04.12.25
Written by Haik Kazarian, Head of Business Development
Reviewed by Tigran Rostomyan, Compliance Expert
Why Crypto Companies Are Leaving Poland After Anti-Crypto Signals – And Where They Are Going
Poland’s recent public messaging around digital assets has created a noticeable shift in the country’s crypto business landscape. Statements from senior officials, including remarks by the Minister of Digital Affairs that Poland “does not want crypto speculation,” have raised concerns among exchanges, blockchain firms, and payment providers operating in the country. While no new laws have been introduced, the tone of these statements has triggered a broader business response.
Crypto companies depend on regulatory predictability. Even small changes in tone from policymakers can influence access to banking, planning horizons, investment decisions, and expansion strategies. This article examines why companies are adjusting their presence in Poland, where they are moving first, and why many eventually consider global hubs such as Canada.
Public Messaging and Its Consequences
The Minister’s comments are part of a broader pattern of cautious statements from several Polish officials over the past two years. None represent a formal policy shift, yet they function as early indicators watched closely by regulated businesses.
In crypto, public rhetoric matters. Financial institutions monitor government priorities to shape their own risk appetite. When senior officials express scepticism about the sector, banks often tighten onboarding rules or increase scrutiny for existing clients. This influences companies long before any legislative change occurs.
Poland has a mature financial system and follows EU-wide AML directives. However, its banking sector is known for a conservative approach to crypto exposure. The recent statements amplify that caution, creating uncertainty for firms that rely on stable AML expectations and predictable supervisory behaviour.
How Crypto Firms Interpret These Signals
Crypto exchanges, VASPs, OTC desks, and payments companies rely on long-term planning. Even when the regulatory framework remains intact, public comments that imply a more restrictive environment can disrupt operations.
Industry groups and professional networks across the EU report several common reactions:
-
postponing planned product launches in Poland
-
relocating parts of operational teams to other jurisdictions
-
shifting compliance functions to countries with clearer oversight
-
opening secondary entities to diversify regulatory exposure
These actions do not signal panic; they demonstrate risk management. Businesses in the crypto sector move quickly when they sense potential friction in banking or supervision. Predictability is essential for AML programs, audit cycles, and client onboarding.
The First Step: Moving Within the EU
Before looking globally, many Polish crypto companies first explore options within the EU. This behaviour is consistent with past patterns in Europe whenever a member state signals uncertainty.
Lithuania, Estonia, and the Czech Republic are common destinations for early-stage relocation because they offer clearer operational frameworks and more predictable institutional behaviour. Their financial sectors have more established pathways for working with crypto companies, and their regulators communicate expectations with greater consistency.
Teams often move compliance oversight, risk functions, or customer-facing operations to these jurisdictions before deciding whether a full relocation is necessary. This phased approach lets companies preserve access to the EU Single Market while reducing exposure to unpredictable messaging at home.
Seeking Stability Beyond Europe: UAE and Other Global Hubs
When intra-EU moves are not sufficient, or when companies seek international expansion, the next stage often involves exploring global hubs.
The United Arab Emirates—particularly ADGM and VARA—has become attractive due to its transparent supervision, sector-specific expertise, and institutional support for digital asset businesses. Firms appreciate the clarity offered by these regulators, especially during periods when other jurisdictions send unclear signals.
Other hubs considered during global expansion include regions that publicly support crypto innovation while maintaining structured AML/CTF oversight.
The goal is not regulatory arbitrage; it is operational certainty.
Why Many Crypto MSBs Eventually Consider Canada
A growing number of Polish and EU-based crypto companies look toward Canada once they plan permanent, stable international expansion. Canada’s environment for crypto MSBs offers several advantages that appeal to firms seeking long-term predictability.
The FINTRAC MSB registration model provides a clear, rules-based framework rather than fluctuating political narratives. Expectations around AML program development, transaction monitoring, and reporting obligations are transparent and consistently applied.
Companies appreciate several features of the Canadian environment:
-
predictable supervisory posture
-
defined AML/CTF requirements
-
established pathways to work with payment intermediaries and financial partners
-
operational alignment with North American markets
Canada has developed a reputation as a practical launchpad for global fintech and crypto firms.
Crypto companies relocating from Europe also look for guidance on governance and oversight. AML Incubator supports these needs through structured services, including CAMLO/MLRO support, available here:
https://amlincubator.com/services/camlo-mlro-outsourcing
Companies exploring the Canadian market or planning MSB registration can review AML Incubator’s support for international firms entering Canada
Patterns Behind the Shift Away From Poland
Looking across all industry reports, community observations, and relocation data, several factors consistently shape the business response:
-
Perceived regulatory hostility: even without legal changes, public messaging influences expectations.
-
Conservative banking environment: Polish banks already have limited risk appetite for crypto.
-
Operational uncertainty: difficult for firms to plan long-term AML investments under unclear signals.
-
Comparative stability abroad: jurisdictions with clear supervisory communication quickly become more attractive.
Crypto companies tend to react early. Their compliance frameworks require constant alignment, and uncertainty introduces operational risk that is easier to eliminate by relocating.
What Crypto MSBs Should Consider When Relocating
For Polish firms evaluating their next steps, several practical considerations matter more than political interpretation:
-
Banking Access:
Stable financial partners are essential for fiat on-ramps, payroll, and client funds. -
Regulatory Predictability:
Supervisors must communicate expectations clearly so firms can design effective AML programs. -
Operational Fit:
Jurisdictions differ in reporting models, record-keeping requirements, and onboarding expectations. -
Cost and Governance:
Relocation affects compliance staffing, audits, and ongoing monitoring. -
Global Strategy:
Crypto MSBs with international reach often prefer jurisdictions with streamlined registration, transparent oversight, and access to multiple markets.
Relocation is not always immediate. Many firms begin with partial operational moves, followed by gradual migration of compliance and financial functions.
Why Predictability Matters Most
The core lesson from Poland’s recent experience is clear: in crypto, messaging influences business long before laws change. Companies look for jurisdictions where supervisors express stable expectations, where banks understand digital asset models, and where public statements align with regulatory practice.
Poland may stabilize its stance in time. But for now, companies are diversifying to protect long-term operations. Jurisdictions that offer transparency and predictable oversight—whether in the EU, the UAE, or Canada—are benefiting from this shift.
