Karol Nawrocki has vetoed a second bill aimed at aligning Poland’s crypto framework with the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), extending legal uncertainty for domestic digital asset companies. The rejected legislation, known as Bill 2064, was described by the president as largely identical to a previously vetoed proposal, signaling ongoing divisions within the government over the scope of crypto regulation.
The decision comes as Poland approaches the MiCA transition deadline in July 2026, a milestone requiring EU member states to establish supervisory structures for crypto market oversight. The country has yet to designate a competent authority under the framework, a gap highlighted by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, or KNF, in recent communications.
From a policy standpoint, the veto underscores a broader tension between regulatory harmonization and domestic legislative priorities. While MiCA is designed to create a unified licensing regime across the EU, delays in national implementation risk creating short-term fragmentation in market access.
Domestic Firms Face Licensing Disadvantage Within the EU
The absence of implementing legislation places Polish crypto platforms at a structural disadvantage compared to firms licensed in other EU jurisdictions. Under MiCA’s passporting rules, companies approved in one member state can operate across the bloc, allowing foreign exchanges to enter Poland while local firms lack a clear domestic licensing pathway.
This dynamic has already influenced strategic decisions among market participants. Executives at Poland-linked platforms such as Kanga Exchange and Zonda Crypto have indicated they are pursuing alternative jurisdictions to secure MiCA authorization and maintain operational continuity.
Meanwhile, international competitors, including Coinbase, have expanded their European footprint after obtaining MiCA licenses in countries such as Luxembourg, highlighting a growing regulatory asymmetry within the single market. Smaller domestic firms may face higher compliance costs and potential market exit if delays persist.
Broader Institutional and Regulatory Implications
The repeated veto also reflects wider debates across Europe regarding proportional regulation and innovation policy. Some policymakers and industry advocates argue that overly restrictive implementation could suppress local fintech development, while others emphasize the need for robust consumer protection and systemic risk oversight.
At a macro level, MiCA represents one of the most comprehensive crypto regulatory frameworks globally, influencing how institutional capital evaluates jurisdictional risk in digital asset markets. Regulatory clarity has become a key factor in capital allocation, exchange expansion, and venture funding decisions across the EU.
With new legislative proposals reportedly in development, Poland’s regulatory trajectory will be closely monitored by institutional investors and crypto infrastructure providers. Until a compliant framework is enacted, however, the country risks losing competitive positioning within Europe’s regulated digital asset ecosystem as firms increasingly anchor licensing strategies in more predictable jurisdictions.