Poland’s Crypto Law Stalls as Zondacrypto Crisis Hits Politics
Poland has failed for a third time to overcome President Karol Nawrocki's veto of legislation intended to establish the country's domestic framework for the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation.
Summary:
- The Sejm fell 25 votes short of overriding Nawrocki’s veto.
- Poland remains without the domestic crypto framework sought by the government to implement MiCA.
- Zondacrypto’s Estonian operator was declared bankrupt on August 27.
- Prosecutors are investigating alleged fraud, money laundering and increasingly complex links surrounding the collapsed exchange.
According to local media, The Sejm voted 241-198 to override the veto, with three abstentions, but supporters needed 266 votes. The regulatory deadlock now coincides with the bankruptcy of Zondacrypto operator BB Trade Estonia and an expanding criminal investigation into suspected fraud and money laundering involving at least PLN 350 million in estimated losses.
Nawrocki’s Crypto Veto Survives Again
The September vote produced a clear majority in favor of overturning the president’s decision, but not the constitutionally required three-fifths majority.
Of the 442 lawmakers participating, 241 supported rejecting the veto, 198 opposed and three abstained. With 266 votes required, the government’s effort ended 25 votes short.
The legislation was designed to provide Poland’s national legal architecture for the EU’s MiCA regime and strengthen domestic supervision of crypto-asset businesses.
Nawrocki has repeatedly argued that the government’s approach goes further than necessary. His objections have focused on compliance costs for legitimate crypto businesses and regulatory powers he considers excessive, including provisions allowing authorities to block websites. The government argues stronger domestic oversight is needed to protect consumers and prevent illicit activity.
The result leaves Poland in an unusual position. MiCA is an EU regulation and therefore does not disappear because Warsaw failed to pass national legislation. The unresolved issue is the domestic machinery needed to administer and enforce parts of the regime, including the allocation of supervisory responsibilities.
For crypto companies, that distinction matters operationally. EU-level rules can exist while licensing, enforcement and interaction with domestic authorities remain harder to navigate without a completed national framework.
Zondacrypto Turns a Regulatory Fight Into a Political One
The parliamentary dispute might have remained a technical argument over how aggressively Poland should implement MiCA.
Zondacrypto has changed the stakes.
Polish prosecutors opened an investigation in April into suspected large-scale fraud involving the exchange. They are examining allegations that customers were misled about their ability to purchase and store fiat currencies and crypto assets, as well as potential money laundering involving funds suspected of criminal origin.
Prosecutors initially placed the damage at no less than PLN 350 million, approximately $95 million to $100 million depending on exchange rates. They cautioned that the amount was continuing to change as additional victims came forward.
One particularly significant issue identified by prosecutors concerns a cold wallet reportedly holding about 4,500 BTC. According to the prosecutor’s April statement, the exchange’s owner said the company had lacked access to the wallet since 2022 and that customers had not been informed.
The investigation remains ongoing, and allegations being examined by prosecutors should not be treated as findings of criminal liability.
Zondacrypto’s Operator Is Now Bankrupt
The regulatory problems surrounding the exchange have also moved into formal insolvency proceedings.
Estonia’s Financial Intelligence Unit first partially suspended BB Trade Estonia’s virtual-currency license on May 18, preventing the company from accepting additional customer assets or establishing new business relationships. The FIU revoked the license entirely on June 29 after saying the company failed to comply with a supervisory order.
On August 27, an Estonian court declared BB Trade Estonia OÜ bankrupt. Poland’s Justice Ministry subsequently informed creditors that claims arising before the bankruptcy must be submitted to trustee Margus Lentsius within two months of the official notice. The first creditors’ meeting is scheduled for September 17.
That sequence gives the political debate a concrete consumer-protection dimension: Poland is still arguing over its domestic crypto supervisory framework while creditors of one of the country’s most prominent former exchanges are navigating an insolvency process in another EU jurisdiction.
Tusk Brings the Investigation Directly Into Parliament
Prime Minister Donald Tusk used the Zondacrypto investigation to make the case for overriding Nawrocki’s veto.
Before the vote, Tusk presented information from the investigation and cited testimony from a key witness. According to the Polish government’s account, the testimony alleged that people associated with Zondacrypto attempted to influence individuals within the previous PiS government’s political environment.
The allegations have sharply raised the political temperature around what began as a dispute over crypto regulation.
