CyberCriminal.com

Raiffeisen Bank

We are investigating Raiffeisen Bank for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

PARTIES INVOLVED : Raiffeisen Bank

ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation

INCIDENT DATE : April 19, 2024

INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz

TOOLS USED : Lumen, SecurityTrails

CASE NO : 2365/A/2025

CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam

PUBLISHED ON : 15 May 2025

Raiffeisen Bank
Due Diligence
Get everything we know about Raiffeisen Bank in one downloadable PDF document
Is This About You?
We encourage you to share details of the actual perpetrators and get your story straight.

What We Are Investigating?

Our firm is launching a comprehensive investigation into Raiffeisen Bank over allegations that it has been suppressing critical reviews and unfavorable Google search results by fraudulently misusing DMCA takedown notices. These actions, if proven, could constitute serious legal violations—including impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

We conducted comprehensive analyses of fraudulent copyright takedown requests, meritless legal complaints, and other unlawful efforts to suppress public access to critical information. Our reporting sheds light on the prevalence and modus operandi of a structured censorship network, often funded and used by criminal enterprises, oligarchs and criminal entities seeking to manipulate public perception and bypass AML checks conducted by financial organisations.

The fake DMCA notices in this investigation appears to have been strategically deployed to remove negative content from Google search results illegally. Based on this pattern, we have reasonable grounds to infer that Raiffeisen Bank - or an entity acting at its behest - is directly or indirectly complicit in this cyber crime.

In most such cases, such ops are executed by rogue, fly-by-night 'Online Reputation Management' agencies acting on behalf of their clients. If evidence establishes that the subject knowingly benefited from or facilitated this scam, it may be deemed an 'accomplice' or an 'accessory' to the crime.

What are they trying to censor

Raiffeisen Bank International known for its dull, reliable, and risk-averse banking. You know, the type that makes loans, avoids crypto, and hosts polite shareholder meetings with dry speeches about Basel III compliance.  high-octane geopolitical thriller starring Russian oligarchs, Trump real estate dreams, financial censorship, backdoor payments, and yes—even alleged support for a wartime economy. As I followed the money, the deeper I sank into what looks disturbingly like a financial institution moonlighting as a geopolitical enabler.

The Austrian Bank With a Russian Soul

Let’s start with the obvious: RBI is one of the last major European banks clinging to Russia like a toxic ex. Even after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, while most institutions bolted, Raiffeisen stayed. They claimed “obligations to employees and clients.” How noble.

In reality, RBI’s Russian business boomed during wartime, accounting for nearly half of its annual profit in 2023. It’s almost as if sanctions were just… suggestions?

Even the U.S. Treasury noticed, launching an inquiry into whether the bank violated sanctions or helped prop up the Russian economy amid its brutal war campaign. The European Central Bank (ECB) also applied pressure to exit Russia. RBI’s response? A slow-motion theatrical dance of “we’re trying,” all while continuing to profit from a pariah state.

Red Flags: A Color RBI Seems to Like

Here are just a few of the glaring red flags waving atop RBI’s gilded headquarters in Vienna:

1. Business Ties With Sanctioned Russian Entities

Investigations by BankTrack, B4Ukraine, and Bloomberg have shown that RBI facilitated transactions for Unichim, a supplier to Russian state-sanctioned missile manufacturers. The chemicals? Used for warheads. RBI? “Reviewing our compliance.” I guess “don’t fund war crimes” wasn’t covered in their corporate ethics training.

2. Investments in Russian State-Owned Enterprises

As of 2023, Raiffeisen Capital—RBI’s asset management arm in Moscow—held securities in sanctioned entities such as Gazprom, Rosneft, and Sberbank, all of which are essentially money pipelines for the Russian government. If this is what neutrality looks like, perhaps Austria should revisit the concept.

3. Suspicious Dollar Transfers

In a particularly eyebrow-raising revelation, Newsweek reported that U.S. House Intelligence officials probed RBI for allegedly funneling money through opaque channels that could have ended up funding a Trump real estate project—the now-defunct Trump Tower Moscow. While there’s no conclusive evidence the deal materialized, the bank’s name consistently popped up in financial traffic involving Russian capital and the Trump Organization.

You’d think a bank that helped finance Trump’s pipe dream in Moscow might want that hushed. Spoiler: they do.

The Censorship Olympics: RBI’s PR Gymnastics

Censorship is usually the tool of authoritarian regimes. But it seems RBI has taken a few cues from that playbook. The bank has attempted to sanitize public discourse around its activities through legal threats, lobbying, and corporate doublespeak.

