Implementation of MiCA in Poland – why it has still not been achieved?

The Legislative Process

26 June 2025 - The Polish government submitted a draft Act on the Crypto-Assets Market to the Sejm (lower House of Polish Parliment).

The bill was designed to implement MiCA at the national level and fundamentally reshape the Polish crypto landscape. It proposed replacing the existing VASP registration regime with a CASP licensing system and designated the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) as the supervisory body. This marked a shift from a light-touch registration model to a highly regulated framework with detailed capital, governance and compliance requirements.

26 September 2025 - After several months of parliamentary work, the Sejm adopted the bill and forwarded it to the Senate (the upper house of the Polish parliament).

At this stage, the government presented the act as a necessary step to align Polish law with EU requirements and to increase investor protection.

7 November 2025 - Following the adoption of selected Senate amendments, the Sejm passed the final version of the bill and sent it to the President for signature.

This moment exposed a deep divide within the Polish crypto industry. Some market participants (e.g AIBC, AIO Systems, Arisen, Billon Solutions, Bithub) called on the President to veto the act, pointing out that the Polish implementation of MiCA goes far beyond what EU law requires and introduces over-regulation.

At the same time, some companies have started campaigns urging the president to sign the bill. For example, XTB wrote: “The time for discussing the detailed shape of the Polish crypto-asset market bill passed over a year ago. At this point, the lack of any law at all poses a much greater risk to Polish businesses and investors than a situation in which its provisions might be considered imperfect.”

2 December 2025 - The President of Poland refused to sign the crypto-assets bill.

The objections focused on non-transparent domain-blocking mechanisms, excessive length, complexity of the legislation compared to other EU jurisdictions, and supervisory fees that could hinder the development of smaller companies and startups.

3 December 2025 - Sejm failed to override the President Karol Nawrocki veto.

The issue immediately escalated into a political dispute. Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced that the government would make another attempt to pass the legislation, framing it as essential for investor protection, state security and effective supervision of a market vulnerable to abuse.

9 December 2025 - The government published a “new/old” draft of the bill on the website of the Government Legislation Centre. Despite expectations of compromise, the text turned out to be identical to the vetoed version. This significantly increased the likelihood of another presidential veto.

18 December 2025 - The government has, for the second time, put forward an unchanged draft bill on the crypto-assets market, despite a presidential veto and sharp criticism from the opposition. During the last session of the Sejm this year, the first reading took place of the regulation intended to implement EU provisions and place the market under the supervision of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF). “We are returning with the same draft bill because we believe that its current wording is the most optimal,” said Deputy Minister of Finance Jurand Drop in the Sejm.

19 December 2025 - The Sejm has passed the Crypto-Assets Act 2.0.

The majority of MPs voted in favor. The Sejm also adopted one amendment to the bill, submitted by MPs from Polska 2050 (a political party).

However, Polska 2050 had originally proposed far-reaching changes aimed at avoiding excessive regulation. Only one amendment proposed by Polska 2050 was ultimately adopted.

It reduces the maximum supervisory fee payable by token issuers on an annual basis to the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF).

Other proposed amendments, which sought to eliminate overregulation in the act, were rejected. The adopted amendment is intended to significantly reduce costs for crypto-token issuers. It is particularly relevant for startups that wish to create tokens as a means of financing their operations.

Under the amendment (Article 79(1) of the Act), the maximum supervisory fee for token issuance will amount to 0.1%, instead of 0.5%. This refers to the maximum rate. The Act provides that the actual fee will depend on the issuer’s financial liabilities arising from the issued tokens, but it may not be lower than EUR 500.

As a result, the amendment lowers the entry barrier (the fee) for small entities, especially startups, seeking to enter the crypto-assets market. The remaining proposals submitted by Poland 2050 did not secure a majority in the Sejm, despite their aim of softening the regulatory framework. When vetoing the original version of the Act, President Karol Nawrocki argued, among other things, that it amounted to overregulation.

