framework and let the Bank of Russia test cryptocurrency in cross-border trade settlements. The votes did not enact either proposal, but they moved a sanctioned major economy toward regulated use of digital assets for production and foreign commerce while preserving the ban on crypto as domestic money.

What lawmakers advanced

Bill No. 237585-8 addressed mining. The version considered on July 24 would permit Russian legal entities and individual entrepreneurs to mine after entering a government-maintained register. Individuals could mine without registration only while staying below an electricity-consumption limit set by the government. The proposal also required reporting of mined digital currency and contemplated oversight involving the government, the Bank of Russia, anti-money-laundering authorities and other federal bodies.

The mining measure was restrictive as well as permissive. It would allow authorities to prohibit mining in particular regions or territories, and it would bar the organization of digital-currency circulation inside Russia except for activities connected to mining and subsequent distribution. The distinction mattered: legal recognition of production was not recognition of bitcoin or another token as legal tender.

Bill No. 341257-8 addressed a different problem. It would expand Russia’s experimental legal-regime statute so the Bank of Russia could authorize a limited platform for cryptocurrency settlements under foreign-trade contracts. The Duma’s official transcript records both measures as first-reading items considered together. Contemporaneous Interfax reporting said the cross-border experiment could begin from September 1, 2024, subject to completion of the legislative process and the central bank’s implementing program.

Why the first reading mattered

The package joined three policy goals that often pull in different directions: formalizing a large domestic mining industry, retaining state control over payments, and opening a supervised route around friction in conventional cross-border banking. Duma financial-markets committee chair Anatoly Aksakov told the chamber that digital currencies were already being used for some external transactions, according to the official transcript. That was an attributable policy claim, not independently verified transaction data.

For the crypto sector, the institutional significance was larger than a simple “legalization” headline. A registered mining regime could make power use, tax reporting and coin disposition more visible to the state. A central-bank experiment could move some cross-border use from an informal practice into a controlled legal channel. Neither bill established how many miners would qualify, which tokens or counterparties would be admitted, how large the settlement pilot would be, or whether foreign participants would accept it.

The geopolitical context also limits the interpretation. Russia’s interest in alternative settlement rails was linked publicly to difficulties in international payments, but a domestic authorization could not override sanctions, anti-money-laundering rules or counterparties’ laws in other jurisdictions. Public blockchains can make transfers traceable, and payment processors, exchanges and custodians remain potential enforcement points.

What was known on July 24

The verified event was parliamentary advancement at first reading. It was not final passage, presidential signature, an operational mining registry or proof that a crypto trade-settlement platform had processed a payment. No market-price or trading-volume claim is necessary to establish the importance of the vote, and this reconstruction makes none.

Later context

On July 30, 2024, the Bank of Russia said the Duma had adopted the cross-border experiment and mining framework in later readings. That later milestone confirms the direction of travel but must not be folded backward into the status on July 24, when both measures still required additional legislative steps.