BLR · snapshot 2026-08-09
Belarus
HighOverride appliedOverall risk score
55.5
Percentile of scored universe
66th
Data coverage
97%
vs Australia (16.1)
+39.4
Rated High on its own indicators; a gate condition is also flagged.
The High rating stands on the computed score of 55.5 (High). The flagged condition — DFAT advice: Do not travel (Level 4) — would floor the band at High even on weaker data.
Sanctions & banking access
Where sanctions make Belarus hard to operate in — under Australian law, under US/EU extraterritorial reach, and in practice at the bank. Comprehensive frameworks force Very High; severe secondary exposure or severed banking floors the band at High; the rest is disclosure.
Australian sanctions
DFAT frameworks that legally restrict Australian companies
No framework, program, or de-risking pattern identified.
US/EU secondary sanctions
Extraterritorial programs that bind you regardless of Australian law
EU sectoral measures and US designations (state banks, potash, dual-use) despite no Australian country framework
Banking access
Will correspondent banks actually move your money out
Several banks SWIFT-disconnected; Western correspondent appetite minimal
Category breakdown
Political Stability & Governance
Very High6 indicators · 100% coverage
Economic Resilience
Medium7 indicators · 100% coverage
Financial & Currency Risk
Very High5 indicators · 100% coverage
Business Environment
High3 indicators · 75% coverage
Security & Crime
High4 indicators · 100% coverage
Climate & Social Compliance
Medium4 indicators · 100% coverage
Technology & Digital
Medium4 indicators · 100% coverage
Cultural Distance
Insufficient dataInsufficient data · not in overall score
Key risks and considerations
Belarus rates High for market entry — an overall risk score of 55.5, riskier than 66% of rated economies and 39 points riskier than Australia.
An override floors the band at High: DFAT advice: Do not travel (Level 4).
No Australian sanctions framework applies, but the practical picture is harder: US/EU designations require enhanced screening: EU sectoral measures and US designations (state banks, potash, dual-use) despite no Australian country framework. Further, correspondent banking is constrained: Several banks SWIFT-disconnected; Western correspondent appetite minimal.
The main risk drivers are elevated sovereign credit risk (OECD Category 7 / 7 — in default), no double-tax agreement with Australia, no investment-treaty protection with Australia, DFAT travel advice at Level 4 — Do not travel and weak civic voice and accountability.
Relative strengths: physical climate vulnerability and internet users both sit in the least-risky quarter of rated economies, and current account rates Low, the least-risky rating band.
Possible mitigations
- Secondary-sanctions exposure. US/EU sanctions reach further than Australian law: screen counterparties against the OFAC SDN list as well as the DFAT list, remember that any USD transaction creates US jurisdiction, and obtain specialist advice before contracting with state-linked entities.
- Repatriation channel risk. Correspondent banks may refuse or delay payments even where they are legal: test the channel with pilot transfers before committing capital, maintain more than one banking relationship, consider non-USD invoicing where lawful, and build payment delays into working capital.
- Duty of care for people. DFAT advises against non-essential travel. Review duty-of-care obligations, prefer remote engagement, and use in-country agents rather than travelling staff where possible.
- Corruption and legal recourse. Run a strong anti-bribery program (Australian foreign-bribery law follows you abroad), conduct third-party due diligence, and seat dispute resolution offshore — arbitration clauses (e.g. SIAC or HKIAC) beat local courts.
- Payment security. Elevated sovereign/transfer risk: prefer confirmed letters of credit or export credit insurance over open account terms, and watch for import-payment restrictions.
- Withholding tax. No double-tax agreement with Australia: model withholding tax on dividends, interest, and royalties into the business case — it can decide the entity-vs-export question.
Generated automatically from this snapshot’s indicator data — a starting point for analysis, not advice.
