---
title: 'P2P and Individual Entrepreneurs: How to Get Blocked Under 161-FZ'
source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=kas1qtAzXLY'
video_id: 'kas1qtAzXLY'
date: 2026-08-09
duration_sec: 64
channel: 'ProMarket | Полунин Олег'
---

# P2P and Individual Entrepreneurs: How to Get Blocked Under 161-FZ

> Source: [P2P and Individual Entrepreneurs: How to Get Blocked Under 161-FZ](https://youtube.com/watch?v=kas1qtAzXLY)

## Summary

The video discusses the risks of using P2P cryptocurrency exchanges in Russia, particularly for individual entrepreneurs (ИП). It highlights a case where an entrepreneur was blocked under Federal Law 161 due to unclear connections between crypto sales and business activities, emphasizing the need for careful structuring.

### Key Points

- **Russian Entity Crypto Payments** [00:03] — A Russian entity can receive cryptocurrency as payment for goods, work, and services, but there are subtle considerations for self-employed individuals to weigh before structuring the scheme.
- **P2P Tax Optimization Case** [00:18] — An individual entrepreneur used P2P sales to pay 6% tax instead of 13-15% on crypto income, but this led to complications.
- **Blocked Under 161-FZ** [00:42] — Despite advice from lawyers to cash checks, the entrepreneur was blocked under Federal Law 161, with no clear explanation linking crypto sales to his individual entrepreneurship.

### Conclusion

The video warns that using P2P for tax optimization without a clear legal framework can lead to bank blocks under 161-FZ, stressing the importance of proper structuring and legal advice.

## Transcript

the right, as a Russian entity, to receive cryptocurrency as payment for our goods, work, and services.  And here is a subtle point with this self-employed person: you better, well, think a few more times and weigh everything up as to how and how to
fine-tune, so to speak, the work scheme.   We are currently working on a case where an individual entrepreneur was selling on P2P. He did this in order to take 6%
He did this in order to take 6% tax for himself, and not 13-15% for the income the realization of cryptocurrency.  Everything would have been fine, and some lawyers there advised him: “Do this, cash the checks, and everything will be fine for you.”  Everything would have been
Federal Law 161, and they blocked it anyway.  Now he doesn't have a normal, understandable, coherent explanation of how, excuse me, Makar connected the sale of crypto and his individual entrepreneurship.  He just can't
entrepreneurship.  He just can't explain it anywhere.