Russia's state-backed payment firm A7 took in at least 283 tons of cash rubles, worth more than $14 billion, between November 2024 and July 2025, and turned much of it into payments to China that hide where the money came from, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) and Russian investigative outlet Proekt reported on 21 October, citing leaked internal records.
Cut off from Western banks over its war against Ukraine, Russia now moves money the way drug gangs launder theirs: cash goes in, and clean-looking wire transfers come out abroad. The overlap is literal.
Last year, UK investigators found that a network laundering British drug gangs' cash had bought a Kyrgyz bank that was handling payments for Promsvyazbank, Russia's state defense bank. That same bank co-owns A7, which "is also likely to facilitate cash-based money laundering," anti-money-laundering expert George Voloshin told ICIJ. On 1 October, the US Treasury named A7 a "significant transnational criminal organization." Most of the market cash pays Chinese suppliers, and China supplies about 90% of the high-priority Western-restricted items Russia imports for its weapons. Drone makers working for the Russian army are among A7's clients, Proekt found in April.
Much of the cash came from Moscow's giant Sadovod market, where broker teams known as "departments" collect bags of rubles from traders, the records show. Vans take the numbered bags to an A7 office, where about 50 cashiers count the money before it is trucked to Promsvyazbank. The bank vaults it and credits A7. At its peak, A7 handled at least 58 tons of cash a month.
Russia's central bank has flagged the problem itself. Money of unknown origin comes "primarily" from Moscow's wholesale and retail markets and from illegal crypto exchanges, a senior Central Bank official said in September, as quoted by ICIJ.
A7 then orders shell companies outside Russia to pay its clients' suppliers, mostly Chinese exporters. The money moves through Kyrgyzstan, largely via the state-owned Trading Company of the Kyrgyz Republic, and the wire transfers carry no trace of cash or of Russia. The records list accounts at ICBC, Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, and China Construction Bank. One $287,000 transfer went through Standard Chartered's Hong Kong branch with "Sadovod" recorded as the client.
Chinese banks began refusing Russia-linked payments in December 2023 under the threat of US secondary sanctions. Stripping the funds of their origin makes them easier for Chinese banks to accept, illicit-finance expert Zachary Tvarozna told ICIJ. "The only company that sees everything is A7 itself," Voloshin said.
A7, Promsvyazbank, the Chinese banks, and Kyrgyzstan's economy ministry did not answer ICIJ's questions. A7 has publicly rejected the US accusations, saying it runs "a modern, multi-tiered compliance system."
A7 launched in late 2024, co-owned by Promsvyazbank and led by Moldovan oligarch Ilan Shor, a "sanctioned and convicted criminal fraudster," according to the US Treasury. Ukraine sanctioned its network in February, and the UK followed in May. A7 claimed to have moved more than 7.5 trillion rubles, about 13% of Russia's 2025 foreign trade transactions, and its network also helped Iran sell oil and buy weapons, the Treasury said.
Sanctions did hit A7's crypto side. Daily volume of its ruble token A7A5 fell 96% from its peak by June 2026, blockchain analytics firm Elliptic found. The cash channel is harder to touch: Western banks can see where A7's money lands, but not where it starts.
© The New York Times
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen outlined the initiative during a speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Wednesday, 21 October, following discussions among EU leaders over growing global trade imbalances.
The proposal would form part of a wider package addressing economic dependence on foreign suppliers and attempts by third countries to exert commercial pressure on individual EU member states. Although the Commission has not yet published detailed legislation, the announcement signals Brussels’ intention to expand its capacity to intervene in international trade disputes.
European manufacturers have faced increasing competition from imported products in sectors including chemicals, machinery, vehicles, steel and industrial components.
Much of the concern centres on China, where extensive manufacturing capacity and government support have enabled companies to expand their presence in international markets.
European producers argue that differences in subsidies, production costs and market access place them at a competitive disadvantage.
According to the European Commission, the EU’s goods trade deficit with China exceeded €1 billion per day in 2025.
Von der Leyen has described the imbalance as unsustainable and argued that European trade policy must respond more effectively to market distortions.
During her 21st October address to Parliament, she confirmed that the Commission was working on additional safeguards intended to address sudden increases in imports affecting European businesses.
