Overregulation threatens to remove Europe’s edge in digital assets, laments Wojciech Kaszycki, CSO of BTCS. Or as he’d put it in Gorky’s style: “The bureaucrats have strangled innovation with red tape, while the Yankees ride off into the crypto sunset. 🌅💰”
- Regulatory divergence between the U.S. and the EU is accelerating 🚀🇺🇸 vs. 🐌🇪U
- Tether, the stablecoin giant, is banned in the EU like a heretic in the Middle Ages 🔥⚖️
- Each EU country must pass its own law to interpret MiCA, creating a regulatory patchwork quilt 🧵🤦♂️
A few years ago, Europe strutted like a peacock, claiming leadership in crypto regulation. Today, that peacock’s feathers are looking a bit ruffled. 🦚→🐓 As global frameworks crystallize, the U.S. and EU are playing a game of regulatory tug-of-war, and Europe’s grip is slipping. 😬
To dissect this bureaucratic mess, crypto.news chatted with Wojciech Kaszycki, CSO of BTCS, a Polish firm juggling infrastructure and treasury. He spills the tea on why Europe’s overreach is stifling innovation, while the U.S. zooms ahead like a Tesla on autopilot. 🚗💨
crypto.news: You mentioned a report from the Financial Stability Board highlighting regulatory divergence. What’s the real story here, and who’s winning?
Wojciech Kaszycki: Ah, the great realignment! 🌍 Take Qatar, for example. Once caught in geopolitical crossfire, now home to the world’s most profitable company. Meanwhile, the U.S. passed the GENIUS Act, and Visa’s settling transactions in USDC. 🤯 Europe? Busy banning Tether like it’s a medieval plague. 🦠
MiCA, