Nestlé’s Russia Business Under Kremlin Control as Food Giant Weighs Its Next Move
Nestlé is assessing its options after Russia placed the Swiss food giant’s local operations under temporary external administration, escalating the risks facing Western companies that have...
Nestlé is assessing its options after Russia placed the Swiss food giant’s local operations under temporary external administration, escalating the risks facing Western companies that have maintained businesses in the country since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.
A presidential decree published on September 17 transferred control of Nestlé Russia to external administrators, alongside the Russian operations of French retailers Auchan and Leroy Merlin. The move represents another major test of how multinational companies can protect assets and shareholder interests when geopolitical tensions collide with local operating realities.
Nestlé confirmed that it was reviewing the situation and said it would take necessary steps to protect its rights and ensure business continuity, particularly for employees.
The company had already scaled back its Russian activities following the 2022 invasion, limiting its portfolio while maintaining local manufacturing. Nestlé had six factories in Russia in 2025, according to its annual report. Reuters reported that the Russian business employed about 7,000 people and accounted for a declining share of the group’s global sales.
The latest intervention follows Russia’s 2023 framework allowing temporary state control over assets belonging to companies from countries Moscow considers “unfriendly.” Similar measures have affected Western businesses including Danone and Carlsberg, whose Russian operations were subsequently sold, in both cases resulting in financial losses for the companies exiting the market.
For compliance, legal and risk teams, the Nestlé case illustrates the increasingly complex intersection of sanctions, geopolitical exposure, asset protection, business continuity and exit strategy.
The immediate question is no longer simply whether multinational companies can operate in high-risk jurisdictions. It is whether they can retain meaningful control and economic value when governments intervene directly in corporate assets.


No Comment! Be the first one.