Indicators
| Indicator | Value | Risk score | Rating | Australia | Data source year | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Political Stability & Governance | ||||||
| Voice & accountability (WGI) | 27.3 | 93.9 | Very High | |||
| Government effectiveness (WGI) | 37.7 | 75.4 | Very High | |||
| Regulatory quality (WGI) | 35.4 | 90.0 | Very High | |||
| Rule of law (WGI) | 35.8 | 88.2 | Very High | |||
| Control of corruption (WGI) | 36.2 | 68.4 | High | |||
| Political stability & absence of violence/terrorism (WGI PV) | 59.4 | 65.9 | High | |||
| Economic Resilience | ||||||
| GDP growth (3-yr average, %) | 3.3% (3-yr avg) | 45.0 | Medium | |||
| Growth volatility (10-yr std dev, pp) | ±2.9 pp | 39.7 | Medium | |||
| Government net debt (% of GDP) | 33.1 | 35.0 | Medium | |||
| Inflation (CPI %, vs income-group target) | 6.6 | 40.0 | Medium | |||
| Current account (3-yr average, % of GDP) | -1.7% (3-yr avg) | 15.0 | Low | |||
| FX reserves (months of import cover) | 3.0 months | 30.0 | Medium | |||
| GDP per capita (PPP, current intl $) | $34,716 | 36.9 | Medium | |||
| Financial & Currency Risk | ||||||
| Capital-account openness (Chinn-Ito KAOPEN) | 0.42 | 60.0 | High | |||
| Currency stability (regime-aware classification) | Floating — normal volatility (8–13%) | 30.0 | Medium | |||
| Sovereign credit risk (OECD country risk classification) | Category 7 / 7 — in default | 100.0 | Very High | |||
| FATF listing (grey / black list status) | Not listed | 0.0 | Low | |||
| Double-tax agreement with Australia | None in force | 100.0 | Very High | |||
| Business Environment | ||||||
| FDI regulatory restrictiveness (OECD FDIRRI) | 0.09 | 50.5 | High | |||
| Logistics performance (World Bank LPI) | 2.7 | 59.1 | High | |||
| Business readiness (World Bank B-READY pillar average) | — | — | Insufficient data | |||
| Investment protection with Australia in force (BIT or FTA investment chapter) | None in force | 100.0 | Very High | |||
| Security & Crime | ||||||
| Armed-conflict intensity (battle deaths per 100k, 5-yr) | 0.0 | 29.7 | Medium | |||
| Intentional homicide rate (per 100k) | 2.4 | 51.4 | High | |||
| Organised crime pervasiveness (GI-TOC criminality score) | 5.8 | 67.7 | High | |||
| DFAT Smartraveller advisory level | Level 4 — Do not travel | 95.0 | Very High | |||
| Climate & Social Compliance | ||||||
| Physical climate vulnerability (ND-GAIN vulnerability) | 0.355 | 15.5 | Low | |||
| Disaster risk (INFORM Risk Index) | 2.6 | 24.9 | Low | |||
| Modern-slavery prevalence (per 1,000) | 11.3 | 90.3 | Very High | |||
| Modern-slavery vulnerability score | 41.0 | 37.8 | Medium | |||
| Technology & Digital | ||||||
| E-government development (UN EGDI) | 0.7 | 39.6 | Medium | |||
| Internet users (% of population) | 94.3 | 17.5 | Low | |||
| Cybercrime origination (World Cybercrime Index) | 3.9 | 45.0 | Medium | |||
| Secure internet servers (per million people) | 12729.5 | 24.4 | Low | |||
Per-indicator ratings are quartile bands of the 0–100 risk score. The Australia column shows the same indicator’s raw value for the Australian baseline in this snapshot.
Cultural distance
GLOBE 2004 societal practices · rated on distance from Australia · not in the overall score
Context — not scored
Unemployment
3.4%
Displayed, never scored: ambiguous for an entrant and unreliable where informal employment dominates. (2025, ILO modelled)
Trade agreement
No Australian FTA in force
Market access is decision-relevant but a benefit, not a risk — kept out of the rating.
Regional advisories
No higher regional advisory levels
DFAT Smartraveller sub-national advice where it exceeds the overall level.
Compare with
A score means little on its own. These economies scored closest to Belarus in this snapshot, which is the fastest way to see whether the rating is telling you something specific or something regional.