| A Lithuanian here. > But Lithuania has a sizable Russian population [1]. It's also a small country. The Russian population (5%) is a tiny minority here, not represented by any political party in the parlament. It's much bigger (25%) in Latvia and Estonia, as Russians tend to live in the cities near the Russian border[1]. > The latter means it has less experience supervising novel and complex financial systems. It also makes its regulators easier to unduly influence, either through bribery or threats In this case, there is a common view in Lithuania, that as a tiny economy we should focus on IT sector and follow Estonia's example, trying to be the most modern and innovative state in the EU. Therefore, there is an entire goverment program for attracting and supporting fintech companies[2], hoping that they will open offices in Lithuania and employ recent graduates, preventing them from fleeing to Western Europe for better job opportunities. Of course, it makes no financial sense to give a banking license to a foreign startup for such a small economy, but Revolut is extremely popular in Lithuania and the general population sees it as an alternative to Scandinavian banks which have occupied the local market. As a result, those policitians who have tried to oppose giving the license to Revolut were publicly attacked from all sides as "working on behalf of Scandinavian banks". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russians_in_the_Baltic_states [2] https://www.lb.lt/en/newcomer-programme |
I rest my case. That such financial regulation is being politically decided gives Revolut more leeway in Lithuania than it would have in e.g. the U.K.