Splitting payments to foreign companies: new risks after the Supreme Court review

On 17 June 2026, the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation approved Thematic Review No. 8/2026 on the application by arbitrazh courts of legislation on special economic measures introduced to protect the national interests of the Russian Federation.

One practical conclusion of the review concerns payments to foreign persons connected with states that have committed unfriendly actions against the Russian Federation. The Supreme Court drew attention to the risk of artificially splitting payments in order to bypass the temporary payment procedure.

What the Supreme Court clarified

Paragraph 4 of the review considers a situation where payments under credit obligations to foreign persons were artificially divided into parts of up to RUB 10 million.

Under Presidential Decree No. 95, a special procedure for fulfilling obligations applies if the amount of obligations to the relevant foreign creditors exceeds RUB 10 million per calendar month, or the equivalent amount in foreign currency. In such cases, payments must be made in accordance with the established temporary procedure, including through special mechanisms provided by the decree, such as type “C” accounts.

The courts noted that a formal division of payments below the threshold does not remove the risk. If the splitting is aimed at bypassing Decree No. 95, such actions may be qualified as void under Article 10 and Article 168(2) of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

Why this matters for business

The risk does not depend only on the amount of each individual payment. The economic purpose of the transaction, the aggregate amount of obligations, the connection of the recipient with foreign states subject to special measures, and the overall context of the payments are also relevant.

For companies with foreign loans, intra-group financing, licence payments, royalties, dividends and other payments to foreign persons, this means that not only the amount of each payment but the entire payment structure should be reviewed more carefully.

• payments under loans and credit obligations to foreign companies;
• payments to companies from jurisdictions subject to special economic measures;
• royalty and licence payments, for which separate special rules may apply;
• dividends and other corporate payments to foreign participants;
• payment schedules where several payments within a month in fact relate to one obligation or a group of obligations.

What should be checked

Companies should assess current and planned payments to foreign counterparties:

• who the final recipient and beneficial owner of the payment is;
• whether the counterparty or its group is subject to special economic measures;
• whether the aggregate amount of obligations exceeds the applicable thresholds;
• whether the payment schedule may look like artificial splitting;
• whether a special account, permission or another procedure is required to fulfil the obligation;
• whether there are sufficient documents confirming the economic purpose and legal nature of the payment.

Sterngoff Audit helps companies assess tax, currency-control and legal risks in settlements with foreign counterparties, analyse payment structures and prepare documents for safe fulfilment of obligations.