Version 2.0 is almost identical to version 1.0 and therefore does not address the flaws identified by the President when vetoing the original bill. However, the Act 2.0 must still be approved by the Senate.

Next – the Marshal of the Sejm forwards the adopted bill to the Senate. In the Senate, work on the bill is carried out in the relevant subject-matter Senate committees and then at a Senate session, during which a debate and a vote take place. The Senate adopts a resolution that may include a motion to accept the bill without amendments (in which case it is forwarded to the President for signature) or a motion to reject it in its entirety or to introduce amendments (in which case the bill is returned to the Sejm).

Only after the Sejm accepts or rejects the Senate’s amendments does the bill go to the President for signature. The entire process may take several months, and, most worryingly, the bill in its current form will most likely not be signed by President Nawrocki.

Where Poland Goes Beyond MiCA

A key source of controversy is not MiCA itself, but the way it is implemented at the national level in Poland. Several provisions of the draft Crypto-Assets Market Act introduce requirements that go beyond the minimum standards set by EU law and are not uniformly applied across other Member States.

• Supervisory fees exceeding EU practice: the Polish draft introduces ongoing supervisory fees calculated as a percentage of revenue, creating a disproportionate burden for smaller CASPs and token issuers compared to many other EU jurisdictions.
• Criminal liability beyond MiCA minimum: the act extends criminal liability to conduct that MiCA regulates through administrative sanctions, significantly elevating compliance and personal risk for CASP management.
• Domain-blocking mechanisms absent in MiCA: the bill empowers authorities to block internet domains without sufficient procedural transparency, a tool not explicitly required or harmonised under MiCA.
• Excessive localisation of staff and functions: requirements to locate key personnel and operational functions in Poland go further than MiCA’s EU-level presence rules and may undermine the freedom to provide services across the Union.

As a result, the core issue is not MiCA as such, but Poland’s national over-implementation, which risks reducing competitiveness, discouraging startups, and pushing market participants toward other EU jurisdictions.

What the Draft Crypto-Assets Market Act Actually Changes

Before MiCA entered into force, the Polish regulatory framework for crypto-asset activities was relatively straightforward. Operating legally required only an entry in the VASP register, maintained by the Director of the Tax Administration Chamber in Katowice. Provided the application was correctly completed, registration could be obtained within a maximum of two weeks. This light-touch regime applied until 30 December 2024, when MiCA became fully applicable across the European Union and fundamentally changed the regulatory landscape for crypto markets.

The draft Polish Act on the Crypto-Assets Market is intended to translate MiCA into national law and replace the existing VASP model with a comprehensive CASP licensing regime. Under the new framework, crypto-asset service providers would no longer be subject to simple registration, but to full regulatory authorisation and ongoing supervision by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF). In practice, this means a shift from administrative entry to prudential regulation comparable to that applied in traditional financial markets.

Importantly, despite MiCA’s direct applicability, the Polish draft act has not yet entered into force. As a result, the old VASP rules formally remain in place, while at the same time CASP applications cannot yet be submitted. This legal limbo is one of the most problematic aspects of the current situation and a key driver of uncertainty for market participants.

The draft act introduces a transitional period for entities that were already registered in the VASP register or provided crypto-asset services as of 29 December 2024. These entities would be allowed to continue operating either for four months from the entry into force of the new law or for up to nine months, provided that a complete CASP application is submitted to KNF within three months and formally acknowledged. For new market entrants without prior VASP registration, the draft leaves no flexibility: obtaining a CASP licence would be mandatory from day one.

Under MiCA and the Polish draft, CASP licences may be granted either to companies authorised under Article 63 of MiCA-most commonly limited liability companies or joint-stock companies or certain regulated financial institutions, such as banks, investment firms, electronic money institutions or fund managers, which may provide crypto-asset services under Article 60 of MiCA without a separate CASP licence.

The requirements for authorisation represent a major departure from the former Polish approach. Applicants must have their registered office in an EU Member State and conduct at least part of their activities there. Management must be effectively located in the EU, with at least one board member resident in the Union. Applicants must also meet minimum capital thresholds, submit extensive internal documentation and demonstrate that their management body is of good repute, free of relevant criminal records, and collectively equipped with adequate knowledge and experience in crypto-asset markets.