The proposed measures follow a Franco-German initiative calling for stronger instruments to counter systemic economic imbalances.
France and Germany have urged Brussels to act more quickly where existing trade investigations and enforcement procedures prove insufficient.
The announcement follows recent negotiations between Brussels and Beijing aimed at reducing tensions over industrial competition.
Earlier this month, the two sides reached an arrangement restricting Chinese hybrid vehicle exports to the European market.
As EU Today reported on 13rd October, the agreement established an annual ceiling of 350,000 vehicles, potentially reducing Chinese manufacturers’ expected market access.
However, European officials acknowledge that restrictions covering a single automotive category cannot resolve the wider trade imbalance.
Other industries remain concerned about Chinese production capacity, including chemicals, machinery and manufactured components.
Beijing has warned against further unilateral European restrictions, arguing that protectionist measures could damage commercial relations.
The Chinese authorities have also demonstrated a willingness to pursue trade investigations involving European products.
As previous EU Today coverage established, China opened an anti-dumping investigation into an EU chemical product in early October, adding to existing commercial disputes.
Further European restrictions could therefore prompt additional Chinese countermeasures affecting exporters from member states.
The proposed market-access mechanism is intended to give Brussels greater scope to act when existing safeguards cannot address economic threats quickly enough.
However, its legal structure, enforcement thresholds and relationship with existing anti-dumping and anti-subsidy legislation have not yet been specified.
The EU already possesses several trade-defence instruments, including duties against unfairly priced or subsidised products and safeguards designed to protect industries from damaging import surges.
Those mechanisms generally require formal investigations and evidence demonstrating the conditions for intervention.
The new proposal could introduce a faster response, but questions remain over how any restrictions would comply with international trade obligations and the EU’s commitments under World Trade Organisation rules.
Member states would also have to consider the consequences for European businesses that depend on imported materials, components and finished goods.
The Commission’s strategy extends beyond restrictions on imports. Von der Leyen confirmed that a separate initiative, known as DiversifyEU, would be presented in December.
The programme is intended to help European companies reduce excessive dependence on individual suppliers and countries, particularly where critical raw materials and strategic technologies are involved.
The Commission also plans a solidarity mechanism designed to assist member states and industries facing external economic coercion or retaliation. Such arrangements could become relevant when a foreign government targets exports from a particular member state in response to an EU policy decision.
The initiative follows growing concern that Europe’s access to strategically important industrial supplies can be disrupted through export controls or political disputes.
The Commission will still have to translate the proposed measures into legislation and secure sufficient political support among member states and the European Parliament.
National governments have different commercial relationships with China and varying levels of dependence on imported industrial goods. Countries with substantial export markets in China may be particularly concerned about retaliation, while manufacturers facing foreign competition are likely to press for faster intervention.
The Commission must also determine whether new trade powers should be exercised centrally in Brussels or require additional approval from national governments. For European industry, the immediate question is whether the new mechanism can provide effective protection without increasing production costs through restrictions on essential imports.
The Commission’s forthcoming legislative proposals will establish how far the EU intends to move towards a more interventionist trade policy.
The agreement, reached by the Council and European Parliament on 20th October and announced the following day, raises the invalidation threshold of the EU Emissions Trading System’s market stability reserve from 400 million to 700 million allowances.
The compromise reached by EU negotiators follows months of pressure from energy-intensive industries concerned about carbon prices, electricity costs and competition from manufacturers operating under less restrictive environmental regimes.
The measure requires formal approval before entering into force and forms part of a wider review of the EU’s principal carbon-pricing mechanism.
Established in 2019, the market stability reserve was designed to address the accumulation of surplus emissions allowances that had weakened the effectiveness of Europe’s carbon market.
Under the Emissions Trading System, companies in covered sectors must surrender allowances corresponding to their greenhouse gas emissions. The total quantity available is progressively reduced, creating a financial incentive to cut emissions.
The reserve adjusts the supply of allowances entering the market, withdrawing them when there is a substantial surplus and releasing them under specified conditions when supply becomes scarce.
Existing rules also provide for the permanent cancellation of allowances held above a threshold of 400 million.
Under the new agreement, that threshold would increase to 700 million, allowing a larger stock to remain available for potential future release.
