Polish government pushes crypto legislation despite presidential veto
Poland’s government has reintroduced a cryptocurrency bill that President Karol Nawrocki vetoed just last week. Prime Minister Donald Tusk is now urging the president to sign the legislation, citing what officials describe as national security threats linked to Russia and other former Soviet states.
The bill, formally called the Cryptoasset Market Act, would align Poland’s regulatory framework with the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regime. This EU framework establishes a single rulebook for crypto oversight across the entire bloc. Interestingly, the government resubmitted the legislation without making any amendments to address the president’s concerns.
National security concerns drive the push
Tusk’s argument centers on security. “Our official register of companies operating in the cryptocurrency market includes over 100 entities directly linked to Russia, Belarus, and the countries of the former Soviet Union,” he said, according to reports. “This is a wake-up call, we must ensure the security of the state and its citizens in this matter.”
He went further, suggesting that cryptocurrencies are increasingly being used as instruments of hostile activity. “Unfortunately, cryptocurrencies often serve as a tool for sabotage, including by enemies of the Polish state, so basic control is all the more necessary and essential,” Tusk added.
The president’s objections remain
President Nawrocki vetoed the legislation last week for different reasons. He argued it would impose overly stringent regulations on the crypto market. In a statement on his website on December 1, he said the legislation “poses a real threat to the freedom of Poles, their property and the stability of the state.”
It’s a classic standoff between security concerns and regulatory freedom. The government sees crypto as a potential national security vulnerability that needs immediate addressing, while the president views the proposed regulations as excessive and potentially harmful to citizens’ freedoms.
What happens next?
This isn’t just about Poland aligning with EU regulations, though that’s certainly part of it. MiCA compliance is important for any EU member state. But the security angle adds a layer of urgency that wasn’t necessarily present in earlier discussions about crypto regulation.
I think what’s interesting here is the timing. The government could have waited, perhaps tried to negotiate some changes to address the president’s concerns. Instead, they’ve chosen to resubmit the exact same bill and apply political pressure.
Maybe they believe the security argument will be compelling enough to overcome the president’s objections. Or perhaps they’re counting on public opinion shifting in their favor as people become more aware of the potential risks.
Either way, it creates an interesting constitutional moment. The president has the power to veto, but the government clearly believes this legislation is too important to delay. We’ll have to see whether security concerns ultimately trump regulatory freedom concerns in this particular case.
For the crypto industry in Poland, this creates uncertainty. Companies operating there need clarity on the regulatory framework, but they’re caught between competing visions of what that framework should look like. Some might welcome clearer rules, even if they’re strict, while others might share the president’s concerns about overregulation.
It’s a messy situation, honestly. And it shows how crypto regulation isn’t just about financial markets anymore—it’s increasingly tied to broader geopolitical and security considerations.
