By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Microsoft is fully withdrawing from Russia, with its subsidiary, Microsoft Rus, initiating bankruptcy proceedings in a Moscow court. This action follows a lawsuit by Gazprombank seeking repayment for allegedly unfulfilled contract obligations totaling approximately US$1.14 million. Despite a significant revenue drop since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Microsoft Rus reported a net profit before filing for bankruptcy. The move marks the final stage of Microsoft’s departure from the Russian market, following the closure of its 13 Russian branches earlier this year.
Read the original article here
Microsoft’s exit from the Russian market, culminating in the bankruptcy of its local subsidiary, is a drawn-out affair that raises more questions than it initially answers. While the timing might seem belated, the official closure of its 13 branches across major Russian cities only in early 2025, after initially reducing its presence in 2022, paints a picture of a slow, deliberate withdrawal. The company’s operating activity in Russia had already plummeted dramatically by 2024, with revenue dropping by a staggering 98% from 2021, dwindling to a mere US$2 million. Surprisingly, despite this drastic revenue decrease, the subsidiary still managed to report a net profit of approximately US$2.2 million. This raises eyebrows, suggesting that perhaps the remaining revenue was generated from existing service contracts, with minimal new activity.
This situation highlights a complex interplay of business decisions and geopolitical factors. It wasn’t a principled stand against the ongoing conflict in Ukraine; rather, it was a financially driven decision rooted in the near-total collapse of business operations within the country. This begs the question: Could Russia have used the period of relatively positive West-Russia relations to develop a robust domestic technological infrastructure, including its own operating systems? The stark contrast to other global tech giants who’ve faced similar challenges is noticeable; Microsoft’s decision to leave seems largely based on financial unviability, not any strong moral stance. The fact that they disconnected the International Criminal Court but continued business in Russia for so long further emphasizes this financial pragmatism over ethical concerns.
The impact on everyday Russian users is surprisingly muted. The widespread use of pirated software – a common occurrence even before the recent conflicts and sanctions – means that the absence of official Microsoft support may have a limited effect on individual consumers. While many people use Windows, the reality is that a substantial portion uses unlicensed versions, rendering the official withdrawal largely insignificant for their daily computing needs. The effect on businesses is more considerable; the lack of support for official Microsoft 365 subscriptions and other enterprise solutions is a much more significant issue for companies that relied on these services.
The narrative is further complicated by the broader economic context of Russia’s declining economy. The country’s ongoing war effort has led to significant nationalization and a contraction of the market. This undoubtedly contributed to Microsoft’s struggles, making maintaining a profitable presence increasingly difficult. The Russian government’s increasingly desperate financial situation, perhaps even extorting local subsidiaries for cash, adds another layer to the story. One could argue that Microsoft’s eventual departure, precipitated by bankruptcy, might even be viewed as a strategic maneuver to extract value while minimizing losses in a volatile and increasingly hostile environment.
The question of widespread pushback from Russian users due to the loss of Windows access seems largely unfounded. While Windows is undoubtedly prevalent, the availability of pirated versions and alternative solutions, combined with the already struggling economy, suggests that there will be little to no significant public outcry over this development. It’s not the absence of Windows that forms the crux of this situation; it’s rather the larger picture of a failing Russian economy and the desperate measures being taken by entities like Gazprom, which highlights the broader geopolitical implications of this technological withdrawal.
The story of Microsoft’s exit, therefore, extends beyond a simple corporate retreat. It serves as a microcosm of the far-reaching economic and political ramifications of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, demonstrating the intricate interplay between international sanctions, national economies, and corporate strategies in a rapidly changing global landscape. The final outcome seems to be a victory for the users who have long relied on pirated software; the loss of Microsoft’s presence might barely register on their radar, while legitimate business users face a far more disruptive transition. The situation, in its complexity and unexpected outcomes, underscores the unpredictability of geopolitical and economic shifts on the tech industry.