Too Tough? Poland’s New Crypto Law Faces Pushback

bitcoinistPublished on 2025-09-30Last updated on 2025-10-01

Abstract

Poland’s lower house has approved a wide-ranging crypto bill that would put the country’s entire virtual asset market under stricter...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

Poland’s lower house has approved a wide-ranging crypto bill that would put the country’s entire virtual asset market under stricter state control. Based on reports, the measure — known as Bill 1424 — passed the lower house of Poland’s national parliament, or Sejm, with 230 votes in favor and 196 opposed.

The law would give the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, KNF, sweeping powers over exchanges, issuers and custodians operating in or serving customers in Poland.

What The Law Requires

According to coverage, the draft compels all Crypto Asset Service Providers to obtain a KNF license to operate in the market. It would set detailed rules on capital, internal controls, anti-money-laundering safeguards and risk management.

Penalties are heavy: operating without a permit could draw fines up to 10 million złoty (about US$2.8 million) and, in some versions, criminal liability including up to two years in prison for serious breaches. Existing firms would get a six-month window to apply for authorization once the law takes effect.

Supporters Say It Brings Clarity

Backers argue the move will align Poland with the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets rules and give clearer rules to investors and businesses.

Clarity is meant to reduce scams and make large players feel safer about doing business in Poland. Some observers say stronger oversight could attract institutional money that has been wary of unclear local rules.

Concerns From Industry And Lawmakers

But many in Poland’s crypto community warn the bill goes further than EU minimums and could burden smaller players. Reports point to concerns about high costs and heavy paperwork that might push startups to move operations abroad.

BTCUSD trading at $112,886 on the 24-hour chart: TradingView

There is also worry the KNF’s review process could be slow; some sources claim decisions might take as long as 30 months, creating an uncertain climate for firms that need speed to survive. Artists, small issuers and hobbyist projects fear that strict rules will squeeze out low-budget activity.

Transparency And Blocking Powers

The draft would also require more disclosures from issuers and service providers. Regulators could maintain a register of unpermitted domains and use tools to block access. Supporters say this helps fight fraud. Critics say it risks overreach and could limit legitimate users’ access to services.

Based on reports, after clearing the Sejm the text is moving to the Senate for review. President Karol Nawrocki has been reported to consider a veto unless certain provisions are softened, particularly those that introduce criminal penalties and broad supervisory powers.

Lawmakers and industry groups are pressing for amendments that would narrow the scope of some requirements and ease costs for smaller operators.

Featured image from Meta, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Christian, a journalist and editor with leadership roles in Philippine and Canadian media, is fueled by his love for writing and cryptocurrency. Off-screen, he's a cook and cinephile who's constantly intrigued by the size of the universe.

Related Reads

The Fate of Digital Banks: No Fancy App Can Outshine a Banking License

The Fate of Digital Banks: A Flashy App is No Match for a Banking License The article argues that despite attracting billions of users with fee-free checking accounts and sleek apps, most "neobanks" struggle to be profitable because their core business—transaction fees—is inherently low-margin. The real profit engine of banking is lending (credit), which generates interest income. However, many early neobanks operated without their own banking licenses, which restricted their ability to lend at scale. Examples like Nubank, Revolut, and Chime illustrate the point. While they gained users with free accounts, their eventual profitability came from rolling out credit products. The piece highlights systemic risks for neobanks that rely on third-party infrastructure, citing the Synapse bankruptcy, which froze user funds and revealed the fragility of such models. The solution, according to the author, is obtaining a formal banking license, like the U.S. OCC's national trust charter. This provides regulatory backing, allows direct custody of funds, and eliminates dependency on intermediary partners. The trend is now evident in the crypto sector, where companies like Kraken, SoFi, and others are actively pursuing such licenses. The article concludes that while technology changes, the fundamental business logic of banking—profiting from lending—remains constant. Successful digital banks ultimately conform to this old model, just with better interfaces and fairer terms.

Foresight News4m ago

The Fate of Digital Banks: No Fancy App Can Outshine a Banking License

Foresight News4m ago

In the Name of Charity, For the Benefit of the Family: How the Trump Family Turns Philanthropy into Profit?

