.svg)
The country still lacks a regulatory framework for digital assets, creating a significant challenge for Polish crypto firms, which may be forced to suspend operations or rapidly migrate to other EU jurisdictions to maintain market access.
Poland’s effort to transpose the EU’s Markets in Crypto‑Assets (MiCA) Regulation into national law has become a contentious legal issue in the country’s politics, and the persisting regulatory uncertainty could affect the digital asset industry’s long-term prospects.
In February 2026, President Karol Nawrocki formally vetoed the government’s Crypto‑Asset Market Act for a second time, calling it a “bad law” and warning that it posed risks to civil liberties, overreached in its powers and could stifle innovation rather than protect consumers.
The proposed legislation, intended to require crypto‑asset service providers to obtain licences and be subject to oversight by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF), has been repeatedly approved by parliament but has been blocked by the presidency several times via different means, including a previous veto.
The ongoing conflict between the president and the lawmakers has left Poland’s regulatory framework in limbo.
Points of dissent
Proponents of the law say it is critical for consumer protection and legal certainty, warning that without clear domestic rules aligned with MiCA, crypto firms may lose the ability to register in Poland or be forced to move operations to other EU jurisdictions.
Critics from political and civil liberties circles, on the other hand, have backed the veto, portraying the bill as overly burdensome and a potential threat to economic freedoms.
One of the main points of contention is the proposed mandatory supervisory fee, which would be imposed on entrepreneurs based on average total revenue over the previous three years, at a rate not exceeding 0.4 percent, Łukasz Kudela, senior associate at Warsaw-based law firm Wołoszański i Wspólnicy, told Vixio.
“According to the president, these costs are disproportionate compared with those imposed on other participants in the financial market and may therefore undermine the principle of equal treatment of entrepreneurs in economic activity,” Kudela said.
Another major point of friction is the proposed introduction of a public register for entities that conduct unauthorised crypto activities, noted Aleksandra Walas, an attorney at law at Dudkowiak & Putyra.
Modeled heavily after the Polish Gambling Act, this mechanism would impose legal obligations on internet service providers (ISPs) to actively block access to domains listed in the register.
“This creates significant concerns regarding censorship, jurisdictional overreach, and technical feasibility,” Walas said.
Regulatory paralysis
The debates around the crypto legislation in Poland are a perfect example of regulatory paralysis, according to Mateusz Świtalski, attorney-at-law with Switalski Law, a Poznan-based legal company.
“From a legal standpoint, the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) lacks the statutory mandate to act as the competent authority,” Świtalski told Vixio. “Consequently, they cannot process CASP [crypto-asset service provider] license applications, approve white papers or enforce compliance.”
Interestingly, Świtalski noted, the KNF identified a micro-exception: it retains competence only over e-money tokens (EMTs) under legacy payment laws. For the broader crypto market, however, its hands are tied.
For the domestic industry, this deadlock is not just an inconvenience; it is an existential threat.
The KNF’s latest official statement outlines the timeline: Polish virtual asset service providers (VASPs) operating under the old national anti-money laundering (AML) registry are relying on the grandfathering clause in Article 143 of MiCA to continue operations.
However, because no domestic authority can process their transition to a full CASP licence, from July 1, 2026, domestic entities will entirely lose their right to operate.
Industry faces existential threat
The ongoing political standoff between the president and the parliament places the Polish crypto industry at a severe competitive disadvantage and creates a high-risk environment for domestic providers and investors, lawyers have warned Vixio.
“The most pressing practical risk is the expiration of the MiCA grandfathering period,” Walas said. "Because no competent authority exists to accept applications, domestic VASPs will almost certainly be unable to submit their paperwork and receive a positive decision before this transitional period ends.”
The present uncertainty deters institutional investment, forces Polish companies to pause scaling efforts and raises the possibility of domestic providers having to suspend operations or rapidly migrate to other EU jurisdictions to maintain market access.
Polish firms are trapped in a local, outdated transitional regime and cannot expand abroad, Świtalski told Vixio, adding that even government officials warned during the legislative process that this would lead to a mass exodus of businesses.
“We are already seeing this materialize,” Świtalski said. “Law firms are busy executing corporate restructurings, moving holding and operational structures of Polish crypto firms to friendlier jurisdictions like Lithuania, Luxembourg or Estonia.”
As a result, they will simply use the MiCA passport to operate in Poland, meaning a direct and permanent loss of tax revenues and supervisory fees for the Polish state, Świtalski explained.
The practical legal risks are compounding. Although the MiCA licensing process is frozen, the EU Transfer of Funds Regulation (TFR/Travel Rule) has been fully applicable since December 30, 2024.
“Polish firms must comply with complex AML data-sharing rules, but lack a stable sectoral licence, which leads to severe de-risking by local banks that are increasingly hesitant to service ‘unlicensed’ crypto entities,” Świtalski said.
Overcoming the standstill
Looking ahead, breaking the legislative deadlock requires political compromise, Walas said.
Following the latest veto, a minority parliamentary group submitted its own draft of the bill.
According to Walas, “This alternative has a realistic chance of appeasing both the main parliamentary opposition and the president. However, it remains highly uncertain whether the current government will support it, and the specifics of any revised government-backed draft are still unknown.”
Because overcoming the presidential veto is technically challenging, lawmakers have only one viable path: to draft a heavily stripped-down, purely technical “Mini-MiCA Act” that designates the KNF as the competent authority and sets basic administrative penalties, Świtalski said.
“This would mean intentionally dropping the controversial domain-blocking mechanisms and harsh criminal sanctions that provoked the vetoes in the first place,” he added.
If parliament fails to make progress on this issue, Poland faces an infringement procedure by the European Commission under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the lawyers warned.
“We recently saw the Commission take action against Hungary for ‘over-regulating’ crypto; doing ‘too little’ by maintaining a regulatory vacuum will undoubtedly trigger a similar EU response,” Świtalski said.
Against this background, he noted, from a strategic business perspective, the most prudent approach for crypto firms is definitive: do not wait for the Polish political deadlock to resolve.
“Hope is not a legal strategy. In practice, firms should implement one or a combination of several adaptive strategies to navigate this period,” Świtalski concluded.