The investigation has also produced recent arrests. On September 2, three people were detained, and prosecutors subsequently announced charges involving alleged participation in an organized criminal group and actions that allegedly caused significant financial damage to BB Trade Estonia, among other accusations.
READ MORE: CLARITY Act Gains a Senate Opening as Sheriffs Drop Opposition
Separately, Polish Olympic Committee president Radosław Piesiewicz was charged in August with influence peddling and favoring one group of creditors over others in connection with the Zondacrypto investigation. Piesiewicz has previously disputed allegations surrounding gifts he received from figures linked to the exchange.
Tusk’s government is now using those developments to argue that crypto oversight is not simply a question of complying with Brussels. It has become part of a wider debate over financial crime, consumer protection and political influence.
MiCA Does Not Automatically Solve the Zondacrypto Problem
The timing creates an uncomfortable assumption that stronger crypto legislation would necessarily have prevented a collapse like Zondacrypto.
That conclusion goes too far.
MiCA strengthens authorization, governance, disclosure and supervisory requirements for crypto-asset service providers, but regulation cannot eliminate fraud or insolvency. The Zondacrypto investigation also reaches back to conduct allegedly occurring from 2022 onward, years before the current Polish legislative fight.
There is another complication. Zondacrypto operated through an Estonian company, demonstrating how crypto businesses can span multiple EU jurisdictions even while serving large numbers of customers in one national market.
Estonia did have supervisory authority over BB Trade Estonia’s virtual-currency license and ultimately revoked it. However, the Estonian FIU explicitly notes that its mandate under that licensing framework did not include prudential supervision of the existence, liquidity or safekeeping of customer assets.
That gap helps explain why the current argument extends beyond simply whether crypto should be regulated. The harder question is which authority is responsible for which risks when a platform, its customers, its legal operator and its assets span different jurisdictions.
Poland Now Has Two Crypto Problems Instead of One
Nawrocki’s veto and the Zondacrypto case are legally separate, but politically they have become difficult to disentangle.
The president’s camp can continue arguing that Poland should implement MiCA without imposing unnecessary costs or expansive enforcement powers on legitimate companies. The government can now point to an exchange collapse, an insolvency proceeding and a criminal investigation as evidence that weak or fragmented oversight carries its own costs.
The September vote settled neither argument.
What it did establish is that the government currently lacks the parliamentary numbers to impose its preferred framework over the president’s objections. Any durable solution will therefore require either a revised bill capable of attracting opposition support or a political shift large enough to overcome another veto.
Meanwhile, the Zondacrypto process has its own immediate timetable. Creditors are moving through the Estonian bankruptcy proceedings, the first creditors’ meeting is scheduled for September 17, and Poland’s criminal investigation remains active.
That means Poland’s next crypto debate will unfold under very different conditions from the first. The question is no longer only how Warsaw should implement an EU rulebook. Lawmakers must now decide what domestic supervision should look like after one of the country’s biggest crypto scandals exposed the consequences of fragmented cross-border oversight.
The information presented in this article is intended for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as financial, investment, or trading advice. Coinspress.com does not promote or advocate for any particular investment strategy, asset, or cryptocurrency project. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile and unpredictable – always perform your own research and seek guidance from a qualified financial professional before making any investment decisions.
Alexander Stefanov
Reporter at CoinsPress
Alex is Editor-in-Chief of Coinspress and co-founder of Millennial Media Group, with nearly a decade of experience covering financial markets - crypto first, then everything else. It started in 2016 with Bitcoin. Like most people at the time, he didn't fully understand it - so he kept digging. Blockchain, tokenomics, the projects, the cycles. That curiosity never stopped, and eventually pulled him into traditional markets too: equities, commodities, macro. Not because he left crypto behind, but because you can't properly understand one without the other. What drives him is straightforward: he wants to know why something is happening, not just that it's happening. Most market coverage stops at the headline - price up, price down, here's a chart. Alex finds that kind of reporting actively unhelpful. If you walk away from an article without understanding the mechanism behind the move, what did you actually learn? He holds a degree in Tourism from New Bulgarian University - not the most obvious path into financial markets, but markets have a way of pulling in people who are simply too curious to stay out. He has authored over 200 in-depth analyses and more than 10,000 articles across crypto and traditional finance. He still thinks every day in markets teaches him something new. That's probably why he hasn't stopped.
