Yesterday, the European Commission launched a public consultation on the review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA). The deadline for submitting responses is 31 August 2026.

This is an important signal for the entire industry. A regulation that only became fully applicable 18 months ago is already undergoing systematic review. The Commission is acting because competition is evolving: the United States, the United Kingdom, Singapore and other jurisdictions that had been observing MiCA from the sidelines for years are now developing their own regulatory frameworks, often more flexible and more innovation-friendly. Brussels wants to assess whether MiCA remains fit for purpose in this new competitive environment.

The consultation is divided into four main areas:

• The first part concerns scope and definitions — in other words, where MiCA ends and MiFID begins. The boundary between crypto-assets and financial instruments continues to create interpretative challenges, particularly in the case of hybrid tokens, tokenised funds and other tokenised assets.
• The second part focuses on stablecoins — ART and EMT tokens. Here, the Commission raises a question that the industry has been asking for quite some time: why, after nearly two years of MiCA being in force, has no ART token received authorisation in the EU? Are excessively restrictive capital requirements to blame, or is there simply insufficient market demand? The Commission also asks about the ban on interest-bearing stablecoins, the model for global stablecoins and the role of the euro on the international stage.
• The third part concerns crypto-asset service providers (CASPs). The Commission is analysing whether the catalogue of regulated services is complete, whether prudential requirements are properly calibrated in comparison with investment firms, and whether large financial conglomerates combining regulated and unregulated services should be subject to consolidated supervision. Another important topic is access to global liquidity and whether MiCA excessively closes off the EU market.
• The fourth part covers areas that MiCA intentionally excluded or did not regulate at all: DeFi and protocol certification, crypto-asset lending, NFTs, tokenised deposits and — particularly important from a legal perspective — certainty of token ownership rights under private law. This last issue is far from an academic abstraction: the lack of harmonisation of token ownership rules across the 27 EU legal systems creates real risks for investors, issuers and financial institutions.

After collecting responses, the Commission will prepare a summary report and decide on the next steps.

Poland is in a particularly difficult position in this discussion. While the European Commission is already analysing how MiCA should be revised, Poland has still not adopted the national legislation implementing MiCA into the domestic legal framework. This means Polish companies continue operating under conditions of incomplete legal certainty, while the national supervisor does not yet have the full range of tools envisaged under the regulation.

The industry is adapting to a regulation that formally applies directly under EU law, yet without national implementing provisions, its practical application remains severely limited. Brussels is already consulting on MiCA 2.0, while we are still waiting for MiCA 1.0.

This is not an accusation — it is a diagnosis that should encourage action from Polish public authorities. The Polish fintech sector deserves clear and stable legal frameworks. Their absence not only makes doing business more difficult but also weakens the position of Polish entities in the broader European regulatory debate.

FinTech Poland encourages all companies, financial institutions and experts to participate in the consultation process. Please contact us via legal@fintechpoland.com.

If you would like to prepare a joint response together with FinTech Poland or need support in analysing specific consultation questions, please reach out to us. Your voice matters. The shape of MiCA 2.0 will depend on who participates in these consultations.