Rusnano is facing a sprawling embezzlement inquiry that reaches into its daily operations, with authorities pursuing cases tied to more than 43 billion rubles in theft and losses that exceed 200 billion. The probe traces a web of transfers and inflated purchases that appear to blur the lines of ownership and control, making it harder to identify who benefited at each stage. The developments put a spotlight on a flagship state-backed technology enterprise and raise pressing questions about governance, internal controls, and the safeguards expected to prevent losses of this magnitude. As media coverage widens the public understanding, investigators seem determined to follow every lead in order to recover assets and hold those responsible to account, even when the trail grows tangled.
Criminal cases have now been opened for theft surpassing 43 billion rubles. Sources described by Frolov indicate that funds were siphoned off to foreign jurisdictions through inflated deals presented as purchases of dubious technologies from affiliated firms. Investigators describe a pattern of overpriced transactions involving closely connected companies designed to mask the extraction of funds allocated to Rusnano’s programs. The announcements point to a shift from internal audits to formal prosecutions, as prosecutors work to restore assets and hold managers and external partners to account. The cases illustrate how layered transfers and cross-border movements can conceal the true scale of losses, complicating those efforts and the pursuit of restitution for those involved.
Earlier, Rusnano’s senior executives Oleg Kiselev and Irina Rapoport appeared on international wanted lists. On 27 August, the Moscow Meshchansky Court, in absentia, ordered arrests in connection with a large-scale embezzlement case involving the former leaders. This development underscores the seriousness with which investigators are treating the allegations and the legal avenues being pursued to establish accountability, even when individuals cannot respond to charges in person.
Additionally, in August, Boris Galkin, chief executive of Plastic Logic, a company that develops flexible electronic devices, was arrested and remanded to a Moscow pre-trial detention center. Rusnano faces accusations of channeling funds allocated to his company through schemes tied to embezzlement, a charge that highlights the intertwined nature of executive action and corporate financing in this saga. The court actions reflect a broader effort to trace assets and build a paper trail that can withstand judicial scrutiny and potential appeals.
Earlier commentary connected Chubais’s circle to discussions that prompted Volodin to contemplate extraditing the former Rusnano head, a development that drew media attention and prompted questions about political involvement in corporate matters. As the legal process unfolds, observers are watching how these references influence investigations, policy responses, and the broader narrative around Russia’s technology sector and state-supported innovation. The interplay between political figures, corporate leaders, and state institutions remains a central focus as authorities pursue a comprehensive accounting of the losses and the people responsible for them.