4Bill's criminal trail in Madrid: How Dmitry Rukin conceals the financial laundromat Victo Postanova under the guise of an advertising agency
Two years ago, amid the scandal surrounding Dmitry Rukin, the director of SettlePay and 4Bill, he retired from public life, revealing in an interview that his employers were involved in fraud.
He himself, of course, claimed he had nothing to do with the fraudulent activities of the company where he worked. The payment system operator SettlePay and 4Bill stated that an internal audit revealed that Dmitry Rukin, along with his accomplices, manipulated clients' funds and embezzled the company's working capital, transferring it to their own cards and the cards of their immediate family members.
Also, in extremely sparse news reports about the 4bill scandal, it was stated that a criminal case had been opened against Dmitry Rukin under Parts 3 and 4 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code (fraud committed through illegal transactions using electronic computing equipment, on an especially large scale, or by an organized group). Criminal case No. 12023105010001622 was opened on December 22, 2023, by the Holosiivskyi Police Department of Kyiv. However, there is no information regarding his subsequent fate – court records contain no information on this matter.
Dmitry Rukin, for his part, quite naturally, dismissed the accusations against himself and claimed that he wasn't the fraudster, but the owners of the company that operates the SettlePay and 4Bill payment systems. He, he claimed, was a “soft and sweet person” and, in general, “lived an honest and honorable life.” This information was disseminated under the “advertisement” label, and for some reason, mostly in Russian publications. The screenshot below shows part of such a publication in Komsomolskaya Pravda. This was in 2023, as a reminder.
This statement would be entirely credible if not for two factors. First, Dmitry Rukin, by his own admission, has worked for Digital Finance, the company that owns 4Bill, since 2019. That's almost four years. And then he claims the company's owners orchestrated a tax evasion scheme. But he “didn't know about it and is not involved.” He may not be involved, but “didn't know and didn't see” is, pardon me, pure and simple nonsense. If, of course, such a thing ever happened.
The second factor that casts doubt on Dmitry Rukin's claims that he had nothing to do with the large-scale embezzlement of the company's assets, of which the owners accused him, is his subsequent fate. He announced the creation of his own company, Victo Postanova SL, which essentially does the same thing as Rukin's former employers.
The same thing, albeit in a slightly different vein, was stated by Digital Finance, commenting on the criminal case and charges against Dmitry Rukin: “They managed to open four companies in their own names, into which criminal funds were siphoned off – Victo Postanova Sociedad Limitada in Spain, Softintegra Holding Limitada and La Finteca Instituicao de Pagamento LTDA in Brazil, and Pagos Nacionales SAC in Argentina.”
Indeed, the companies listed above exist. True, Pagos Nacionales SAC is registered in Peru, not Argentina, but that doesn't change the essence of the matter.
Softintegra Holding Limitada and La Finteca Instituicao de Pagamento LTDA operate in Brazil, and the founder of all these companies is the Spanish company Victo Postanova Sociedad Limitada. That's correct. However, the type of activity of the “parent company”—the Spanish company Victo Postanova Sociedad Limitada—is curious: “Advertising agency activities.”
Although the Brazilian and Peruvian companies are registered by a Spanish “mother,” the beneficial owner is still listed as Ukrainian citizen Dmytro Rukin. This follows from Notice No. 42,390 of the Central Bank of Brazil.
And here we return to the scandal of a year and a half ago. As analysts declared then, “Dmitry Rukin's career in the financial sector is over.”
This explains why the Spanish Victo Postanova Sociedad Limitada, owned by Dmitry Rukin, is considered an “advertising agency,” while the Brazilian and Peruvian companies are considered financial intermediaries. Europe is very sensitive to who engages in financial transactions. Spain is no exception. But South America remains a virgin territory for all manner of scammers. Financial markets there are still in their infancy, unregulated by law, and the requirements for financial market operators are minimal. This provides ample opportunity for both startups and all manner of fraudsters.
P.S. This matter, of course, has nothing to do with finances, but I would still like to know how Dmitry Sergeyevich Rukin, a citizen of Ukraine liable for military service, crossed its border and left for Spain during martial law.