Charity for Profit: How the Trump Family Turned Philanthropy into Personal Gain Amid a recent controversy over misleading claims about his cryptocurrency company American Bitcoin, Eric Trump invoked his children's cancer charity as evidence of his good intentions. While his Curetivity foundation (formerly the Eric Trump Foundation) has donated over $25 million to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, an investigation reveals a pattern of self-dealing and opaque practices that benefited the Trump family business. Internal documents show that from 2011 to 2016, over $500,000 from the charity was funneled back to Trump-owned properties for event costs, transactions often omitted from tax filings. This created clear conflicts of interest, with figures like former club manager and current White House aide Dan Scavino involved on both sides. Public claims of "one of the lowest expense ratios" were contradicted by records showing significant spending on entertainment, auctions, and transportation. Facing scrutiny in 2017, Eric Trump distanced himself from the board and rebranded the foundation. After a state investigation shifted focus to compliance rather than enforcement, he returned as the public face. Fundraising events, now less transparent, continue at Trump venues. Estimates suggest these events have directed over $1 million to the Trump Organization over two decades. The same playbook of optimistic claims and obscured financial realities is now evident in Eric Trump's role at American Bitcoin. He promoted it as a highly profitable venture with low mining costs, but reports indicate most Bitcoin was purchased with funds from constant stock issuance, not mined, with actual costs far higher than claimed. While the company's stock has crashed nearly 90% from its peak, Eric Trump's personal stake remains valuable. The recurring pattern involves aggressive public defense, legal maneuvering to bury records, making minimal changes to satisfy regulators, and eventually repackaging the venture to regain trust, often successfully.

marsbit13m ago

In the Name of Charity, For the Benefit of the Family: How the Trump Family Turns Philanthropy into Profit?

marsbit13m ago

Bernstein Report: Agentic AI Will Transform CPU from Supporting Role to Leading Role, Bullish on Hygon Information

Bernstein research report: Agentic AI will turn CPUs from supporting players to leading roles, bullish on Hygon Information. Analysts led by David Dai argue that AI is transitioning from the chatbot era to the agentic AI era. Unlike simple query-response models, agentic AI involves complex workflows including retrieval, planning, tool calling, and multi-step reasoning. This shift dramatically increases the demand for CPU compute to orchestrate these tasks, manage memory, and prevent expensive GPU idling. The report forecasts that the GPU-to-CPU ratio in inference clusters will reverse from 8:1 in 2025 to 1:1 by 2029. In agentic AI workloads, CPUs could account for 50% of the compute, on par with GPUs. Consequently, the server CPU Total Addressable Market (TAM) is projected to surge from $37 billion in 2025 to $223 billion by 2030, representing a 6x expansion. Arm is identified as a key beneficiary due to its superior performance-per-watt and a strategic shift from IP licensing to designing its own chips, targeting $15 billion in chip revenue by 2030. Bernstein raises Arm's price target to $500. For x86 vendors, the report is Overweight on AMD (target $600) and Hygon Information (target CNY 450), citing leadership and strong growth in the Chinese market respectively. Intel's target is raised to $100, reflecting upgraded earnings assumptions. The analysis acknowledges significant supply-side risks, questioning whether foundry and memory capacity can support such rapid CPU growth. The optimistic demand forecast also heavily relies on Nvidia's guidance for over $1 trillion in annual AI infrastructure spend by 2027.

marsbit21m ago

Bernstein Report: Agentic AI Will Transform CPU from Supporting Role to Leading Role, Bullish on Hygon Information

marsbit21m ago

Will UNI Reach $100 in Four Years? Can Standard Chartered's Prediction Come True?

TL;DR: Standard Chartered Bank predicts UNI token will reach $100 by 2030, based on the growth of tokenized assets fueling demand for open DeFi liquidity and Uniswap's potential to capture fees from that trading. However, institutional tokenized products like BlackRock's BUIDL fund show that strict access controls and permissioned systems remain major barriers. Standard Chartered's $100 price target for Uniswap's (UNI) governance token by 2030 projects massive growth from current levels. The bank's thesis hinges on tokenized real-world assets (RWA) reaching trillions in value and a significant portion flowing into open, decentralized markets for trading and liquidity, rather than remaining in closed, permissioned systems. Uniswap's position as a leading decentralized exchange (DEX) infrastructure could allow it to capture a major share of this future trading activity. A key challenge is whether tokenized assets like bonds, funds, and stocks will trade openly on DEXs or be restricted to controlled, institutional platforms. The case of BlackRock's BUIDL fund exemplifies this tension: while it uses Uniswap's technology for settlements, trading is strictly limited to pre-approved, whitelisted institutional participants. This hybrid model provides DeFi efficiency but maintains traditional access barriers. For UNI to achieve such a high valuation, Uniswap must not only see increased trading volume from tokenized assets but also implement effective value-capture mechanisms for token holders. Recent governance proposals aim to direct protocol fees to UNI stakers, creating a clearer link between platform usage and token value. Ultimately, the realization of Standard Chartered's prediction depends on the future structure of the tokenized asset market. If open liquidity pools and reduced restrictions prevail, Uniswap's role could expand far beyond crypto-native trading. If permissioned, walled-garden systems dominate, its growth from institutional tokenization may be limited. The prediction itself signals growing institutional recognition of DeFi's potential role in the future of finance.

marsbit29m ago

Will UNI Reach $100 in Four Years? Can Standard Chartered's Prediction Come True?

marsbit29m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片