Abstract: The object of the study is the objective side of the crime, responsibility for which is provided for in Part 1 of Article 185 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The problems that arise when trying to understand the mechanism of causing damage to investors are analyzed. It is noted that it cannot be real. The conclusion is formulated that the socially dangerous consequences reflected in Article 185 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation do not allow it to be applicable in practice, do not allow to correctly determine the immediate object in theory. The necessity of changing the disposition of the rule on abuse in the issue of securities is substantiated. The proposed version, firstly, takes into account legislative changes in the part of documents containing information about securities; secondly, it excludes consequences in the form of damage; and thirdly, it does not create problems in determining the type of intent and distinguishing from the offense, responsibility for which is established in Article 15.17 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation "Unfair issue of securities papers".   The author's special contribution to the research of the topic is that it was carried out after significant changes were made to the sectoral legislation, on which the possibility of applying the criminal law provision providing for liability for abuse in the issue of securities depends. The proposed changes to the disposition of Part 1 of Article 185 of the Criminal Code will make this rule applicable and effective.
on the basis of the analysis, the following conclusions are formulated:
1) on the exclusion of socially dangerous consequences in the form of major damage from Part 1 of Article 185 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation;
2) the degree of violation of the established emission procedure is proposed to be considered as a sign delimiting an administrative offense and the analyzed crime.

Abstract: Special attention is paid to the objective side of the crime, responsibility for which is provided for in Article 185.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The problems arising in the interpretation of the term "malice" of evasion are analyzed. The conclusion is formulated that "malice" should be replaced by "repetition", providing for the interpretation of this term through administrative prejudice in the note to Article 185.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In this regard, it is proposed to exclude the term "malice" from the title of the article, and formulate it as: "Failure to fulfill the obligation to disclose and provide information defined by the legislation of the Russian Federation on securities." The necessity of changing the note to Article 185.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by specifying there the numbers of specific articles in the Administrative Code - Part 1 of Article 15.19 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation and Part 1 of Article 19.7 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, since the existing term "similar act" causes ambiguity in its interpretation.
The introduction of repetition and its interpretation in the note will make it easy to distinguish the crime provided for in Article 185.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation from an administrative offense, responsibility for which is established in Part 1 of Article 15.19 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation "Violations of legal requirements concerning the presentation and disclosure of information in financial markets" and in Part 1 of Article 19.7.3 "Non-presentation information to the Bank of Russia". The exclusion of socially dangerous consequences in the form of major damage to citizens, organizations or the state will allow this norm to become applicable.

Abstract: The subject of this research is differentiation by key aspects of criminal liability for unlawful operations with securities established by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Conceptual, special-legal, and technical-legal aspects of criminal liability for unlawful operations with securities are highlighted. Research is conducted on the problematic of the applicability of proposed differentiation for improvements of doctrinal and normative legal approaches towards regulation of criminal liability for unlawful operations with securities. Based on the conducted differentiation, proposals are made for promising vectors of improvements to the provisions criminalizing unlawful operations with securities. The scientific novelty of this research consists in the following: based on the study carried out within the framework of conceptual, special-legal, and technical-legal aspects of criminal liability for unlawful operations with securities, the author determines the problems pertaining to incompliance of administrative legal and criminal legal regulation of liability for unlawful operations with securities due to textual ambiguity of the norm of criminal law, based on which the recommendation is made to amend Part 1 of the Article 185.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.