ING’s Russian exit stalls: Why the Global Development JSC sale is facing delays

Why is ING’s planned sale of its Russian business facing fresh regulatory delays?

Dutch bank ING confirmed at the end of September 2025 that it is experiencing a delay in completing the planned divestment of its Russian operations. The sale, first announced in January 2025, involves transferring ING Bank (Eurasia) JSC to Moscow-based Global Development JSC. While the financial terms were not disclosed at the time, ING emphasized that the deal was part of its broader strategy to exit Russia and minimize exposure to a market that has become increasingly complex for Western lenders.

The transaction had been slated to close during the third quarter of 2025. ING had previously highlighted that the sale was subject to regulatory approvals both in Russia and in the European Union. As of September 27, 2025, the bank acknowledged that the buyer had not secured all of the required clearances. That absence of approvals now pushes the deal’s closing into uncertainty, though ING said it still intends to follow through on the sale once the legal framework is in place.

For investors and analysts, the delay is less about surprise and more about execution risk. Regulatory barriers in Russia have stymied multiple Western financial institutions, and ING’s case is now another illustration of how political and legal frameworks can slow down exit strategies even when financial terms are agreed upon.

What steps did ING take to reduce its Russian exposure before the sale announcement?

ING has consistently sought to minimize its Russian footprint since the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 and the subsequent waves of sanctions. The Dutch lender first curtailed new Russian lending and then began separating its Russian unit operationally from the rest of the group. These moves ensured that when the divestment was finally agreed with Global Development JSC in early 2025, ING had already reduced cross-border risks.

By mid-2025, ING reported that its offshore exposure to Russian clients had dropped more than 85 percent compared with early 2022. The figure stood at roughly €0.7 billion, of which approximately €0.3 billion was protected through Export Credit Agency or Credit and Political Risk Insurance arrangements. This shrinking exposure signaled to both regulators and shareholders that ING was proactively limiting downside risks before attempting a full market exit.

Such actions positioned ING more favorably than some of its European peers that had taken longer to offload risky assets. However, the regulatory approval process in Russia has proven to be a bottleneck that no amount of internal restructuring can resolve.

How significant is the expected financial hit from the Russian exit according to ING?

Even before announcing the delay, ING had guided investors that the sale of the Russian unit would have a negative post-tax impact of around €0.8 billion. This was broken down into an estimated €0.5 billion book loss and about €0.3 billion from the recycling of currency translation adjustments. In capital terms, the effect was forecast to reduce the bank’s Common Equity Tier 1 ratio by around 7 basis points.

ING’s leadership stressed that the sale was primarily about risk management rather than value maximization. A clean exit from Russia was expected to shield the group from ongoing geopolitical uncertainties, potential sanctions complications, and further operational challenges. Even with the accounting losses, the bank’s balance sheet remained strong enough to absorb the impact without threatening dividend policies or wider capital planning.

The latest delay does not alter these estimates. ING reaffirmed that the eventual impact would remain broadly in line with earlier guidance, provided the sale is completed under existing terms. However, investors will be monitoring whether prolonged negotiations or additional regulatory hurdles could push losses higher.

Why is Russia’s regulatory approval process proving a barrier for Western bank exits?

Russia’s government has tightened controls on the divestment of foreign-owned assets since 2022. Several decrees require explicit state approval for sales of businesses by companies from what Moscow designates as “unfriendly” jurisdictions. This approval process is often lengthy, opaque, and comes with conditions such as steep valuation discounts or commitments from the buyer to maintain certain operations domestically.

In ING’s case, these rules have created a lag between the commercial agreement reached with Global Development JSC and the final regulatory sign-off. ING is far from alone in encountering such obstacles. Other international banks, including Raiffeisen Bank International and UniCredit, have also wrestled with complex negotiations and political uncertainties while seeking to scale back Russian exposure. Goldman Sachs, for example, only received a government decree approving its own Russian divestment earlier in 2025, months after announcing a sale to an Armenian fund.

For ING, the challenge lies not in financial preparedness but in navigating a regulatory landscape where approvals are discretionary and timing is unpredictable.

How does ING’s delay compare with the broader trend among European lenders exiting Russia?

European banks have taken varied approaches to their Russian operations since 2022. Some, such as Deutsche Bank, significantly curtailed their activities early but did not have large retail units to sell. Others, like Austria’s Raiffeisen Bank International, maintained substantial operations and have since been under pressure from regulators to scale down. ING’s case falls in the middle: it had a manageable Russian unit, shrank exposures rapidly, and then sought a full divestment.

The delay highlights that even well-structured exit strategies are vulnerable to political headwinds. Where ING has a relative advantage is in its preparation: by already cutting down exposures, it has limited the risk of sudden write-downs while waiting for regulatory clearance. Still, the reputational question lingers. Stakeholders may perceive the bank as stuck in limbo, a perception that can weigh on institutional sentiment even if the balance sheet impact is contained.

From an investor standpoint, ING’s delay signals that European financial institutions must brace for drawn-out exits. The risk is not necessarily about balance sheet damage but about uncertainty, which markets generally dislike.

What should investors and analysts watch for as ING navigates this delay?

The near-term focus will be on whether Global Development JSC can secure the required approvals from Russian authorities. ING has admitted that there is “currently no realistic prospect” of completing the sale in the third quarter of 2025. Investors should watch for updated timelines in ING’s quarterly disclosures, any signals of renegotiated terms, and commentary from European regulators on whether the bank remains compliant with broader sanctions policy.

Analysts will also be watching for whether ING increases provisions, adjusts capital forecasts, or changes its dividend outlook. Prolonged uncertainty could put pressure on ING’s cost base, particularly if compliance and legal expenses mount.

Institutional sentiment so far appears cautiously neutral. While the market recognizes the inevitability of delays in Russia, ING’s capital resilience offers some comfort. But execution credibility is on the line: investors will want to see evidence that ING can eventually exit without becoming trapped in prolonged negotiations.

What does the delayed ING exit from Russia reveal about long-term risks for European banks operating in politically sensitive markets?

The delay in ING’s Russian exit is a setback, but not a derailment of its strategic intent. ING has prepared itself financially, significantly reduced exposures, and guided the market transparently on expected losses. The remaining obstacle is regulatory approval, which lies beyond its control.

This episode underscores a broader lesson for European banks: exiting politically sensitive jurisdictions is rarely quick or clean. ING’s case will likely become a benchmark for how institutions balance risk reduction with regulatory friction. If ING completes the sale, even with a delay, it could validate its cautious and staged approach. If the process drags further or results in unexpected concessions, it may serve as a cautionary tale for peers still entangled in Russia.

For now, ING remains in the waiting game, with investors watching closely. Execution, rather than intent, will determine whether the Dutch bank can close this chapter and fully realign its operations toward markets with more predictable regulatory frameworks.