Illegal Miners Threatened with Criminal Punishment. What to Prepare For

RBK-cryptoPubblicato 2025-12-09Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-12-09

Introduzione

Russian authorities plan to introduce both administrative and criminal liability for illegal cryptocurrency mining, as announced by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak. The government aims to regulate the digital currency market and establish penalties for mining violations. Legal experts suggest that criminal charges should be reserved for cases involving significant public danger, such as large-scale damage to energy infrastructure or threats to grid stability, rather than duplicating existing laws. They argue that administrative fines are sufficient for minor offenses like small-scale home mining. The distinction between criminal and administrative liability will likely be based on the scale of damage and the amount of illicit income generated. A previous legislative draft proposed substantial fines for unregistered mining, but it was criticized for lacking proportionality. Amendments to both the Administrative and Criminal Codes are expected by 2026 to address these issues. Despite mining being legalized in Russia in 2024, an estimated 70% of miners remain unregistered due to challenges in legalizing previously imported equipment.

As stated by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak at the meeting of the Council for Strategic Development and National Projects on December 8, the government plans to establish both administrative and criminal liability for violations related to cryptocurrency mining.

"We will legislatively regulate the issue of digital currency circulation, as well as establish administrative liability for violations of digital currency mining legislation and criminal liability for illegal mining," Novak said.

Lawyers explained to "RBC-Crypto" where the line between administrative and criminal liability might lie and what could influence the assessment of the severity of the crime.

"Eliminating the Gap"

Criminal liability for mining could make sense if it applies to socially dangerous consequences from illegal mining, rather than duplicating existing offenses, says Yuri Brisov, partner at Digital & Analogue Partners. He explained that criminal liability is considered justified when substantial harm to protected public relations can be caused or there is no other way to effectively stop the violation. Also, creating a separate offense is necessary to eliminate a gap.

Currently, Russian law has liability for electricity theft (Art. 158 of the Criminal Code), damage to power supply (Art. 165 of the Criminal Code), illegal entrepreneurship (if the activity is systematic and large-scale), and illegal miners are also usually subject to norms on tax evasion and violation of power grid operation rules, the lawyer said.

According to him, the problem is that these norms cover only specific aspects of illegal mining. If the new criminal article is targeted, for example, "illegal mining resulting in damage to energy infrastructure on a large scale" — this is not duplication, but gap elimination, the expert noted. He added that if the article is general ("mining without permission"), it will become redundant because the same thing is already addressed by administrative measures.

For comparison, the US does not have a separate criminal article for mining, but it has effective existing norms: energy theft, damage to public utilities, and collectively, these norms are sufficient for courts to effectively prosecute illegal mining, Brisov explained. A similar situation, he said, exists in Germany, France, and in general, the dominant approach in Europe is that there is no need to single out mining as a separate criminal offense if the basic norms work.

When the Damage is Too Great

In Russia, criminal liability for illegal mining could be justified when damage is caused to the energy system (or a threat to its stability is recorded) on a large scale, Brisov believes. According to him, this does not duplicate theft because damage can occur without theft, and it does not duplicate administrative liability because the latter is powerless against major violations.

"Large underground farms can create emergency loads on power grids, disable facilities, cause multi-million dollar damage, and administrative fines are clearly insufficient for such violations, as the public danger and potential damage are too great. At the same time, for 'home mining,' where the maximum risk is blowing the fuses in the house, fines are quite sufficient," the lawyer says.

Search for Justice

The line between criminal and administrative liability will most likely be determined by the amount of damage caused and the illegally obtained income, that is, by the volume of mined cryptocurrency, believes Denis Polyakov, head of the "Digital Economy" practice at the GMT Legal law firm.

The lawyer suggested that the draft law from the Ministry of Digital Development, which appeared this summer, will form the basis for defining the offenses. Polyakov recalled that the ministry proposed introducing administrative liability for illegal mining, illegal activities of mining infrastructure operators (MIO), and failure to submit reports to the Federal Tax Service on mined digital currency.

"The violation itself regarding 'illegal mining' consists of mining cryptocurrency on the territory of Russia without being included in the register. That is, to recognize a violation, it is sufficient to prove that a person is engaged in mining and is not included in the register," Polyakov explained.

According to him, the Ministry of Digital Development's draft law proposed the following fine amounts: from 200 to 400 thousand rubles for individual entrepreneurs and from 1 to 2 million rubles for legal entities. However, these fines were subsequently removed from the draft law, and one of the reasons was that the document proposed only administrative liability, the expert said.

"Effectively, this would mean that any violations, whether illegal mining with 3 ASICs (devices for cryptocurrency mining) or mining with 1000 ASICs, would be subject to the same measures of liability, which is not fair," Polyakov said.

According to him, simultaneous amendments to both the Administrative Code (KoAP) and the Criminal Code (UK) are expected in 2026. These changes should take into account the specifics of possible violations and their consequences, the lawyer says.

Other Proposals

Novak instructed to work on strengthening liability for illegal mining back in mid-July. Among the violations mentioned at the time were illegal connection to power grids, electricity theft, and violation of the mining ban.

In October, the State Duma proposed finalizing the Administrative Code regarding non-compliance with current requirements for cryptocurrency mining, and making electricity theft for mining a separate criminal offense. The latter initiative suggests that electricity theft for cryptocurrency mining is defined as an aggravating circumstance.

Mining was legalized in Russia in 2024, after which the industry began to "whiten," but the share of illegal business remains high — according to expert estimates, only about 30% of miners are officially registered. Industry participants cite the lack of a mechanism for legalizing equipment that was previously imported through gray schemes as the main reason preventing many miners from "coming out of the shadows," and call for this problem to be solved.

Arkham Announced "De-anonymization" of ZCash. Which Transactions Are Tracked

Tether Invested in Humanoid Robots. When Will They Be Launched

Only 7 Native Tokens Remain in the Green Since the Start of the Year. And It's Not Bitcoin

Letture associate

Bitcoin Mining Difficulty Drops for the Third Time in a Row. What Does This Mean?

Bitcoin mining difficulty has decreased for the third consecutive time, dropping by 0.74% to 148.2 trillion on December 11. This means miners now need to compute approximately 148 trillion hash functions on average to add a new block and earn the 3.125 BTC reward (around $281,000 at current rates). This prolonged decline in difficulty, last seen in 2024 after the halving event, reflects reduced mining activity. The global hashrate has fallen from its peak of 1.31 Zh/s on October 24 to 1.14 Zh/s, indicating some miners are switching off unprofitable equipment. According to Anton Gonterev, Commercial Director of Intelion, this adjustment reflects the market adapting to Bitcoin's lower price. Since reaching approximately $126,000 on October 6, Bitcoin's price has fallen 28% to $90,000. Despite this, mining difficulty is still over 40% higher than a year ago, indicating sustained structural demand for computational power and continued investor interest in mining. The current correction is seen as a normal industry dynamic where less efficient operators are gradually leaving the network. Mining is shifting towards players with modern equipment, stable infrastructure, and controlled project economics, particularly those with access to predictable, competitive energy prices. These efficient operators remain stable despite short-term fluctuations in Bitcoin's price or mining difficulty.

RBK-crypto51 min fa

Bitcoin Mining Difficulty Drops for the Third Time in a Row. What Does This Mean?

RBK-crypto51 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片