Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Finances

ING Stuck in Russia: When the Kremlin Itself Won't Allow Selling the Business

A Dutch bank spent a year trying to sell its Russian asset but failed: the buyer did not receive permits. This is not an exception but a new norm for exiting Russia, where the regulator effectively controls who can take over foreign businesses.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 7, 2026 · 2 min read

ING Stuck in Russia: When the Kremlin Itself Won't Allow Selling the Business
Фото: пресслужба ING

On April 7, 2026, the Dutch group ING announced the termination of the agreement to sell ING Bank (Eurasia) to Global Development. The agreement was signed on January 28, 2025 — and for over a year it remained in limbo while the buyer was unable to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals.

A year of waiting — and zero results

The deal was planned to close in the third quarter of 2025. Instead, ING will record a loss: according to the group's official press release, the financial impact will be approximately €0.8 billion after tax — roughly €0.5 billion in book losses and another €0.3 billion from currency position revaluation.

"Our position remains unchanged: we see no future for ING in Russia and remain focused on completing our exit from the Russian market"

— official ING statement

The bank notes that it is considering alternative exit scenarios with comparable financial impact. ING's offshore exposure to Russian clients between 2022–2025 has declined by nearly 90% — to €0.6 billion.

The Kremlin as a silent veto player

Formally, Russia did not ban the deal — it simply did not grant approval. This is a subtler, but more effective form of control: a foreign bank cannot either sell an asset or quickly liquidate it. Citibank experienced similar dynamics — according to KSE Institute, its Russian subsidiary only began the final stage of exit in November 2025, with a planned sale to Renaissance Capital group in the first half of 2026.

Meanwhile, Russia is simultaneously practicing direct confiscation: in early 2026, assets of Danish Rockwool and Polish-American CanPack were placed under Russian control by decisions of state bodies.

13% in three years — and the pace is slowing

The ING case fits into the broader picture documented by the Kyiv School of Economics. According to KSE Institute data, as of January 2026, only 547 international companies — or 12.8% of those operating in Russia before the full-scale invasion — have completely left the market. More than 55% continue to operate, while the rest declare suspension or intentions to leave.

In 2025, at least 80 companies left Russia — averaging 20 per quarter. This is noticeably less than in the peak years of 2022–2023. Since then, foreign business has paid dozens of billions of dollars to the Russian budget: in 2023 alone — an estimated $21.6 billion in taxes.

  • 547 companies have completely exited Russia since February 2022
  • Over 2,200 continue to operate there
  • €0.8 billion — ING's expected loss from the failed sale
  • ~90% — reduction in ING's offshore exposure to Russia over three years

For ING, the next step depends on whether the Kremlin will accept any other buyer — or allow liquidation on terms that would not turn the exit into confiscation with compensation in rubles at the Central Bank of Russia's exchange rate. If Moscow continues to block deals through silent veto, the question becomes direct: can any major Western bank exit Russia without the Kremlin itself deciding — to whom, when, and for how much.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026