Advertisement
AD

Key EU Country Fails to Overturn Crypto Veto

Fri, 17/04/2026 - 16:01
Poland's digital asset market faces prolonged regulatory uncertainty after parliament failed to override President Karol Nawrocki’s veto of a critical cryptocurrency regulation bill.
Advertisement
Key EU Country Fails to Overturn Crypto Veto
Cover image via depositphotos.com
Google
Advertisement

Poland’s parliament has failed to override President Karol Nawrocki’s veto of a critical cryptocurrency regulation bill, according to local media reports

The veto will likely negatively affect the digital asset market of the key European Union member due to prolonged regulatory uncertainty. 

The parliamentary deadlock

The Sejm (the lower house of the Polish parliament) failed to secure the three-fifths qualified majority required to overturn a presidential veto during the pivotal vote. 

HOT Stories
Dogecoin Holders Suggest Elon Musk's X Money Absorbed 3 Billion DOGE, $2 XRP Risks Causing $10 Million Single Liquidation on Hyperliquid, Binance's Fresh Delistings Target Ethereum DeFi Space: Morning Crypto Report Shiba Inu (SHIB) Most Stable It Has Ever Been, Hyperliquid (HYPE) on Verge of New ATH, XRP Price Spikes Through First Resistance: Crypto Market Review

You Might Also Like
Advertisement

Only 243 lawmakers voted in favor of overriding the veto. It is worth noting that 276 votes are required to bypass the president's desk. 

President Nawrocki previously vetoed a nearly identical version of the bill earlier this year.

The MiCA mandate  

The legislation was meant to ensure that the Polish national law is in synch with the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation.

Advertisement

If passed, the bill would have granted sweeping new powers to the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF). 

The regulatory body would have obtained the legal tools to police the digital asset sector. It would have had the ability to halt public offerings of specific crypto assets, suspend trading activities, or even impose an outright ban. 

Proponents of the bill argued that there was a desperate need for these measures to improve the market. 

The pushback 

President Nawrocki defended his veto by arguing that the revised bill presented to him was virtually unchanged from the version he rejected. There was only an insignificant adjustment to the maximum cap for regulatory supervision fees.

"One detail was changed, but the fundamental errors were not removed," the president stated, maintaining his stance that the proposed regulations are excessive, disproportionate, and place an undue burden on the industry.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Subscribe to daily newsletter

Recommended articles

Our social media
There's a lot to see there, too