The change does not automatically introduce 300 million additional allowances into circulation. Releases would continue to depend on the reserve’s operating rules and market conditions.
According to the Council, more than three billion allowances have been invalidated since the mechanism began operating in 2023.
The Commission initially proposed ending automatic invalidation indefinitely, while the Council’s September negotiating position envisaged a temporary suspension followed by a higher threshold.
The compromise retains invalidation but increases the amount protected from cancellation.
The agreement follows growing concern about the cumulative cost of European climate regulation, particularly for steelmaking, chemicals, cement and other energy-intensive sectors. Manufacturers have warned that carbon costs, combined with relatively expensive electricity and industrial gas, complicate investment decisions and weaken their ability to compete internationally.
Brussels must also consider the consequences of production shifting to jurisdictions with lower emissions-related costs, a phenomenon known as carbon leakage. Earlier this year, EU Today examined the Commission’s consideration of changes to industrial protections under the ETS, including the relationship between free allowances and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
The latest reserve agreement does not directly change the allocation of free allowances, the emissions cap or the obligations imposed on individual industrial installations. Its principal effect would be to preserve a larger buffer that could become available if future market conditions trigger the release mechanism.
For manufacturers planning investments extending into the 2030s, the availability of allowances and the future trajectory of carbon prices influence production costs and the commercial case for decarbonisation technologies.
The European Commission reported in May that the total number of allowances in circulation during 2025 stood at approximately 1.023 billion.
Its annual market stability reserve calculation provided for approximately 190.5 million allowances to be withdrawn from auctions between September 2026 and August 2027.
These withdrawals reflect the existing mechanism for reducing market surpluses. The proposed higher invalidation threshold concerns how many allowances can subsequently remain in reserve rather than being cancelled.
The overall emissions cap will continue to decline under the legislation already governing the ETS.
Consequently, preserving a larger reserve does not remove the long-term constraint on emissions or guarantee lower carbon prices for European industry.
The agreement also concerns the established ETS covering power generation, industry and certain other sectors, rather than the separate ETS2 regime for emissions associated with road transport and buildings.
The latter has generated its own political controversy, as EU Today reported following the October European Council summit.
The Council and Parliament have agreed that the question of gradually reducing the invalidation threshold should be considered during the broader ETS review.
That exercise will address the carbon market’s operation over a longer period, when the declining supply of allowances could create tighter conditions.
The present agreement therefore provides an adjustment to the reserve mechanism without reopening the entire emissions trading framework. Following legal and technical finalisation, the provisional deal must be endorsed by both institutions and formally adopted.
The new 700 million threshold would apply after the legislation takes effect, while the larger review of the ETS continues through the EU legislative process.
The Council adopted its position on 21st October, proposing an exemption from the obligation to appoint an authorised representative in another EU country when the amount of packaging placed on that country’s market remains below one tonne per calendar year.
The measure addresses complaints from small and medium-sized enterprises that the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, which became applicable on 12th August 2026, creates unnecessary expenses for companies engaged in relatively modest volumes of cross-border commerce.
The proposal forms part of the EU’s eighth legislative simplification package and will now be negotiated with the European Parliament.
Under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation, businesses placing packaging or packaged products on the European market are subject to obligations concerning waste management and extended producer responsibility.
The extended producer responsibility system requires producers to contribute to the management of waste generated by products and packaging placed on the market.
For businesses operating across borders, the framework also includes requirements concerning authorised representatives in member states where producers are not established.
These representatives perform specified compliance functions and provide a point of contact for national authorities.
The system can create substantial administrative obligations for businesses trading in several countries, particularly when the quantity of packaging supplied to individual markets is limited.
A small Belgian retailer, for example, may sell products to customers in Germany, France and the Netherlands without maintaining physical operations in those countries.
The requirement to arrange representation separately across different markets can add compliance costs regardless of whether the volume of trade justifies them.
Under the Council’s proposal, eligible EU-based producers placing less than one tonne of packaging annually on another member state’s market could be exempted from appointing a representative there.
The threshold would be assessed by reference to the quantity placed on the market of the member state concerned.
However, the proposed exemption would not abolish the wider principle of extended producer responsibility or automatically release businesses from their other environmental obligations.
