On December 2nd, Polish President Karol Nawrocki stepped on the brakes and directly vetoed the “Crypto Asset Market Act,” which had been criticized for being “too broad.” This news caused an uproar in the crypto community—supporters cheered, while the government was left looking pale.
The reason given by the presidential office is quite hardcore: certain provisions of this bill “really threaten the freedom and property of the Polish people, and even national stability.” It sounds quite scary, but upon closer inspection, there are indeed some points to criticize.
First, the bill contains a provision that allows authorities to easily shut down encryption websites. Once this power is given away, who knows if it will be misused? Second, the entire bill is written too complicated, with a bunch of rules piled up, which constitutes excessive regulation. Even worse, the high compliance costs are simply unbearable for small companies, ultimately benefiting foreign giants and traditional banks.
Nawrocki also pointed out a reality: with such strict regulations, why would Polish companies stay and pay taxes? Wouldn't it be better for them to just run off to the Czech Republic, Lithuania, or Malta? Those places are much friendlier towards encryption.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
5 Likes
Reward
5
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MerkleMaid
· 15h ago
The Polish president's veto is really something else; finally, a politician understands the market... Those so-called "compliance costs" are simply stifling innovation in disguise, and small teams can barely keep up.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHunterXM
· 15h ago
The Polish president's vote is really amazing, finally someone sees clearly... The part about randomly shutting down websites is really outrageous, once power is given away, it will never be taken back.
View OriginalReply0
SmartContractPlumber
· 15h ago
This guy from Poland has set a good precedent. The power control clauses look like they handed the authorities a key, and there's really no one who can guarantee it won't be abused—there have been too many cases in history; once authority control slips, it's like an integer overflow. Overregulation ultimately drives small project parties underground; this logic is truly sound.
View OriginalReply0
BlindBoxVictim
· 15h ago
The Polish president's vote is so satisfying; finally, someone dares to speak the truth about regulation. The power to shut down websites is bound to be abused by whoever holds it, and small businesses are the ones truly played people for suckers.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainFries
· 15h ago
The Polish president's move is amazing; finally, someone dares to say that excessive regulation is indeed excessive regulation, no pretense.
The President of Poland vetoed the encryption regulation bill, citing "overregulation" as the reason.
On December 2nd, Polish President Karol Nawrocki stepped on the brakes and directly vetoed the “Crypto Asset Market Act,” which had been criticized for being “too broad.” This news caused an uproar in the crypto community—supporters cheered, while the government was left looking pale.
The reason given by the presidential office is quite hardcore: certain provisions of this bill “really threaten the freedom and property of the Polish people, and even national stability.” It sounds quite scary, but upon closer inspection, there are indeed some points to criticize.
First, the bill contains a provision that allows authorities to easily shut down encryption websites. Once this power is given away, who knows if it will be misused? Second, the entire bill is written too complicated, with a bunch of rules piled up, which constitutes excessive regulation. Even worse, the high compliance costs are simply unbearable for small companies, ultimately benefiting foreign giants and traditional banks.
Nawrocki also pointed out a reality: with such strict regulations, why would Polish companies stay and pay taxes? Wouldn't it be better for them to just run off to the Czech Republic, Lithuania, or Malta? Those places are much friendlier towards encryption.