Since the U.S. imposed sanctions on Naftna Industrija Srbije (NIS) last week, public debate in Serbia has surged over possible solutions for oil and fuel supply. Opinions vary widely, with some suggesting bankruptcy as a solution, while others warn it could create bigger problems. The government has not yet presented concrete proposals.
Pressure is coming from both sides: the U.S. wants Russia removed from NIS ownership, while Russia resists, offering a gas arrangement with Serbia only until the end of the year. Public suggestions have ranged from nationalization to forming a new oil company or declaring bankruptcy.
Energy expert Aleksandar Kovačević told N1 that it is difficult to link sanctions directly to supply security. “If a company cannot access bank accounts, the court declares bankruptcy and appoints a trustee, who ensures supply obligations are met. At that point, it effectively becomes a new entity,” he said.
Economic journalist Miša Brkić argued that a controlled bankruptcy could be a practical solution: the state could agree to bankruptcy, a trustee would manage the process, creditors would be paid, and a new company could then handle market supply.
However, some experts consider bankruptcy unrealistic. Nenad Gujaničić, chief broker at Momentum Securities, noted that voluntary bankruptcy requires the majority owner’s consent, and forced bankruptcy would occur too late to protect citizens and the economy. Vladan Pavlović from Ipopema Securities added that bankruptcy could only happen if bank accounts are blocked, forcing a trustee to sell assets—an outcome Russia would likely oppose.
Former ALSU director Ivana Matić explained that bankruptcy is possible only if NIS can prove imminent inability to meet obligations. During bankruptcy, all current owners’ rights would be suspended, placing NIS under the control of the Serbian court and licensing agency. Yet, bankruptcy is a temporary measure, and challenges remain, including potential resale to Russian owners and operational chaos, given NIS’s size.
Matić also highlighted alternatives like a reorganization plan, which would require shareholder approval. Any forced administration or suspension of Russian control would likely require new legislation, effectively amounting to nationalization, which authorities have ruled out.
In summary, while bankruptcy could temporarily bypass sanctions, it carries significant risks, including legal disputes with Russia and potential disruption to gas supply, emphasizing the need for careful analysis before any action is taken.