The regulatory changes come only two months after the EU’s revised packaging framework began applying across the single market.
The legislation, Regulation (EU) 2025/40, is intended to reduce packaging waste, improve recyclability and establish more consistent requirements for products and packaging materials.
It covers an extensive range of commercial activities, including manufacturing, retail, food distribution, transport packaging and online sales.
As EU Today reported when the regulation began applying in August, the legislation introduces new requirements affecting packaging design, materials and waste prevention.
However, the practical implications for smaller firms have generated pressure for modifications.
In September, EU Today examined the emerging campaign for simplification, as business organisations questioned whether the compliance system adequately reflected the circumstances of smaller producers.
The Council’s latest agreement represents a further legislative step, replacing general calls for administrative relief with a specific negotiating position.
The Commission also issued detailed implementation guidance in June 2026 after receiving numerous questions from member states and businesses about how the regulation should be interpreted.
The proposed exemption would not apply without conditions.
The Council’s negotiating mandate includes a safeguard allowing the relevant authorities to respond when a producer fails to comply with extended producer responsibility obligations.
It also provides for the European Commission to review the duration of the temporary suspension by 31st December 2030, ahead of its scheduled expiry in 2032.
The timetable reflects the possibility that broader reform of producer responsibility arrangements could replace the temporary measure.
The Commission is preparing a Circular Economy Act intended to address additional problems affecting Europe’s recycling and secondary raw materials markets.
That initiative could provide a more comprehensive framework for the administration of producer responsibility systems across member states.
For now, the Council has opted for a narrower intervention designed to reduce the immediate burden on smaller companies without reopening the entire packaging regulation.
The proposal also reflects a broader problem with European regulatory integration.
Although companies can sell goods throughout the single market, compliance requirements often remain administered through national systems, requiring businesses to deal with separate authorities and procedures.
For multinational corporations, such costs can be distributed across substantial commercial operations. For smaller exporters and online retailers, similar administrative requirements can consume a much greater proportion of turnover.
The Council argues that removing unnecessary representation requirements would support cross-border trade while preserving the objectives of European environmental legislation.
The Irish presidency will now seek agreement with the European Parliament on the proposed amendment.
Until that legislation is adopted and becomes applicable, businesses must continue to comply with the existing rules, including relevant national producer responsibility requirements.
Finn Gomez/Getty Images
Meta says some of its biggest cash incinerators could finally start turning profits.
The social media giant, which generated over 97% of its quarterly revenue from ads, has faced persistent questions from investors about the lack of profitability in its AI and hardware initiatives.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg addressed those concerns head-on during its third-quarter earnings call on Wednesday.
Zuckerberg said that Muse, the AI assistant it launched last month, is unprofitable since it's "very compute intensive to run." Meta expects to start turning that around next year by massively improving Muse's efficiency.
"If compute efficiency continues improving quickly for another few years, which we think is highly likely, then Muse will be highly profitable over multiple years," he said.
Meta plans to make money from Muse by taking a small transaction fee off of purchases it drives, Zuckerberg said at Meta's Connect conference last month.
Zuckerberg added that Muse, which launched only in the US and Canada, wasn't launched globally due in part to the amount of compute it requires. (Meta's North American users are generally its most lucrative.)
Zuckerberg also struck a positive note about its cash-hemorrhaging Reality Labs division, which makes products like Meta Ray-Bans and virtual reality glasses.
Meta expects Reality Labs to narrow its losses to about $15 billion in 2027, down from the $18 to $19 billion it expects to lose this year. The division should start trending toward profitability next year, as Meta's AI systems make it more useful, Zuckerberg said.
"I continue to believe that the path to delivering holographic experience, of bringing together the physical and digital worlds and everyday glasses, will come through VR first," Zuckerberg said.
Have a tip? Contact this reporter securely on Signal at charlesrollet.12 or +1-628-282-2811. Use a personal email address and a non-work device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.
Courtesy of Andie Allan
When Andie Allan scans job listings, her dog, Luther, is never far from her mind — or her side.
The 92-pound German Shepherd has a spot on the couch in Allan's home office. Allan, a marketing manager who hasn't worked full-time in person in more than a dozen years, is looking for a job that lets her remain fully remote, in part so she can stay close to Luther.
