Monopoly-forced: the Central Bank offered banks access to their technologies

At the tenth anniversary forum "Finopolis-2025", the Chairman of the Central Bank and the head of the Savings Bank entered into a heated discussion about monopoly in the banking market. The regulator wants to introduce new rules for technology development, and it has presented criteria for creating a national infrastructure. Elvira Nabiullina suggested that large credit institutions should open access to new systems for all players two to three years after the launch of the service, if it is critical for the country's infrastructure. Otherwise, the state will have to create its own technology. Market participants reacted ambiguously. German Gref compared it to playing badminton in hockey uniform. However, he expressed his willingness to play by any rules. Alfa also proposed to create an alternative to the national payment system. What the dispute between the regulator and business has come to, and whether there will be a competitor to the Mir cards — in the Izvestia material.

How payment technologies will be developed in Russia

Russia has entered the top 5 countries with large economies in terms of the share of non-cash payments — it has already reached 87.5%, the head of the Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, said at the anniversary X forum "Finopolis-2025". She spoke at the plenary session "National Digital Infrastructure of the financial market (DIGIt): in search of balance." Together with market participants, the regulator argued about competition in the banking sector.

Technology leads to increased competition. It has become easier for people to choose and change a financial institution if they see that there are better products somewhere else, said the chairman of the Central Bank. She emphasized that banking slavery is almost a thing of the past. Thanks to technology, players have become confident that they can retain customers through better service.

"In the foreseeable future, we would like to combine all three key components of the national financial market infrastructure — payments, data exchange, and remote identification — into a single digital space," said Elvira Nabiullina.

According to her, it is necessary to support the leaders, but not to let them turn into monopolists, and to create an incentive for others to reach for the leaders. To do this, criteria for creating a national infrastructure should be defined in advance so that businesses understand what they can invest in and what should be part of a common system that everyone has access to.

The Central Bank proposed the following criteria:

• ensuring the continuous operation of the financial market;
• data protection and protection against common threats (for example, how fincert works — the Central Bank's unified database of fraudsters);
• reducing transaction costs (this will make it possible to save on the "road" and develop the services themselves);
• development of competition (it was the prevention of monopoly in the market that caused the most disagreement when discussing with the sector);
• accessibility of services for citizens and businesses;
• improving data quality (one example is uniform requirements for the quality and protection of biometrics);
• promoting innovation.

According to the head of the Savings Bank, German Gref, these criteria need to be clarified. Now absolutely all services fall under them. If we follow the trend that everything will be absorbed by the state, then these are good goals, he said. We need to figure out which infrastructure is critical. Gref is convinced that everything that can create a market as an alternative to the state system should not be banned. Then the state infrastructure will be more competitive.

At the same time, VTB supported all the criteria proposed by the Central Bank. According to First Deputy Chairman Dmitry Pyanov, the main thing is to get started faster, test the initiative in practice, and not spend many years on expert approvals.

However, there is also a difficulty in applying these criteria, according to Sergey Schemnikov, Risk Director at Ingo Bank. For example, the points "promoting innovation" or "preventing monopoly" are absolutely correct, but they are really difficult to measure. And without clear metrics, they can become a subjective tool, he noted.

Nevertheless, there is a system in the world where global digital giants are actually able to dictate their terms, including political ones, explained Anton Sviridenko, executive director of the Stolypin Institute for Growth Economics. According to him, this is easier in Russia, the main players are known and understood by the state, and they are being worked with. However, there must be clear rules of competition that will prevent the financial markets from being over-concentrated in one hand. Therefore, it is necessary to involve regional players in the new digital financial system.

How did the dispute at Finopolis end?

Speed is very important for innovation, Elvira Nabiullina agreed. At the same time, the state should not compete with business or undermine development. Nevertheless, technology should be accessible to everyone, not just one major creator. For example, you can consider this option: if a major market participant develops a significant infrastructure, then in three years, when payback and benefit come, they should open the technology to the market. If he does not want to do this, then the regulator must create its own technology. Is the market ready for this, the head of the Central Bank asked.

— We are ready to play by any rules that will be lowered. It's not always comfortable when you come to the hockey box, and they offer you to play badminton in hockey uniform, but we are ready for this," said the head of Sberbank.

At the same time, if we are talking about two or three years, it is better not to start, said German Gref. If it becomes clear that there is no way to make money on innovation, and the company will not even gain a competitive advantage, then this is not profitable. In his opinion, it is necessary to fight natural monopoly in the economy, but technological monopoly is always temporary. And whoever created it is interested in getting the money back faster.

Moreover, a technological monopoly in Russia is hardly possible, says Dmitry Tselishchev, managing director of the investment company Rikom-Trust. He explained that there is already noticeable competition for innovation and talent from at least two categories of financial market headliners. One of them is banks with state participation and corresponding budgets, and the other is private fintech, represented by non—banks and marketplaces. And in the future, this trend will only intensify. That is, an oligopoly is theoretically possible, but a monopoly is not, the expert concluded.

In his opinion, further development of innovations should take the form of an explicit strategy coordinated at the highest level with the authorities and business.

The creator of the technology will always defend it, but eventually it will have to use regulatory violence or create a new infrastructure, Dmitry Pyanov said at the session. German Gref called such reflections a typical conversation between a loser and a leader. "What prevents the second bank in the country from crying into its vest all the time, but from innovating," he asked.

The dispute was stopped by the chairman of the Central Bank: "We would not like to have one winner in the country." The monopolist bears the burden of innovation, but he decides for himself whether to invest in them, Elvira Nabiullina added. The discussion on the criteria of regulators and the "rules of the game" will continue, but the participants in the discussion agreed that the criteria of the Central Bank can be clarified.

The risk of monopoly, especially state—owned monopoly, is central to this discussion, said Sergey Schemnikov from Ingo Bank. Technological infrastructure is common and quite effective due to the synergy of data, economies of scale, and the need for common standards (as in the case of NSPK or FinCERT). At the same time, it is very important that such an infrastructure is open and accessible — this will stimulate more active development of innovations and the introduction of new approaches and technologies, the expert concluded.

At the session, the head of Alfa-Bank, Vladimir Verkhoshinsky, proposed creating an alternative to the Mir payment system. He stressed: for example, in the United States there are three of them — this removes the monopoly of the state and makes the system sustainable for citizens. The financial organization is ready to call Bigtech and work out such a solution, he noted.

The Bank of Russia approved this step. If the market agrees, then the Central Bank is not against it, and with both cards and reinsurance, Elvira Nabiullina emphasized.