In a pivotal move for the future of digital currencies in Eastern Europe, Poland’s leadership has put a stop to a legislative proposal that sought to impose tight regulations on the crypto sector. This decision was influenced by worries about innovation stagnation and potential migration of local startups to friendlier jurisdictions.
Poland’s Leadership Takes a Stand Against Crypto Regulation
On a significant Monday, President Karol Nawrocki of Poland publicly declined to endorse a legislative package meant to regulate the cryptocurrency landscape. His administration expressed concerns that the proposed rules might undermine the liberties of citizens and hinder economic stability.
In a formal announcement, the presidential office detailed Nawrocki’s rationale for vetoing the controversial Crypto-Asset Market Act, which surfaced in June. The intent was to guard against “overregulation” and mitigate the “legal quagmire” associated with government proposals.
According to insights from Bitrabo, numerous stakeholders within Poland’s crypto scene had previously voiced apprehensions regarding the legislation. They highlighted that the bill went beyond the regulatory standards set by the European Union (EU), risking an exodus of small businesses and innovators.
Significantly, the legislation mandated that every Crypto Asset Service Provider secure a license from the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) for market participation. Additionally, it introduced severe penalties for those who contravened its provisions, including substantial fines and imprisonment.
Rafal Leśkiewicz, the president’s Press Secretary, outlined the primary motivations for rejecting the bill, emphasizing three critical issues. He noted that the legislation permitted potential governmental abuse, highlighted by provisions allowing for the swift shutdown of cryptocurrency sites with minimal oversight.
“Such authority is troubling,” he remarked. “Most EU nations utilize simpler warning systems to safeguard consumers without resorting to site blocks,” he added.
Moreover, he pointed out that the depth of the proposed regulations, lacking in transparency, risked creating a regulatory environment that was unnecessarily complex. In contrast, neighboring nations like the Czech Republic and Hungary have successfully implemented succinct regulatory measures. Poland’s proposal exceeded a daunting one hundred pages.
He asserted that “excessive regulation will undoubtedly push businesses to relocate—whether to the Czech Republic, Malta, or Lithuania—hampering local opportunities for growth and reducing tax contributions within Poland.”
Lastly, Leśkiewicz criticized the exorbitant supervisory fees outlined in the bill, claiming they were structured in a way that would deter small enterprises while favoring larger foreign entities. He expressed concern that this approach would stifle competition and inhibit innovations.
Industry Voices Applaud the Decision
Leśkiewicz emphasized the necessity of regulation but reiterated the importance of adopting guidelines that are “fair, reasonable, and protective” of consumers while ensuring the growth of the local economy rather than detrimental overreach.
“The government had ample time to draft a proposal in accordance with the EU’s MiCA framework for crypto assets but ended up creating a convoluted document that adversely affects Polish citizens and businesses,” he stated strongly, adding that the veto was a responsible course of action in defense of the Polish economy.
Prominent Polish economist Krzysztof Piech endorsed President Nawrocki’s veto, calling the proposed law “deeply flawed” and contrary to both the Polish Constitution and EU regulations.
Piech also dismissed concerns that Poland would become a safe haven for illicit activities. Instead, he assured that by July 1, 2026, comprehensive regulations will inevitably emerge, aligning with EU standards, even in the absence of this specific legislation.
