Following the prohibition on Apple equipment for civil servants, procurement announcements appeared in Russia for the destruction of American devices. This development was reported on a Telegram channel by Eldar Murtazin, a leading analyst at Mobile Research Group.
“I recently visited Perm, where the city government issued a tender to destroy 26 devices, including smartphones and computers. The winning bidder was the company IT Em LLC, with a quoted price of 1200 rubles for the job in total. The devices must be physically destroyed; there is no option to salvage equipment,” stated Murtazin.
According to this publication, six companies initially submitted applications for the order on the Properm portal. The portal also notes that bidders cannot reclaim any precious metals extracted from device microcircuits. Instead, the company must deliver the devices and hand over any proceeds to the authorities.
Murtazin projects that in 2024 roughly 120,000 Apple devices will be destroyed in Russia by this method, with a total value surpassing 2 billion rubles.
“What stands out is the divergence: some government bodies are destroying equipment through tenders, while others are simply disposing of it without such processes,” the analyst observed.
Earlier, Russian users of Apple Vision Pro faced warnings about potential problems, highlighting broader concerns around the intersection of government policy, procurement practices, and consumer technology in the region. This evolving landscape reflects ongoing debates about decommissioning, asset management, and the security implications of domestically sourced or sanctioned devices, as seen in recent public discourse and related reports at the time.
Experts note that tenders for destruction are part of a wider conversation about asset disposition, data sanitization, and regulatory compliance in a climate of shifting sanctions and technology controls. The specific case in Perm illustrates how local administrations approach the disposal of equipment, balancing the desire to remove sensitive devices from public networks with transparency and accountability in the use of public resources. Observers also point to the broader implications for manufacturers, resellers, and service providers who participate in these auctions, including the need to verify bid requirements, ensure proper destruction procedures, and manage any financial or legal remittances to authorities. In this context, the described events contribute to a growing narrative about the lifecycle of technology within public institutions and how cities navigate the practicalities of decommissioning in an environment shaped by policy decisions and economic considerations.
Overall, the situation underscores how different regional and municipal authorities respond to the question of device retirement, sometimes through formal tender processes and other times through more informal channels. Market participants remain attentive to further tenders, regulatory developments, and official guidance as Russia continues to redefine its approach to the use, disposal, and accountability of foreign-manufactured technology.
As the discourse evolves, the public discourse around Apple products in Russia continues to intersect with broader themes of digital sovereignty, national security policy, and the governance of electronic waste. The evolving policy landscape may influence future procurement practices and the handling of deprecated devices, including the destruction of equipment that has been sanctioned or restricted for public use, with ongoing scrutiny from observers and industry analysts alike as noted in recent updates and commentary.