The arrest of Alta Banka’s owner, allegations of unauthorised cash withdrawals and emergency restrictions in North Macedonia have exposed a cross-border banking crisis. Thousands of Russian expatriates and businesses in Serbia are also among those affected.
BELGRADE/SKOPJE, Nov. 3, 2026 (BalkanView) — A Serbian banking crisis has deepened after prosecutors arrested the owner of Alta Banka over suspected abuses involving approximately €385 million, while thousands of Russian expatriates and businesses have been caught up in the lender’s collapse and customers at its North Macedonian subsidiary face restrictions on accessing their money.
Serbian businessman Davor Macura, identified by prosecutors as the owner of Alta Banka AD Belgrade, was arrested on November 2 alongside two bank employees, two days after the National Bank of Serbia revoked the lender’s operating licence.
Serbia’s Public Prosecutor’s Office for Organised Crime suspects Macura of abusing his position to obtain unlawful financial benefits worth approximately 45 billion dinars, equivalent to about €385 million.
According to prosecutors, the investigation concerns alleged unauthorised access to and removal of cash from the bank’s vault.
The two other suspects, including an official responsible for treasury and cash management, allegedly enabled Macura to enter restricted areas by providing access cards or accompanying him.
Investigators searched the bank and premises associated with Macura on October 31 and November 1 and conducted an inventory of cash holdings.
All three suspects were initially detained for up to 48 hours.
The allegations remain under investigation. No court has established the suspects’ guilt, and the precise amount of any confirmed cash shortfall has not been independently established.
The case has triggered questions about the supervision of Serbia’s banking sector, the exposure of state-owned enterprises and the consequences for a North Macedonian bank controlled by the Serbian lender.
Russian expatriates face frozen savings
Among the most immediately affected are Russian citizens who relocated to Serbia following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
For many, Alta Banka had become one of the few institutions willing to provide personal and business accounts amid tighter financial compliance requirements and restrictions affecting Russian nationals.
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) reported that Russian expatriates had lost access to savings and routine banking services following the revocation of the lender’s licence.
Anya Besson, a 40-year-old Russian citizen who has lived in Serbia for three years, told RFE/RL that she could no longer access almost all her savings.
“I lost access to all my savings,” she said.
Besson opened an account in September 2023 after leaving Russia because of her opposition to the government’s policies.
She said Alta Banka had been among the easiest options for foreign nationals seeking bank accounts, which were also important for residence-related procedures.
Although her savings fall below Serbia’s €50,000 deposit insurance ceiling, she cannot currently use the funds.
“I can’t pay by card, I can’t log into online banking,” she told RFE/RL.
Another Russian citizen, identified as Kirill, 39, said he had no alternative bank account after several other institutions rejected his applications.
Darya, a 32-year-old art historian living in Belgrade, said she had deposited proceeds from the sale of a family apartment in Russia with Alta Banka, intending to purchase property in Serbia.
She expects to recover the insured €50,000, but the fate of funds exceeding that threshold will depend on subsequent legal proceedings.
Their experiences illustrate the distinction between having legally insured deposits and being able to access money immediately.
Thousands of Russian-linked businesses affected
The crisis extends beyond individual depositors.
According to a commercial business database analysed by RFE/RL, Russian citizens registered more than 22,000 business entities in Serbia between February 2022 and November 2026.
Of these, 12,271 were active at the time of the analysis.
Approximately 6,500 Russian-linked companies and entrepreneurs had at least one account with Alta Banka.
By comparison, 2,241 had accounts with Raiffeisen Bank and 2,238 with Poštanska Štedionica, according to the same analysis.
The figures do not establish how many accounts were actively used or how much money was deposited.
Nevertheless, they demonstrate Alta Banka’s significant role in serving Serbia’s Russian business community.
RFE/RL cited official statistics showing that more than 53,000 Russian citizens were legally resident in Serbia in 2025.
Banking professor Đorđe Đukić said affected customers should receive compensation in accordance with Serbian law.
Serbia’s deposit insurance framework provides coverage of up to €50,000 per eligible depositor at a bank, including qualifying individuals, entrepreneurs and businesses.
Under the announced procedure, insured payouts should begin within seven working days of the Belgrade Commercial Court’s decision to open bankruptcy proceedings, rather than automatically from the date of licence revocation.
For balances above the insured threshold, recovery will depend on the bank’s assets and the claims settlement process.
State-owned companies under scrutiny
The scandal has also raised questions about the relationship between Alta Banka and major Serbian state-owned enterprises.
According to reporting by Nova.rs, companies with accounts or business relationships involving the lender included Elektroprivreda Srbije (EPS), Telekom Srbija, Elektromreža Srbije, Srbijagas and other public utilities.
Alta Banka also participated in processing electricity bill payments for EPS.
The existence of these banking relationships does not establish the amounts deposited, whether funds were lost or whether any wrongdoing occurred.
However, the disclosures have prompted calls for an investigation into whether political influence played a role in decisions by public enterprises to use the bank.
Đorđe Miketić of the Belgrade Remains movement called for scrutiny of potential political interference, mentioning senior officials including Finance Minister Siniša Mali and central bank Governor Jorgovanka Tabaković.
Those allegations have not been established in court, and the available reporting does not demonstrate criminal wrongdoing by the officials named.
Banking experts have separately questioned how alleged irregularities involving such large amounts of cash could have escaped earlier detection.
Zoran Petrović, speaking on Serbian public broadcaster RTS, said Alta Banka held an unusually high proportion of its assets in cash.
According to his assessment, cash holdings excluding funds held at the Serbian central bank accounted for almost one-quarter of the lender’s balance-sheet assets.
