Pepeliaev Group advises that, on 22 July 2025, the State Duma adopted a Law that is aimed at creating a safe environment on digital platforms, while also creating a legal framework for the development and functioning of such platforms.
The document determines the main concepts and sets the principles of regulating the platform economy while also outlining specific features enabling operators of intermediary digital platforms to interact with partners and users.
Regulations of the Law take effect on
1 March 2026.
Let us examine the main new developments.
1. Area of business activity
The law clearly formulates the area that it regulates and does not apply to relationships connected with:
- the operations of audio-visual services, including arranging for such operations and activities of persons classified as credit institutions or non-credit financial organisations, as well as activities of persons providing professional services on the financial market;
- the issue of licences for the use of computer software; and
- the exclusive distribution of goods (services) that belong to owners of such information resources.
The effect of the new legal rules will only extend to relationships that evolve between such entities as operators of intermediary digital platforms, their partners and users.
An analysis of the Law's terminology will enable us to understand the pool of entities that fall under the regulation of this Law.
2. Terminology
The law defines such fundamental terms as the “platform economy” and a “digital platform”.
The first term encompasses the entirety of organisational and property-based relationships that arise during business and other activity performed through digital platforms.
A digital platform is understood as an information system, including websites, that ensures technical, organisational, information and other functionality for members of the general public to liaise with each other, as well as for goods to be sold.
One of the Law's innovations was the adoption of an “intermediary digital platform” (an “IDP”) that enables interaction between operators, partners and users.
Let us examine more closely the entities that are parties to legal relationships evolving on platforms, highlighting the principal ones.
|
IDP operator (the Operator)
|
IDP Partner (the Partner)
|
IDP User (the User)
|
|
The person supplying services connected with arranging for partners and users to interact on the intermediary digital platform.
|
The person operating on the IDP as a seller of goods to users acting as purchasers (partner/seller);
or
The person operating on the IDP as a supplier of work or services to users that are clients (partner/service provider).
|
The person using technical capabilities of the IDP with a view to purchasing goods (user/purchaser) or obtaining results of work or services (user/client).
|
On the face of it, the terminology that is being adopted does not give rise to particular questions, but we note that the Law on Protecting Competition also contains a definition of a “digital platform”, while article 10.1 of the Law on Protecting Competition provides for a ban on monopolistic activity of an owner of such platform.
So, is there a difference between the terms of the current legislation and the adopted Law? Let us conduct a comparative analysis.
|
Law
|
Law
|
Law on Protecting Competition
|
Digital platform -
the information system / website in the Internet, and/or computer software that provides for technical, organisational, informational and other capabilities for an unlimited number of individuals to interact in the Internet, including with a view to exchanging information, distributing it, selling goods, performing work of supplying services.
|
Intermediary digital platform -
a platform that enables the operator, partners and users to interact with a view to entering into civil law contracts and provides technical capabilities to place orders and/or display product detail pages, perform transactions, and pay for goods (works and services) that a user buys from the partner; the platform is included in the list of intermediary digital platforms.
|
Digital platform -
a program (a set of programs) for computers joined by information and communications networks including the Internet that enables the performance of transactions between sellers and buyers of certain goods.
|
It transpires that the concept of a “digital platform” as set out in the new Law is marginally wider than the relevant definition in the Competition Law. The current term is more compatible with the notion of the “intermediary digital platform” if one considers their respective purposes.
Pepeliaev Group’s comment
We believe that, without additional adjustments that are aimed at harmonising the current rules and regulations of the Law, there is a risk of legal uncertainty, specifically, with respect to the pool of persons affected by the antitrust bans set out in articles 10 and 10.1 of the Competition Law.
3. Procedure for an IDP operator to liaise with partners
Quite a few provisions of the Law are dedicated to regulating issues connected with IDP operations. From the standpoint of antitrust regulation the aspects of interaction with partners are the most interesting. Let us consider the most notable of them.
3.1. The agreement between an IDP operator and a partner
How an operator liaises with a partner is governed by a contract. The contract is concluded after the operator verifies information about a person intending to become a partner via the Unified Register of Legal Entities, Unified Register of Individual Entrepreneurs or identifies and authenticates the person via the relevant unified system.
Please note that the operator can amend the terms and conditions of the contract unilaterally, but it has an obligation to notify the partner to this effect 45 days in advance if such an amendment leads to the following:
- changes to measures of liability provided for in the contract;
- a greater amount of remuneration being paid to the operator for services supplied to the partner;
- changes to the procedure determining the amount of the operator’s remuneration for services supplied to a partner;
- the remuneration payable to the owner of a pick-up point being reduced;
- changes to the procedure determining the remuneration payable to the owner of a pick-up point;
- changes to the conditions for partners/sellers to accept, store and return the goods.
