Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki killed a second crypto bill last week. Same objections. Same result.
Bill 2064 was supposed to bring Poland into line with the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation. Nawrocki said no. His office confirmed the veto Thursday.
“Practically identical” to the first version he rejected in December.
That first bill—number 1424—got vetoed for being too strict. The new one changed almost nothing. Polish lawmakers sent it back anyway. Nawrocki wasn’t having it.
“I will not sign a wrong law just because it was passed again by the parliamentary majority,” Nawrocki said. “A wrong law that passed a hundred times still remains a wrong law.”
He added: “Poland should attract innovation, not push it away.”
The veto deepens a regulatory standoff inside Poland’s government. One side wants strict rules. The other wants lighter touch. For now, lighter touch wins—but that creates a different problem.
No law means no framework. And the EU’s MiCA transition deadline hits July 1, 2026.
Three months out.
The Polish Financial Supervision Authority warned this week that Poland hasn’t designated a competent authority to supervise crypto markets. That’s required under MiCA. Without it, Polish companies can’t start the licensing process.
Foreign companies face no such barrier.
Coinbase expanded into Poland earlier this year after securing a MiCA license in Luxembourg. The exchange can operate across the EU now, including Poland. Polish firms can’t do the same in reverse.
“Foreign entities that obtain a MiCA license in their home countries will be able to provide services in Poland, while Polish companies currently have no formal path to begin the licensing process domestically,” Kanga Exchange co-CEO Sławek Zawadzki told Cointelegraph. “This results in regulatory asymmetry.”
Kanga saw this coming. The exchange prepared backup plans.
“This does not change our strategy,” Zawadzki said. “From the beginning, we considered the possibility that the MiCA-implementing law in Poland might not enter into force in time, and we prepared alternative jurisdictional solutions accordingly.”
Alternative jurisdictional solutions. Translation: license abroad.
Zonda Crypto already did. The exchange started in Poland but registered in Estonia years ago. CEO Przemysław Kral said regulatory uncertainty will push smaller Polish companies out entirely.
“Although we are a company with Polish roots and the largest player in the crypto industry on the Polish market, we have been operating outside Poland for years,” Kral told Cointelegraph. The company is pursuing a MiCA license outside Poland and plans to passport it back.
“We are confident that we will remain a key player on the market,” Kral said. “However, many small Polish crypto companies will lose the opportunity to operate on the market.”
That’s the choice now. License abroad or shut down.
Both vetoed bills drew heavy criticism from crypto advocates. Polish politician Tomasz Mentzen called the legislation “overregulation” that would strangle the sector. Nawrocki agreed enough to block it twice.
But industry supporters celebrating the veto miss the other side. No law creates limbo. And limbo favors deep-pocketed foreign competitors.
Every other EU member is implementing MiCA. France, Germany, Italy—all moving forward. Poland stands alone.
The pattern across Europe shows consolidation. Smaller exchanges struggle with compliance costs. Binance recently applied for a MiCA license in Greece, adding to licenses already held in multiple jurisdictions. Large players can afford multi-country licensing strategies.
Polish startups can’t.
Without domestic framework, they face a binary choice: find capital to license elsewhere or exit the market before summer. Neither option helps Poland’s crypto sector.
Kral’s point about small companies losing market access isn’t speculation. It’s math. MiCA compliance requires legal teams, compliance officers, and capital reserves. Startups operating on thin margins can’t absorb those costs in foreign jurisdictions.
Meanwhile, economist Krzysztof Piech said he’s drafting a new proposal—one more crypto-friendly than the vetoed versions. Piech posted about the draft over the weekend, saying it exists and is being finalized.
No details released yet. No timeline for submission.
Three months until the deadline.
The political calculation seems clear. Nawrocki positioned himself as pro-innovation by blocking strict rules. That plays well with crypto supporters. But the absence of any framework creates the opposite effect—pushing innovation to Luxembourg, Estonia, and other jurisdictions that finalized their laws months ago.
Poland’s debate over how to regulate digital assets continues. One faction wants comprehensive oversight. Another wants minimal interference. Neither side has enough support to pass legislation the president will sign.
The result: regulatory paralysis.
Foreign platforms expand. Local companies relocate. The summer deadline approaches.
Question is whether Piech’s draft can bridge the gap between Nawrocki’s demands and parliamentary support. And whether three months is enough time to draft, debate, pass, and implement entirely new legislation.
For now, Polish crypto firms keep shopping for foreign licenses.
All eyes on July 1.
