Russian banks have rejected proposals from telecom operators MTS and MegaFon to organize the labeling of outgoing calls that lack a special identifier. This was stated in a joint declaration by the operators, which MTS shared with TASS. The parties discussed the issue during a series of meetings involving regulators, but have yet to reach an agreement. Previously, the implementation of blocking such calls for banks was postponed until November 13, 2026, and this date remains the key milestone for the future development of the situation.
Bank position: 85% of calls are debt collection related
According to the operators, bank representatives stated during negotiations that approximately 85% of outgoing calls to customers are related to debt collection. In some cases, borrowers receive 5–10 calls per day from debt collection services. Banks fear that mandatory labeling of these calls could reduce the likelihood of reaching the debtor and, consequently, increase communication costs. This argument has become the main obstacle to adopting the mechanisms proposed by the operators.
Operators cite legislative requirements
MTS and MegaFon acknowledge the validity of some of the banks' concerns, but remind them that current legislation requires operators to specify not only the category of the caller but also the purpose of the contact. In their view, this norm creates the legal framework for implementing the labeling, and deviating from it without changing the law is impossible. The operators declared their readiness to propose a comprehensive solution that would avoid making bank costs directly dependent on the number of outgoing calls, although specific parameters of such a solution are not disclosed in the public statement.
Combating fraud and statistical context
The operators also believe that the banks' concerns regarding potential damage to the fight against telephone fraud are exaggerated. According to their data, the financial sector estimates the annual volume of relevant telephone inquiries to be less than 0.3% of the total number of calls to customers. Thus, even with a full transition to labeling, the share of affected calls remains insignificant, which, according to the telecom companies, does not create a systemic risk for anti-fraud infrastructure.
Next steps: November 13 as a deadline
The situation remains unresolved: neither side has announced a compromise, and the regulators present at the meetings have not publicly announced any interim solutions. November 13, 2026, to which the introduction of blocking unlabeled calls for banks was postponed, is becoming the de facto deadline. If an agreement is not reached by this date, operators will be faced with the necessity of either applying the blocking in accordance with the previously established schedule or seeking another extension. For banks, in turn, this means continued uncertainty in calculating communication expenses for the upcoming quarter.
