Banks did not support the abolition of fees for paying for housing and communal services – Kommersant

Banks opposed the amendments that abolished commissions for paying for housing and communal services (HCS). This is stated in the response of the National Council for the Financial Market (NCFM) to the bill, which leads RBC. Instead of citizens, banks proposed charging commissions from resource supply organizations.

The bill developed by United Russia prohibits banks, payment agents and Russian Post from charging commissions to clients when paying for housing and communal services. Work on the document began back in 2020. State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin ordered its adoption by the end of the year. A letter with the consolidated position of credit institutions was sent to the Bank of Russia, the government, the Federation Council and Vyacheslav Volodin.

Banks have already warned about possible risks when banning commissions for accepting payments for housing and communal services, when the document was just submitted to the State Duma in February 2020 by a group of deputies from United Russia led by Vyacheslav Volodin. Then in May 2020, the State Duma Committee on Housing Policy and Housing and Communal Services recommended establishing a ban on charging fees only to pensioners and citizens who receive subsidies to pay for housing and communal services. Since that time, the bill has not been considered in the State Duma.

The NSFR review states that the measures proposed by the document “not only will not achieve the declared goal, but, on the contrary, will lead to a number of negative consequences both for citizens and for resource supplying organizations and financial market participants.”

Representatives of financial institutions said that the ban would lead to “forced optimization of business processes,” that is, banks would worsen the conditions for servicing clients. The letter states that banks will reduce interest on deposits, increase interest rates on loans, and increase tariffs for other financial services in order to cover the costs of making free payments for housing and communal services. It is argued that with the adoption of the bill, “the risks of theft of funds from banking clients will increase due to a reduction in the amount of funds from banks, especially regional ones, that were previously spent on the development of fraud prevention systems. In addition, acquiring banks may stop accepting transfers for housing and communal services from cards of other banks, so as not to give a commission to the issuing bank.

At the same time, the letter notes that the ban on charging fees for citizens receiving pensions and benefits “deserves support.” However, as banks note, it is not clear how preferential categories will be determined, since the law already establishes categories of citizens entitled to compensation for expenses for housing and communal services (WWII veterans, Labor Heroes, public sector employees of educational institutions, disabled people). Credit institutions believe that in order to provide benefits for exemption from paying commissions, special categories of citizens will need to confirm their status when paying through the bank’s cash desk, which will worsen payment conditions for beneficiaries.

Anastasia Larina