It is noted that such amendments must be entered into a contract taking account of the requirements established by Russian antitrust legislation.
Pepeliaev Group’s comment
We believe that it is logical and justified that these amendments should be codified in view of the potential risks of IDPs breaking antitrust bans, including by abusing their dominant position by imposing onerous contractual terms on a business partner.
3.2. Offering discounts on goods
The Law permits discounts to be offered on goods of sellers (partners) under the procedure that is set out in a contract between the operator and partner on condition that (i) the partner is notified of the intention to reduce the price of the goods and (ii) the partner consents to such a reduction.
The partner is entitled: to agree to participate in such a campaign having specified the period for which the consent is valid and/or the number of goods to which such a consent extends; or refuse to participate in a campaign, having notified the operator of its decision. Moreover, the IDP operator must ensure that a partner can ban sales of its goods at a price that is discounted at the partner’s expense.
Pepeliaev Group’s comment
The need for these provisions has emerged in view of the law enforcement practice of the antitrust regulator.
Specifically, this refers to the two dominant marketplaces, which sold goods at discounted prices if such goods were automatically included in a sales category without obtaining the prior consent of sellers but making discounts at their expense, which effectively resulted in such sellers losing the right to manage prices of their own goods. The antitrust regulator responded to such conduct on the market by issuing the relevant warnings to the dominant entities.
Thus, the new developments have been included in the wording of the Law for a good reason. These innovations are aimed at preventing similar anti-competitive practices in future, while also ensuring that sellers participate in campaigns voluntarily and the process is transparent.
3.3. Search Results
If the IDP allows an operator to provide fee-based services affecting search results, the operator must provide access to such services to all partners on an equal footing.
The Law sets the rules for displaying search results whereby, when search results are formed, they cannot be influenced in violation of the sorting criteria that the user has applied.
Pepeliaev Group’s comment
These developments obviously stem from the law enforcement practice of the antitrust service.
Specifically, what comes to mind is the case of Yandex, which was terminated by a settlement agreement. In this case, the company, when it displayed search results, gave an advantage to its own services that appeared in the so-called search wizards, i.e. interactive widgets.
We believe that these rules are quite logical and are aimed at preventing bad-faith practices with search results from happening in future.
3.4. Examining complaints on an intermediary digital platform
According to the Law, among the operator’s actions (omissions) that may be appealed out of court are those connected with applying measures of civil law liability to partners, limiting access to personal accounts, ceasing to display or limiting the display of pages containing product details, lowering the rating, and changing the position of a page containing product details in the list of search results.
The operator is vested with the obligation to set up a system for examining out-of-court complaints (settling disputes) that enables a partner to appeal the actions (omissions) described above and to send responses to such an appeal.
Pepeliaev Group’s comment
A few years ago, some marketplaces had already launched services for settling disputes out of court on their platforms. These were, among others, disputes between right holders and sellers over breaches of intellectual property rights. The services in question are still operating.
We believe that the purpose behind these measures is to reduce the administrative workload of the antitrust authority and courts. Also, these measures will be instrumental to the expansion and development of the institute of the out-of-court settlement of disputes on digital platforms.
4. State control (supervision) over compliance with legislation in the field of the platform economy
It is assumed that the Federal Antimonopoly Service will be vested with the task of exercising federal state supervision over compliance with requirements in the field of platform economy. On a number of issues, controlling powers to oversee compliance with the Law will be granted to the Russian Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and the Mass Media (abbreviated in Russian as ‘Rospotrebnadzor’).
During federal state audits of compliance with requirements in the field of the platform economy, no scheduled control events will be conducted.
Pepeliaev Group’s comment
We believe that it is quite a logical step to vest in the antitrust authority the obligation to oversee most of the new rules, because the majority of the issues that the Law regulates have already been examined to some degree by the regulator.
It is not entirely clear how the antitrust authority will perform its controlling functions in practice, because the rules of the Law cover a wide range of legal relationships that extend beyond the established powers of the antitrust regulator.
What to think about and what to do
The new developments may be a considerable step forward to a transparent, safe and convenient digital economy.
We believe that these changes will provide business with a stable and predictable operating environment, buyers will be safeguarded against bad-faith sellers and digital platforms will have clear legal guidance to rely on in their operations.
We recommend studying the text of the Law and keeping its provisions in mind in your professional practice.
Help from your adviser
Pepeliaev Group's lawyers have considerable experience of providing legal support to clients in the field of antitrust regulation.
Our lawyers continually monitor changes in antitrust legislation and are ready to promptly advise on any legal aspects that arise in connection with the new provisions being adopted.
