New rules for bank transfers come into force on July 1: they may be blocked for 10 days

New measures to combat financial crimes will come into force in Russia on July 1. Rosfinmonitoring has received the right to suspend private transfers to citizens' bank cards for up to 10 days without a court decision. Senator Olga Epifanova recently reminded about this. The blocking will concern transfers that the Financial Intelligence Service finds suspicious. For example, this concerns frequent small transfers from different individuals, debt repayment without documents, or some atypical expenses. At the same time, if suspicious actions are confirmed by various law enforcement agencies, they can be blocked for up to 30 days.

The authorities emphasize that the purpose of this measure is to limit the spread of fraudulent schemes, including those using fake cards and self-employed wallets. However, even law-abiding citizens risk getting "caught in the crossfire." Experts told MK about the pros and cons of the financial innovation.

Denis Astafiev, founder of the investment company SharesPro:

"The purpose of the innovation is to strengthen preventive control and promptly respond to suspicious financial transactions without waiting for lengthy court proceedings. In recent years, there have been more frequent cases of using the banking system for cashing out, shadow withdrawal of funds and sponsoring prohibited organizations. The idea is to block possible illegal activity at an early stage and gain time for a detailed check. However, there are also obvious risks. The lack of need for a court decision can lead to erroneous blocking of bona fide clients, especially if Rosfinmonitoring filters operate on formal grounds. This can cause delays in payments, freezing of salaries, payment of contracts, loans and other obligations. Small businesses and individuals who do not have sufficient resources for prompt appeal will suffer first.

The measure requires high transparency and precision in application, as well as clear channels for prompt restoration of consumer rights. Without this, it risks becoming a source of social tension and mistrust of financial institutions. It is important that the mechanism be adjusted taking into account the balance between security and the rights of citizens."

Andrey Loboda, economist, top manager in the field of financial communications:

"The decision to empower Rosfinmonitoring to suspend citizens' financial transactions without a court order shows that the state wants to strengthen control over money laundering and other illegal processes. As a measure to combat financial crimes, this step can be effective, since it will allow for a prompt response to suspicious transactions and block access to possible illegal resources before law enforcement agencies intervene. In the future, the decision may increase the stability of the financial system.

But it also has a downside. Without clear criteria and a transparent dispute mechanism, the suspension of operations may affect those clients who are unaware of the problems. At the same time, this will create risks for businesses and individuals - for example, in the form of blocking salary or mortgage payments. Then banks will have to interact more actively with the regulator to minimize errors. At first, there may be a lot of disputes and emotions."

Vladimir Chernov, analyst at Freedom Finance Global:

"The purpose of this measure is, of course, to combat financial fraudsters. However, in practice, there are already numerous examples of erroneous blocking of completely legal transactions. The media described cases where a student's transfer for a cup of coffee to a friend was blocked, because it was received with the signature "thank you for the morning." A self-employed course teacher complained that his income from several hundred small transfers daily was suspended as dubious. Another case became known when a debt transfer between friends was blocked, because the sender did not leave an explanation and did not attach any evidence (an IOU), and the recipient came under suspicion. For many Russians, such situations come as a surprise, because we are not talking about criminal schemes, but about everyday and completely legal actions.

It can be assumed that the new measures will cause a wave of complaints from the population. Despite the importance of combating financial violations, it is important to avoid excessive pressure on conscientious citizens. Therefore, we believe that the system needs to be improved. Among the additional measures, it is possible to at least provide for the possibility of appealing the blocking within 24 hours through the banking application, clarify the criteria of suspicion taking into account social and professional specifics, and introduce automatic filters based on AI that will take into account the client's behavior in dynamics, and not on a formal basis. Without such adjustments, the risk of undermining trust in the banking system and the formal approach to the real fight against financial fraud increases. In this regard, Russians may again begin to switch en masse to cash payments, which may mean a rollback of a decade, as this will weaken state control, reduce the efficiency of the economy and hit the financial system."

Igor Rastorguev, financial analyst:

"The measure is intended to make life difficult for fraudsters and save the savings of easily persuaded Russians. Regular transfers or suspicious transactions fall into the risk zone - for example, in another region, at an unusual time, with subsequent cashing out of funds through ATMs. Individuals who regularly send money to help relatives, as well as all sorts of organizing committees (school and kindergarten), which regularly collect money for all sorts of needs and trips, should also be wary of this "catch".

The effectiveness of the innovation can only be assessed after some time. If there are positive statistics on interrupted transactions in favor of scammers (fraudsters who collect people's contact information on dating sites and social networks - "MK" ), or droppering becomes ineffective, then the measure is justified. In addition, concealing the income of the self-employed (like "gingerbread to order") will become almost impossible - money not presented in checks in favor of individuals will be classified as dubious transactions. And if it is still possible to prove the total collection for benefits for the class, then this is clearly an attempt to evade paying taxes."