More than six years after the pandemic ushered in a work-from-home revolution, many office workers have gotten used to skipping some commutes and having more flexibility outside their 9-to-5. Others have embraced a return to in-person collaboration.
Entirely remote work remains relatively uncommon: In September, 12.1% of US full-time workers were fully remote, according to Stanford data.
For some, these remote setups are a preference. For others, it can make holding down a job feasible alongside factors like caregiving responsibilities or disabilities.
The search for remote jobs can be tough, however, unless you have an especially in-demand or niche skill set. In the US, fully remote roles made up 9% of job postings on LinkedIn in September, yet drew 33% of applications, the company said.
Competition for those roles has also increased as many companies have returned to the office, at least part-time. The number of applicants per remote job rose 10% from a year earlier, according to LinkedIn.
Candidates seeking these roles might need to show employers they can succeed without regular office time — contrary to what some corporate leaders might prefer. Allan is using her track record of remote work as a selling point when applying. She points to the successful products she launched while working with global teams she rarely met in person.
Allan said she's happy being at home, even if it means forgoing opportunities. Commuting to an office from her home outside London could work, Allan said, "If I was 25 and had no ties and wasn't married to a German Shepherd."
Access to remote jobs also isn't evenly spread across industries. LinkedIn found that it was most common in technology, information, and media; financial services; and administrative and support services.
Winston Murdock, who's dialed in from home since 2010, works in one of the more remote-friendly corners of the job market as a software team lead. He and his wife bought their house outside Atlanta with an extra bedroom for his dedicated office.
Years ago, Murdock said, a recruiter approached him about a job that would have paid more but required a two-hour round-trip commute on weekdays. Murdock and his wife considered the added costs of childcare, gas, vehicle wear and tear, lunches, and work clothes fancier than a T-shirt.
"There's maybe a number that will get me to choose to be back in the office," Murdock said. "That number was not it."
Murdock said he loves his role at a Canadian software company and plans to stay, in part because of the remote arrangement. He would consider office work only if he lost his job.
For workers looking for a new role, office time is increasingly part of the bargain. Robert Half, the staffing firm, said in a July report that a shift toward in-office work meant "more competition for fully remote roles and a near guarantee that new opportunities will come with at least some in-office time."
The relative scarcity of remote jobs makes a targeted search especially important, said Markos Korvesis, a career coach who helps people find such roles. He said job seekers often don't know how to tailor their résumés to show they are a good fit for logging on from outside an office.
Korvesis spends most of his time in Vietnam and has worked from more than three dozen countries over the last eight years. He recommends that job seekers highlight that they're up to date with AI tools and have solid experience using a variety of communication platforms, from Slack to Discord.
People should point to examples of how they've worked across offices, nations, and cultures, Korvesis said. It's important, he said, to be specific: If you've worked with teams in five time zones, say so.
Korvesis said those details can show that a candidate is prepared to thrive in a remote environment.
Landing a remote job is only one of the difficulties. Chad Albert, who lives in South Florida and helps customize and sell software used in healthcare, said technology has made it easier to collaborate across distances, yet communicating through a screen can make it harder to connect with colleagues.
Albert said he makes an effort to pay attention when coworkers talk about their hobbies or what they did over the weekend.
The goal is to be a bit more outgoing and engage people in some side conversations, he said, adding that otherwise, "You wind up living on an island."
With fewer remote openings and more applicants per posting, the job search can demand persistence.
From her home southwest of London, Allan has been looking for a full-time marketing role since May 2025. Last year, she said she was in a "blind panic, applying for everything," submitting more than 1,000 applications.
Now, Allan said, she is being more deliberate. Unless she fully fits the criteria, she doesn't apply, she said. Allan also remains upfront with prospective employers about Luther, who gets at least three walks a day, including one at lunchtime.
"If they get me, great," she said. "And if they don't, well, maybe it's not a great fit."
Do you have a story to share about your work setup? Contact this reporter at tparadis@businessinsider.com.
Higher interest rates and tighter financial conditions can kill the AI boom, but those forces are already at work in the bond market.
The post Breitbart Business Digest: The Bond Market Is Already Doing Warsh’s Work appeared first on Breitbart.
Login