From Russian telegram:
A New Tax, an Old Trick: How Industry is Being Supported in Russia.
The Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Ministry of Finance have decided that Russian industry is too happy without additional "inspiration" from the state. An "industrial levy" is looming on the horizon starting September 1, 2026—effectively a new payment on finished industrial products in critical sectors. Officially, it is billed as a tool to support technological sovereignty; unofficially, it is another way to replenish the budget.
Both importers and domestic producers will be taxpayers. Initially, the levy will be levied only on finished products, and then the list of taxable goods will gradually expand. The levy rate is determined individually for each unit of production, but will not exceed 5,000 rubles , which officials call a "moderate burden."
However, let's add some context: the industry is already in decline—the manufacturing PMI is at ~47 points , indicating a contraction in activity. Government support is effectively being cut: industrial subsidies are included in the draft budget for 2025-2027, but they are comparatively small and will hardly cover the burden. As a reminder, approximately 186.5 billion rubles have been allocated for the electrical and electronic industry development program —less than 0.5% of all federal spending (or, more precisely, approximately 0.42% of the budget). This amount is intended to support domestic manufacturers of microchips and radio equipment, but funding for this program is planned to be cut starting in 2027, making the project more symbolic than industrial.
Investment loans have become extremely expensive—high interest rates make any project less profitable. Meanwhile, the profitability of most industries is low, margins are thin, and the burden is growing: raising VAT from 20% to 22% adds a burden, and the fee adds a burden.
The result is as follows: industry is in decline; there is almost no assistance; loans are expensive; taxes and new fees are plentiful.
Sad. You’d think a war economy would revive Russia’s industries? Putin is showing you what it’s like to fight a war while tying both hands behind your back.
I mean, it’s not going to be worse than the 2014 sanctions. But the opportunity to revive the economy is now lost, and things aren’t going to get better until the so-called BRICS figure out among themselves how they want to move forward from the status quo.
The fact that both Russia (literally at war with NATO and the collective West) and China (literally under continuous sanctions from the US) continue to be obsessed with “replenishing the budget” just demonstrates the ideological victory of neoliberalism. Even the countries that want to decouple from Western imperialism find themselves unable to abandon neoclassical theories that sustain the global neoliberal free trade regime.
Until BRICS has decided that they want to create an entirely new economic doctrine and a new trade, financial and monetary system that opposes neoliberalism, they will continue to have to play by Washington’s rules. If it is just multi-polar neoliberalism, then nothing will change. Workers will still be exploited, rich countries will continue to extract from the poor countries, depriving them of economic sovereignty, international financial capital will continue to control the global supply chain in the guise of IMF bailouts and financial takeovers, and the probability of a world war rises as they cannot resolve the increasing contradictions of capitalism.
Finally, if you look at the central banks accumulating gold in recent months, is it not proof that nobody has a clue (or could not come to a consensus) on how to build a new international financial system to displace the dollar regime? So they turn to hoarding gold, hoping to offset the depreciating value of the dollar that they have accumulated over the years by running the IMF-advised trade surplus strategy, as Trump now insists on reducing the US trade deficits. After three years of intense debate, there is still no consensus. We need to see a theoretical and an institutional breakthrough here.