Euroclear earns €5bn in income from frozen Russian assets last year
European depository Euroclear earned €5 billion in interest income in 2025 from investing frozen Russian assets, which is 26% less than in 2024.
Of this amount, €1.4 billion will be directed to a fund for Ukraine, Forbes reported, citing the depository’s report dated February 4.
The company attributed the decline in income to falling interest rates. For comparison, profit from these assets amounted to €6.9 billion in 2024, €4.4 billion in 2023, and €821 million in 2022.
Overall, €3.3 billion in income from frozen Russian assets is planned to be directed to the European Fund for Ukraine. The first payment of €1.6 billion was already transferred in July 2025, while the second, around €1.4 billion, is expected in early 2026. In addition, tax revenues from the income on these assets in 2025 amounted to €1.1 billion.
The report also states that court proceedings have begun in the Arbitration Court of Moscow following a claim filed by the Bank of Russia. The hearings are held behind closed doors, and Euroclear stresses that it will defend its position while adhering to its obligations regarding market stability and the protection of clients’ interests.
As of the end of December 2025, Euroclear’s balance sheet totaled €222 billion, of which €195 billion accounted for frozen Russian assets. The depository continues to reinvest the funds to minimize risks and capital requirements, complying with European capital rules (CET1) and sanctions requirements, and is building a financial buffer in case of future risks.
As reported, Euroclear warned that EU countries could face higher borrowing costs if the European Union uses these assets to finance a €140 billion loan to Ukraine.
In a letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa, Euroclear stresses that such a "reparations loan" could worsen the investment climate and reduce the attractiveness of European financial markets.
The reason is that investors, including sovereign funds and central banks, may view this decision as a de facto confiscation of central bank reserves, which, in their view, calls into question adherence to the rule of law principle.