Đukić also questioned whether supervisory mechanisms had been used sufficiently early to identify unusual financial activity.
Serbian media reported that four deputy governors had requested an investigation into possible responsibility within the central bank itself, saying they were informed of discrepancies between the bank’s actual condition and its submitted reports at an emergency meeting on October 30.
The National Bank of Serbia has maintained that revoking Alta Banka’s licence was necessary to protect depositors and that the country’s banking system remains stable.
The crisis crosses into North Macedonia
The consequences have also reached North Macedonia, where Alta Banka Belgrade controls more than 95% of Alta Banka AD Bitola, formerly Stopanska Banka Bitola.
On November 1, the National Bank of North Macedonia imposed temporary administration on the Bitola lender.
Customers were restricted to weekly outflows of 10,000 denars, approximately €162, through bank-issued payment cards, while branches temporarily suspended counter services from November 2.
Central bank Governor Trajko Slaveski said approximately €2 million had been withdrawn from the Macedonian bank before the restrictions were imposed.
He insisted the institution remained liquid, highly capitalised and compliant with supervisory requirements.
The Macedonian bank has not lost its operating licence, and the temporary administration does not constitute bankruptcy.
Its legal position is therefore different from that of its Serbian shareholder.
Nevertheless, customers face immediate practical difficulties despite assurances that their deposits remain in their accounts.
Financial statements reveal losses
Financial reports published through the Macedonian Stock Exchange provide additional insight into Alta Banka Bitola’s position before the intervention.
According to its unaudited nine-month results, published on October 30, the bank recorded a net loss of 48.64 million denars, approximately €790,000, for the first nine months of 2026.
That compared with a profit of 49.15 million denars in the corresponding period of 2025.
The deterioration represented a negative swing of approximately €1.6 million.
The bank had already recorded a first-quarter loss of 28.03 million denars. Its cumulative loss narrowed to 20.42 million denars by the end of June before widening again by September.
The institution attributed the deterioration partly to investment in business development, staffing and infrastructure, alongside a more cautious approach to credit risk.
Personnel expenses rose 32.57% year-on-year to 176.26 million denars, while other operating expenses increased 26.31% to 156.90 million denars.
Despite the losses, the bank reported total assets of approximately 11.27 billion denars and capital and reserves of 1.98 billion denars as of September 30.
Liquid assets accounted for 43.91% of total assets.
Customer deposits stood at approximately €144.8 million.
A loss does not, by itself, establish insolvency or a liquidity shortfall.
However, the figures raise questions about the bank’s profitability, business strategy and the quality of its loan portfolio.
At the end of 2025, its non-performing loan ratio was reported at 5.41%, compared with a sector-wide ratio of 1.97% at the end of June 2026.
The figures relate to different reporting dates and are not a directly comparable measure of current credit quality.
‘We are not interested’: Governor defends takeover approval
The crisis has intensified scrutiny of North Macedonia’s decision to approve the Serbian bank’s acquisition of Stopanska Banka Bitola in 2025.
In an interview with Telma television, Governor Slaveski said the Macedonian lender had been in serious difficulty before the takeover.
“It was a very problematic bank. It was on shaky ground,” he said, describing years of intensified supervision and difficulties involving shareholders and governance.
Slaveski argued that without a new investor, the bank might not have survived.
He said the regulatory assessment of Alta Banka Belgrade had lasted three months and involved multiple supervisory departments.
The central bank had also contacted the European Central Bank and other regulatory institutions to seek information about the investor, he said.
According to Slaveski, the responses did not identify obstacles to approval.
“There are 30 signatures on that,” he said of the supervisory process, adding that he stood behind the decision.
But his comments about Macura’s ownership role have generated further questions.
Asked about Macura’s stake and whether the regulator had examined the businessman behind the Serbian banking group, Slaveski said the approval was granted to Alta Banka Belgrade as a legal entity rather than to an individual.
“I don’t know what percentage he owns, and that does not interest us,” the governor said.
The statement raises questions about the scope of the regulator’s assessment of ultimate beneficial ownership and connected parties.
It does not establish that legally required ownership checks were omitted, but it underscores the need for greater clarity about what was examined before the acquisition was authorised.
What did regulators know, and when?
The Serbian central bank said the licence revocation followed previous supervisory measures and a significant deterioration in Alta Banka Belgrade’s financial condition.
It remains unclear when North Macedonian regulators first received information about those problems and whether any additional measures were taken before October 31.
Another unresolved question concerns possible financial exposures between the two banks.
Such exposures could include interbank deposits, loans, guarantees, receivables or other transactions.
There is currently no confirmed evidence that funds allegedly removed unlawfully from the Serbian bank were transferred to Alta Banka Bitola.
Nor is there evidence in the published material that the Macedonian bank participated in the alleged criminal activities under investigation in Serbia.
The €385 million figure cited by Serbian prosecutors should not be interpreted as an established loss at the Macedonian subsidiary.
A banking scandal with regional consequences
The Alta Banka affair now presents three overlapping challenges.
In Serbia, investigators must determine whether the alleged abuses occurred, how internal controls operated and what happened to the funds under investigation.
For Russian expatriates and entrepreneurs, the immediate priority is restoring access to accounts and recovering insured savings.
In North Macedonia, regulators must protect depositors while explaining the risks associated with the Serbian shareholder, the supervisory assessment behind the 2025 takeover and the conditions for lifting restrictions.
The Serbian investigation could eventually provide answers about the bank’s management and the alleged misuse of cash.
But the wider test for both countries will be whether banking supervision can preserve public confidence when failures at one institution threaten depositors and businesses across borders.
For customers unable to use their savings, the question is more immediate: when will they be able to access their own money again?