Seized Russian Superyachts: The Hidden Bill for European Taxpayers

How Two Frozen Superyachts Became a Multimillion-Euro Problem for Italy and Germany

Two of the world's largest superyachts, seized under EU sanctions against Russia, have become a costly logistical and legal burden for Italy and Germany. The 143-metre sailing yacht 'A', owned by Russian oligarch Andrej Melnitschenko, has been anchored in the port of Trieste since 2022. According to Trieste's mayor, Roberto Dipiazza, maintaining the vessel costs Italian taxpayers up to €30,000 per day — a cumulative bill exceeding €40 million. The yacht requires a 20-person crew, berthing fees, insurance, fuel for generators and regular maintenance, even though it never leaves the dock.

In Germany, the 156-metre megayacht 'Dilbar' — valued at €600 million — sits in a floating dock at the Lürssen shipyard near Bremen. Its upkeep is estimated at €50,000 per day, or more than €18 million annually. Until recently, the shipyard bore these costs under its duty of care. But in June 2026, the Frankfurt Administrative Court ruled that authorities had failed to prove that Alischer Usmanow or his sanctioned sister controlled the owning trust, meaning the yacht could no longer be treated as a frozen economic resource under EU sanctions. Lürssen now has the right to bill the trust or seek state compensation, though US sanctions and ongoing legal appeals delay any resolution.

The legal complexity stems from opaque ownership structures. The yacht 'A' is officially held by a Bermuda-based company controlled by a trust, and Melnitschenko's lawyers argued that this structure means he is no longer the legal owner. The European Court of Justice rejected that argument, allowing the freeze to stand, but the main case continues before an Italian administrative court. Meanwhile, the costs keep mounting, and politicians like Mayor Dipiazza are frustrated by the lack of a clear exit.

Trust Structures, Legal Gridlock and the Real Cost of Sanctions Enforcement

Why Trust Structures Are Sanctions' Achilles' Heel

Both cases hinge on the same legal problem: proving who really owns a superyacht when it is held through layered international trusts. The 'A' is formally owned by a Bermuda company controlled by a trust; Melnitschenko's lawyers used that to argue the freeze was illegal. The ECJ disagreed, but the Frankfurt court accepted a similar argument for the 'Dilbar', ruling that German authorities had not proven Usmanow or his sister controlled the owning trust. This inconsistency across EU jurisdictions creates uncertainty for enforcement agencies and opens the door for further legal challenges. For context, the EU's sanctions framework relies on member states to identify and freeze assets, but it does not provide a harmonised mechanism for piercing complex ownership structures — a gap that oligarchs' advisers have exploited since 2022.

The Shipyards Caught in the Middle

Lürssen, one of Germany's most prestigious yacht builders, has been forced to maintain the 'Dilbar' for years without compensation. The June 2026 ruling gives it a legal path to recover costs, but the trust's ownership is disputed and US sanctions remain in place, meaning any payment or release could still be blocked. For Lürssen, this is both a financial drain and a reputational risk: it is stuck caring for an asset it cannot sell, move or hand over. Other German shipyards, including Nobiskrug and German Naval Yards, built the 'A' but are not currently responsible for its upkeep — a reminder that the burden falls unevenly across the industry.

Political Pressure vs. Legal Reality

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni continues to support sanctions as 'our best deterrent', warning against any easing. But local politicians like Trieste's mayor are openly frustrated, calling the situation unsustainable and saying the owner is unlikely to ever reclaim the yacht because buying a new one would be cheaper than repaying the accumulated costs. This tension between national political commitment and local financial pain is likely to intensify if more seized assets remain frozen for years. The EU has no central fund for maintaining confiscated assets, so the costs fall on member states, port authorities and sometimes private companies — a politically awkward outcome that could erode public support for sanctions over time.

What Happens Next

Short term (0–6 months): The 'A' remains in Trieste pending the Italian administrative court's main ruling; the 'Dilbar' stays in Bremen as appeals and US sanctions block its release. Medium term (6–24 months): If courts continue to question ownership, more seized assets could be unfrozen or returned, forcing states to absorb sunk costs. Long term (2–5 years): The EU may face pressure to create a centralised asset-management framework or risk seeing sanctions enforcement undermined by legal and financial attrition.

What the Yacht Seizures Mean for Governments, Shipyards and Sanctions Policy

The most important insight: Seizing oligarch assets is easy; holding them legally and financially is not — and the bill is landing on European taxpayers and private shipyards.

For government agencies and policymakers, the cases of the 'A' and 'Dilbar' highlight the need for a clearer EU-wide mechanism to manage frozen assets, including who pays for upkeep and how ownership disputes are resolved. Without it, enforcement will remain patchy and expensive.

• For national authorities: Review existing seizure protocols to ensure ownership evidence is robust enough to withstand court challenges. The Frankfurt ruling shows that failing to prove control over a trust can unravel a freeze.
• For shipyards and marine service providers: Clarify contractual rights and insurance coverage for vessels held under sanctions. Lürssen's experience shows that upkeep obligations can run into tens of millions before any reimbursement is possible.
• For EU policymakers: Consider a centralised fund or framework for maintaining seized assets, similar to proposals discussed for frozen Russian central bank reserves. Without it, member states will continue to bear uneven costs.

Metrics to watch: The Italian administrative court's ruling on the 'A'; any US decision to lift or maintain sanctions on the 'Dilbar'; and whether the EU proposes a new asset-management regulation in 2027.