The scope of documentation required for a CASP application is extensive. It includes, among other things, a detailed business plan, proof of compliance with prudential safeguards, descriptions of governance arrangements, risk management and AML/CFT procedures, ICT systems and security measures, asset segregation mechanisms and complaint-handling processes. Additional policies are required depending on the specific services offered, such as custody, trading platform operation, exchange services or crypto-asset advisory and portfolio management.

Particular emphasis is placed on the management board. In line with MiCA and ESMA guidance, board members must demonstrate not only integrity but also sufficient time commitment and collective competence. The board should be proportionate to the size and complexity of the business, typically consisting of at least two members, with the CEO expected to devote their full professional time to managing the CASP. KNF is also expected to apply a restrictive approach toward individuals with significant ties to Russia or Belarus, based on its earlier supervisory resolutions.

The draft act also imposes strict requirements on shareholders and key employees. Shareholders holding qualifying stakes must prove their good repute and provide transparent ownership structures. CASPs must employ suitably qualified staff and establish a robust organisational structure, including risk management, compliance and AML functions, internal audit, IT and incident management, with key personnel located in Poland and available to the supervisor.

The licensing process itself is formalised and time-bound. Applications are submitted to KNF with a fixed fee of EUR 4,500. KNF then conducts a completeness check, followed by a substantive review that may involve requests for additional documentation. While MiCA sets formal deadlines, in practice the process may extend due to the complexity of the assessment and administrative correspondence.

MiCA distinguishes three classes of CASP licences, depending on the scope of services and required capital, ranging from EUR 50,000 to EUR 150,000. The Polish draft does not alter these thresholds. In addition, CASPs would be subject to ongoing supervisory fees calculated as a percentage of average revenue, a provision that has drawn significant criticism for its potential impact on smaller market players. Finally, the draft act introduces a strict system of sanctions. Operating without a CASP licence, breaching professional secrecy or misleadingly suggesting licensed status may result in substantial financial penalties and, in some cases, criminal liability. These provisions are among the most controversial elements of the bill and a central reason for the presidential veto.

Taken together, the draft act represents a profound transformation of the Polish crypto market. It moves the sector decisively from a registration-based model toward full financial supervision. Whether this transformation will ultimately take place in its current form remains uncertain, but its implications for businesses and investors are already reshaping strategic decisions across the market.

The current state of the Crypto Market in Poland

Since 30 December 2024, MiCA has applied directly across the EU, including Poland. However, due to the lack of a national implementing act, Poland remains in a transitional phase. Crypto-asset services may still be provided under entries in the existing VASP register until 30 June 2026, yet new registrations are no longer possible. This creates a regulatory paradox: the market is open in theory but closed in practice to new entrants, unless they acquire an already registered entity.

From an investor perspective, this situation raises concerns. Until the end of the transitional period, many service providers continue to operate under pre-MiCA standards, which are significantly less demanding than those envisaged under the new regime. Even if a national law were adopted quickly, the complexity of the CASP licensing process means that not all existing entities may obtain authorisation in time.

After 30 June 2026, investors will need to ensure that the entities they use hold a valid CASP licence issued in an EU Member State. Importantly, enforcement of investor rights will depend on the jurisdiction where the licence was granted.

What Form Will the Law Take?

Looking ahead, the adoption of Polish crypto legislation appears inevitable, but its final shape remains uncertain. A further attempt to pass the law in its current form is likely to result in another veto. The most realistic scenario involves amendments addressing presidential concerns, including reducing supervisory fees, simplifying the structure of the act and limiting criminal sanctions.

Without compromise, Poland risks prolonged regulatory uncertainty, weakened competitiveness of domestic crypto businesses and increased reliance on foreign-licensed service providers. The coming months will be decisive in determining whether Poland moves toward regulatory stability or remains caught between EU law and national politics.