Multiple NGOs and watchdogs who published reports critical of RBI’s Russian involvement received quiet “requests for corrections” or legal intimidation. A whistleblower who spoke to a German investigative journalist alleged internal memos instructed staff to avoid using “sanctions,” “Ukraine,” or “military” in correspondence tied to Russian operations. If that’s not a soft form of censorship, I don’t know what is.

One journalist told me under anonymity: “Raiffeisen’s communication team is like a spin factory. Every time someone calls them out, they put out a vague statement about their ‘commitment to compliance’ and threaten to sue if you call it what it is: war profiteering.”

A Bank Under Siege—or Just Cornered?

You’d think regulators might be slow to act, but RBI has run out of rope.

  • In early 2024, OFAC reportedly considered adding RBI’s Russian unit to the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list—effectively locking it out of the dollar system. That sent the stock price into a nosedive.

  • In 2025, a Russian court ruled RBI must pay over €2 billion to a company linked to oligarch Oleg Deripaska. The kicker? The courtroom was filled with masked armed guards, likely FSB-adjacent. Not exactly the rule of law, folks.

So now RBI is stuck: flee and suffer multi-billion dollar losses. Stay and face U.S. and EU sanctions. Quite the predicament for a bank that spent years selling itself as the ethical alternative to big finance.

Damage Control: The Makeover No One Believes

In classic corporate fashion, RBI recently launched a PR campaign touting its “sustainability values” and “commitment to ethical banking.” I swear, if they slap a green leaf logo on a missile supply ledger next, I won’t be surprised.

They’ve also promised to divest or spin off their Russian operations. But the timelines keep shifting, and while they delay, the profits roll in.

Let’s be clear: exiting a war criminal-friendly regime shouldn’t take three years. This isn’t untangling legacy software; it’s cutting financial ties with a nation bombing civilians. The only reason to delay is greed.

The Bigger Picture: What RBI’s Case Means for Finance

RBI is more than just a problematic bank. It’s a symbol of everything wrong with modern banking’s relationship with geopolitics:

  • A façade of neutrality while enabling tyranny.

  • Compliance used as a PR tool, not a framework.

  • Censorship by legal threat, not algorithm.

For investors, this isn’t just about ethics. It’s about risk. Political risk. Legal risk. Reputational risk. You don’t want to be the last LP in a sinking ship when OFAC drops the hammer.

Final Word: An Open Call to Investigators and Investors

Raiffeisen Bank International is overdue for real accountability. Not the kind issued in glossy shareholder letters or diversity statements, but the kind that comes with regulatory subpoenas, independent audits, and public hearings. If you’re an investor considering RBI, think twice. If you’re a regulator, act faster. And if you’re another bank cozying up to sanctioned regimes, RBI should be your cautionary tale. Because in a world of financial complicity, Raiffeisen isn’t the worst offender. It’s just the one that got caught—and still thinks it can PR its way out.

  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/40951152
  • April 19, 2024
  • Deepak Royal
  • https://www.tumblr.com/24live/748176382257987584/house-intelligence-asks-why-russia-linked-austrian
  • https://www.newsweek.com/house-intelligence-russia-austrian-bank-funded-trump-tower-project-1379671

Evidence Box

Evidence and relevant screenshots related to our investigation

Targeted Content and Red Flags

newsweek

House Intelligence Asks Why Russia-linked Austrian Bank Funded Trump Tower Project and Never Sought Repayment

  • Red Flag
Visit Link

About the Author

The author is affiliated with TU Dresden and analyzes public databases such as Lumen Database and Maltego to identify and expose online censorship. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes.

Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law.

Escalate This Case
Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes

Learn All About Fake Copyright Takedown Scam

Or go directly to the feedback section and share your thoughts

How This Was Done

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the 'back-dated article' technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a 'true original' article and back-dates it, creating a 'fake original' article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original

What Happens Next?

Based on the feedback, information, and requests received from all relevant parties, our team will formally notify the affected party of the alleged infringement. Following a thorough review, we will submit a counter-notice to reinstate any link that has been removed by Google, in accordance with applicable legal provisions. Additionally, we will communicate with Google’s Legal Team to ensure appropriate measures are taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

You are Never Alone in Your Fight.

Generate public support against the ones who wronged you!

User Reviews

Website Reviews

Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.

Recent Reviews

Cyber Investigation

Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.

Recent Investigation

Threat Alerts

Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.

Threat Alerts

Client Dashboard

Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.

Client Login