In brief: In a Swedish town famous for its crispbread, the chairman of Italy’s Barilla pasta colossus recently received a prestigious honor. But amid the celebrations, one question went unanswered: Why is his company still doing business in Russia.
On Oct. 13, Guido Barilla, chairman of the billionaire family-owned Italian food giant Barilla, visited Filipstad, Sweden, to be named an honorary citizen. His family company owns Wasa, the well-known crispbread producer and an important local employer.
What should have been an uncomplicated celebration instead became a controversy over corporate responsibility.
JOIN US ON TELEGRAM
Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.
According to Swedish business newspaper Dagens Industri, a planned interview with Guido Barilla was cancelled after the company reportedly insisted that questions about Russia be excluded.
When Swedish public radio reporter Elton Eiranson subsequently approached Guido Barilla, the chairman declined to answer questions about the company’s Russian operations.
The episode raises an uncomfortable question: Can European business leaders expect public recognition while declining to discuss their continued involvement in the Russian economy?
A profitable business in Russia
More than four years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Barilla continues to operate in the country.
The Kyiv School of Economics’ Leave Russia database lists approximately $21 million annually in Russian taxes associated with Barilla’s operations. The amount illustrates an important issue: taxes paid by companies operating in Russia contribute to the Russian state budget, which also finances the war against Ukraine.
Barilla has defended its continued presence.
Russia Reroutes Pig Iron to Arctic Port Over Black Sea Strikes
In its official statement, the company condemns the war, describes humanitarian assistance to Ukrainian refugees, and says it suspended new investments in Russia in February 2022. It also states that it limits production to basic foods and does not seek economic advantage from its Russian operations. Above all, Barilla emphasizes its responsibility to protect local employees.
But none of this removes the need for transparency.
Questions that deserve answers
Barilla’s stated concern for its Russian employees is understandable. But should it not show equal consideration for the concerns of its customers?
Millions of Americans and Europeans purchase Barilla products, including Back to Nature, Wasa crispbread, Harrys, MISKO and Filiz. Many reasonably expect companies to explain the consequences of their business decisions.
Protecting employees and maintaining customers’ trust should not be competing priorities.
When companies lose control of their Russian businesses
Another concern has become increasingly difficult to ignore: the risk that companies remaining in Russia may lose control of their own operations.
Russian authorities have already taken control of operations belonging to major international companies, including Carlsberg, Rockwool, Nestlé and the former Leroy Merlin business. The consequences can extend far beyond financial losses.
In September 2026, German retailer Metro lost operational control of its Russian subsidiary after it was placed under forced administration. Just weeks later Metro Russia announced a transfer of approximately €11 million to an organization supporting Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine.
These cases raise another legitimate question for Barilla: What would happen to its Russian operations, assets and accumulated profits if the company were to lose control of them?
Recent developments demonstrate why companies remaining in Russia should explain how they assess and manage such risks.
American and European customers deserve transparency
Barilla’s reported humanitarian assistance to Ukraine deserves recognition, just as its contribution to the American and European industry does. But neither should place its Russian operations beyond scrutiny.
Barilla should disclose how much tax its Russian subsidiaries pay annually, whether profits remain in Russia, what investments have taken place since 2022, and how it intends to protect its assets from being redirected to purposes inconsistent with its stated values.
These are reasonable questions of corporate accountability. The celebration in Filipstad may have been a local event, but the questions it raised extend far beyond Sweden.
If companies expect customers to trust their values, they must be prepared to explain how those values translate into business decisions.
And when journalists ask about Russia, silence should not be mistaken for an answer.
The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.
Jakob Gottlieb is a Swedish entrepreneur and volunteer supporting Ukraine. He has previously published opinion articles in Aftonbladet and Euromaidan Press.
Zelensky: Ready to Meet Putin in Turkey, Rules Out Concessions
Ukraine Knocks Out 15 Russian Refineries, $23 Billion in Damage
Kremlin Says Ukraine Peace Talks Hinge on Battlefield, Rejects European Role
China Rejects Ukraine Talks With Trump and Putin
Trump Jr. Discusses Deals With Russian Oligarch, Report Says
Ukraine Maintains Record-Low 11.5% NPL Ratio
Russia’s Black Sea Blockade Hits Small Farmers Hardest, PrivatBank Says
Ukraine’s Economy Contracts 0.7% in Q3, Worse Than NBU Estimated
