Bankruptcy Claims in CIS Countries: What Happens When Businesses Fail in Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan

The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) includes Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and other countries that share a post-Soviet legal legacy. Business and bankruptcy law across these jurisdictions reflects that heritage.

For creditors or customers of troubled businesses in the region, it is vital to understand how claims are managed, who gets paid first, and what happens to digital assets when platforms fail.

The Basics: How Bankruptcy Works in CIS Jurisdictions

Across CIS countries, bankruptcy is driven by the courts and follows a formal, highly regulated process:

1. Bankruptcy is declared by a commercial or economic court.
2. A court-appointed insolvency practitioner, often called a trustee or administrator, takes control.
3. Creditors must file claims by a statutory deadline, such as 30 days in Ukraine.
4. A register of claims is compiled and approved by the court.
5. The debtor's assets are liquidated or reorganized.
6. Distributions are made according to legal priority.

When the debtor is a business, the company is usually liquidated and dissolved after distributions are completed.

Priority of Claims in CIS Law

Specific statutes differ, but the overall ranking is similar across the region:

• Personal injury claims and alimony obligations.
• Employee wages and related labor claims.
• Secured creditors, paid from the sale of collateral.
• Government tax claims.
• General unsecured creditors.
• Fines, penalties, and subordinated claims.
• Late-filed claims, which may be excluded entirely.

In Kazakhstan, for example, claims filed after the deadline are placed at the very bottom and often receive nothing. (source)

The Role of Courts and Trustees

Unlike the United States or some European Union systems where administrators and creditor committees can drive restructuring, CIS bankruptcy tends to be more rigid:

• The insolvency trustee operates under close court supervision.
• Claims are validated through formal court rulings, not just administrator review.
• Creditor meetings may occur, but powers are limited.
• Major steps, including final distributions, require judicial approval.

This structure reflects a centralized model with fewer negotiation-based outcomes for creditors.

Digital Assets and Platform Claims in CIS Countries

Digital asset policy is evolving quickly and currently offers little protection for platform customers.

Case in Point: Russia

• In 2018, Russian courts ruled that cryptocurrency could be seized in bankruptcy as debtor property.
• By 2023, authorities announced plans to enable crypto seizure and auction in bankruptcy cases.
• The Ministry of Justice and Federal Bailiff Service are building procedures to confiscate and liquidate digital assets during debt collection.

The result: crypto is treated like any other asset. Platform customers are typically general unsecured creditors unless there is a clear segregation or trust arrangement, which is rare in CIS law.

A Hypothetical CIS FTX Bankruptcy

• Crypto assets held by the exchange would be seized by the trustee.
• Assets would be converted to fiat currency and added to the bankruptcy estate.
• Users would file claims and join the general unsecured pool.
• Payouts would only occur after higher ranking claims were satisfied.

This stands in contrast to the European Union, where the MiCA regulation aims to give users direct ownership rights over segregated crypto assets.

Key Takeaways

• CIS bankruptcy systems prioritize social claims and government collections before commercial claims.
• Insolvency processes are court-controlled with strict timelines and limited creditor influence.
• Digital asset treatment is evolving but still unfriendly to customers when platforms fail.

Customers from specific regions can also sell their claims to avoid delays in recovering funds.