Two years ago, capital amnesty seemed a positively seditious idea. But lately it's been gaining something of a belated legitimacy.

Some politicians who stand every hope of getting into the next State Duma (lower house of parliament) have gone so far as to place it on the list of what must be done to encourage Russian capital to come home. An amnesty, clear legislation and tax reform - such are the keys to economic revival, they say.

And it's not just politicians who have picked up on the idea. Kremlin Household Manager Pavel Borodin said that if just 10 percent of Russian capital abroad were returned - $1.5 trillion in his estimation - the country's economy would get a real boost.

Borodin's generous estimate is no doubt somewhat wide of the mark. But the numbers are not the issue, what counts will be the reaction to the Kremlin official's words.

Should no reaction come, some other official will be found to change tack slightly and promise, for example, customs exemptions for imported capital goods. Russian capital abroad, after all, does not have to come home in the monetary form in which it left the country.

Russia already has an effective leasing law and plenty of examples - from small businesses to mining and metallurgy - where leasing is successfully practiced.

Another option would be to introduce tax breaks for capital building expenses.

One thing's for certain: There's no shortage of choices, or people to implement them. Finance Minister Mikhail Kasyanov, for example, will be looking for good ideas in his role as recently appointed head of the commission on foreign investments for tax, customs and currency issues. Then there's Tax Minister Alexander Pochinok, who is trying now for the second time to push through the Duma tax breaks for capital building.

Finally, there's First Deputy Prime Minister Viktor Khristenko who has a finger in almost every section of the government's financial pie.

But it's still too early to predict the future with any certainty. That will have to wait until after the Duma elections.

Today's players still have some time left, however, in which to lobby for new laws, smooth financial relations between the regions and the center, and push for guarantees for foreign investors. The potential is there, after all. The U.S. market is overheated, while Russia will take decades of investment to build.

It is this factor, coupled with signs of a more favorable climate on the horizon - and not the eloquent words or promises of government officials - that makes possible the present discussion on writing off 40 percent of Russia's debt to the London Club of creditors, a grace period on principal debt and more favorable debt-servicing conditions.

(Anna Yartseva is a Russia Journal staff writer. Email her at anna@russiajournal.com)