POLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Michał Wołoszański, Łukasz Kudela and Marta Solarska-Kaleńczuk, Wołoszański & Partners
4. Cross-Border Services 4.1 Marketing Marketing into Poland Under MiCA
has treated undisclosed sponsorships as an enforce- ment priority. In the crypto-asset context, this over- laps with KNF’s long-standing warnings about com- munications targeted at retail clients and the risks of
Marketing of crypto-asset services into Poland is gov- erned primarily by MiCA. EU-authorised CASPs may market their services to Polish clients on the basis of a passport notification. Third-country firms cannot actively market crypto-asset services to clients in the EU; the only narrow exemption is reverse solicitation under Article 61 of MiCA, where a Polish client initiates the relationship at their own exclusive initiative, with- out prior solicitation. ESMA’s Guidelines of February 2025 construe this exemption narrowly. Solicitation is understood broadly and may include direct or indirect promotion, including through affiliates, influencers, sponsorships, online campaigns, apps or EU-facing websites. The exemption applies only to the specific service or crypto-asset requested by the client, and not to follow-on offerings of other types of crypto- assets or services. Disclaimers or pre-completed “reverse solicitation” templates cannot override the factual nature of the engagement. Marketing Communications and Supervision Within Poland, marketing communications about crypto-assets must be fair, clear and not mislead- ing, clearly identifiable as marketing communica- tions, consistent with any applicable white paper, and include the prescribed risk warnings. KNF may act against misleading communications through its general investor-protection and supervisory tools and, once the Polish implementing act enters into force, is expected to receive additional powers relating to pub- lic warnings and domains used for activity in breach of MiCA. Polish advertising, consumer-protection and unfair-commercial-practices laws apply alongside MiCA, and consumer-protection enforcement may be carried out by the Office of Competition and Con- sumer Protection ( Urząd Ochrony Konkurencji i Kon - sumentów or UOKiK). Polish-language requirements may apply to consumer-facing information under gen- eral Polish law. Influencer Marketing Influencer marketing is a particular area of practi- cal risk. UOKiK has issued recommendations on the labelling of commercial content in social media and
speculative crypto-asset products. No Bespoke Polish Exemptions
There are no specific Polish exemptions from the marketing-restriction regime beyond those provided in MiCA itself. Reverse solicitation is available, but should be treated as a narrow factual exception rather than as a structural market-entry strategy. 4.2 White Labelling White-label solutions are not a recognised way to cir- cumvent the requirement for MiCA authorisation. Any person providing crypto-asset services in the EU on a professional basis must be authorised as a CASP, regardless of any branding or “powered by” arrange- ment. A white-label model may be viable only where the licensed CASP remains the actual provider of the regulated service and the white-label partner does not itself perform regulated crypto-asset services. Where a CASP outsources operational functions to a third party, the outsourcing must comply with MiCA’s outsourcing requirements. The CASP retains full regu- latory responsibility, supervisory access must not be impaired, and the outsourcing must not materially increase operational risk or undermine the quality of internal control. Branding arrangements must also be transparent: structures that obscure the identity of the regulated provider, mislead clients as to who is provid- ing the service, or allow an unlicensed partner to carry out regulated activity may give rise to regulatory and consumer-protection consequences.
5. Decentralised Finance 5.1 Ability to Use DeFi DeFi Permitted in Principle
Decentralised finance (DeFi) is not prohibited in Poland. Polish residents may interact with decentral- ised protocols and there is no general restriction on the use of such applications. The regulatory question is instead whether the relevant activity falls within the perimeter of MiCA or another regulated regime. Recit-
493 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook