In an interview for Business Insider Poland Deputy Minister of Finance Jurand Drop again discussed cryptoassets. And once again he showed that he probably does not understand the threats generated by the potential passage of the bill prepared by his ministry.
An act that is controversial
The draft bill on cryptocurrencies is highly controversial. Many people believe that it imposes greater obligations on companies than MiCA.
We wrote the law in the “EU plus zero” formula, which means we do not add anything more than what is necessary. MiCA recognizes cryptoassets as part of the financial market and leaves two key decisions to member states: the designation of the supervisory authority and the determination of sanctions. Our natural body is the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF), because it supervises the financial market
– explains Drop in an interview.
In the penal part, we only adapted the sanctions to the Polish justice system and to sanctions that have been operating for years in other sectors of the financial market – without going beyond MiCA. The discussion concerned the lower limit of criminal liability, which for purely legislative reasons was initially set at the level of “6 months’ imprisonment”, but at the stage of Senate work we removed the minimum threshold, leaving a maximum of 5 years. For comparison, in Malta, which is indicated by part of the market as one of the more liberal jurisdictions, the upper range is 6 years
– he added.
During the Future Finance Summit conference, the deputy minister accused the cryptocurrency industry of spreading “disinformation”. She stubbornly does not understand what a wonderful act the ministry has written.
The most frequently repeated myth is: “the act is huge, it has hundreds of pages, so it imposes additional obligations beyond MiCA”
– he explained now in an interview with Business Insiderfurther arguing why the act is so long.
However, this does not change the fact that the Polish draft regulation is therefore very long and difficult to understand. Prof. Krzysztof Piech has already explained publicly that other countries managed to summarize it in a much smaller number of pages. He mentioned that the German act has 80 pages, the Polish one – 104. Other countries were even more economical. Spain needed 6 pages, Latvia – 5, Hungary – 9, and the authorities of Cyprus – 2 pages.
Another argument of opponents: too high fees, which in practice will force many companies to move to other countries. According to the deputy minister, this is the price for the “credibility service”:
The surveillance fee is essentially the price for the credibility service. The Polish Financial Supervision Authority checks, monitors and maintains a register of entities. This helps companies because they can communicate that they are supervised and citizens because they can check whether a given entity is in the register of companies dealing in cryptoassets.
The deputy minister probably does not understand that this “credibility service” will not be needed, because many companies will simply choose jurisdictions that offer cheaper costs of doing business.
Another argument from the industry that the Polish Financial Supervision Authority should not supervise the cryptocurrency market due to what it has done in the past (it became famous for blacklisting crypto entities). The politician dismissed it with an argument we have already heard and which hardly convinces anyone: the Polish Financial Supervision Authority acted this way and not otherwise because there were no clear regulations. However, the current regulations may turn out to be a gateway to further attacks, as indicated by, among others, prof. Piech.
Here’s what the politician said exactly:
The Polish Financial Supervision Authority does not conduct its own policy, but applies the law. The more precise the regulations, the less room for interpretation and the less room for any prejudices. In the past, caution was understandable because there was no legal framework in Poland and the status of cryptoassets on the financial market was questionable. Now, after two years of very meticulous work and market analysis, we are creating such a framework and doing it precisely, precisely to limit the discretion of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority.
Will the president’s veto be a mistake?
However, this entire discussion seems unnecessary, because President Karol Nawrocki is going to veto the current project anyway. According to Drop, this is a terrible decision, because “it is difficult to create a completely different law, since what we are talking about today is a one-to-one implementation of the EU MiCA regulation.”
Secondly, the practical consequences would be serious. As of July 1 (2026), the current national register of entities dealing in cryptoassets ceases to operate, companies are removed from it and have no national or EU legal basis to provide services according to MiCA. Our citizens would have to rely on companies licensed in other countries and pursue claims abroad if they wanted to use crypto. The Financial Ombudsman in Poland would have no territorial competences
– he warned.
For now, we are waiting for the project that is being worked on, among others: the already mentioned prof. Piech. Then it will be time for evaluation.
The deputy minister doesn’t understand the market?
The interview with Deputy Minister Drop once again shows that he does not know the cryptocurrency market and does not understand where his concerns come from, among others. KNF. This does not bode well for the future.
The industry remains in a difficult situation as it will soon operate in a regulatory vacuum. The current bill will be vetoed, but will the new one gain a majority in parliament? Reading the deputy minister’s statements, you may fear that this is not the case.
