The Sejm again fails to override the veto - the crypto-assets act falls
In a vote held on 17 April 2026, the Sejm failed for the second time to override the veto of President Karol Nawrocki on the crypto-asset market act. 243 MPs voted to override the veto, 191 voted against and three abstained. Overriding the veto required a qualified majority of 3/5 of votes, that is at least 276 - so the vote fell short by as many as 33.
In practice, this means the bill in its current form is definitively scrapped. Importantly from a legal perspective, it was a de facto almost identical version of the regulation that the President had already vetoed earlier. The only change concerned the maximum supervision fee - a detail that did not remove the fundamental objections raised by the head of state, as well as by the legal community and the crypto industry.
This puts Poland in a rather particular regulatory position. Formally, the MiCA Regulation (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation) applies directly in all EU member states, but the absence of a national implementing act means there is no Polish authority designated to carry out the supervisory functions provided for by EU rules. This creates a gap with real consequences for both businesses and individual investors.
Why did the act cause such serious legal controversy?
The official aim of the act was to align the Polish legal system with the MiCA Regulation. The problem, however, was that the Polish version of the regulation went well beyond the minimum required by EU law. It was the scope of these additional provisions that drew the strongest opposition from financial and technology law experts.
The greatest controversy was caused by the very broad powers granted to the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF). The most contentious powers included:
- Blocking public offers of crypto-assets - the KNF could halt token issuances before they took place, without having to show a specific breach.
- Suspending the course of offers - the supervisory authority would gain the right to intervene in digital asset sales already under way.
- Blocking internet domains - a mechanism allowing access to the websites of entities operating in the crypto market to be restricted.
- High supervision costs - licence and ongoing supervision fees that could be a barrier to entry for smaller players.
- The possibility of paralysing companies' operations before a dispute is finally resolved - which in practice would mean imposing sanctions without a judgment.
For months, experts warned that rules framed in this way could make Poland the most restrictive crypto jurisdiction in the entire European Union. In the context of the licence passporting principle, which is the foundation of the MiCA Regulation, this would simply mean firms migrating to countries with a more lenient regulatory regime - without losing the right to serve Polish clients.
The zondacrypto affair - a political argument or a real threat?
A key thread accompanying the parliamentary debate was the affair surrounding the zondacrypto exchange, which Donald Tusk's government tried to use as an argument for the need to pass the act. The ruling coalition's narrative suggested that the lack of regulation exposes Polish investors to losses similar to those suffered by users of that platform.
However, this argument has a serious legal gap. Zondacrypto operates under a licence issued in Estonia, not in Poland. It is an entity registered outside Polish jurisdiction, which means that even the full entry into force of the crypto-asset market act would not have placed this exchange under direct Polish supervision. The problems with withdrawals of funds that users complain about are therefore governed by Estonian law and the Estonian supervisory authorities.
The head of the President's Chancellery, Zbigniew Bogucki, drew attention to this inconsistency, pointing out that linking the zondacrypto case with the vetoed act is rather an attempt at political instrumentalisation than a substantive argument for specific legislative solutions. From a legal perspective, it is hard to disagree with this assessment - building regulation on a case that the act would not have covered anyway undermines the credibility of the whole legislative process.
What does this mean for investors and crypto firms in Poland?
The rejection of the act does not mean that the crypto-asset market in Poland remains entirely unregulated. The MiCA Regulation, as an act of EU law, applies directly, which means that basic obligations concerning, for example, the publication of a white paper or the rules for how crypto-asset service providers operate formally apply. The problem lies in enforcing these rules without a designated national supervisory authority.
For individual investors, the current situation means the need to exercise particular caution. The lack of a clear supervisory framework means that, if problems arise with a crypto platform, pursuing claims may be considerably more difficult. It is worth using only exchanges that hold licences issued by reputable supervisory authorities in EU countries.
For their part, blockchain and crypto entrepreneurs face a strategic dilemma. Many of them are considering obtaining a licence in another member state and serving the Polish market under the freedom to provide services. Although this solution is lawful, it generates additional costs and operational complications.
Legislative outlook for the coming months
The two failures to override the President's veto show that the act in its current form has no chance of being passed. The government faces a choice: either it prepares a new bill that takes into account the objections of the President and the industry, or Poland will remain in regulatory limbo. The most likely scenario appears to be a return to legislative work in autumn 2026, with a substantially modified version of the rules.
The key will be finding a balance between consumer protection and the competitiveness of the Polish market. The industry does not dispute the need for regulation - it opposes excessive restrictiveness that will push activity abroad without giving Polish investors real protection.
Need legal help with crypto-assets?
The rapidly changing regulatory environment for the crypto market requires professional legal support. Whether you are an individual investor seeking to protect your funds or an entrepreneur planning a business in the blockchain sector - knowing the rules in force and the changes ahead is crucial for the security of your interests.
Contact our law firm for an individual legal consultation on crypto-asset regulation, the requirements of the MiCA Regulation, licensing procedures and the protection of investors' rights in the digital asset market. Our specialists will help you navigate the maze of rules safely and make informed decisions.
Have a question about this?
The first consultation is free - let us talk about your situation.
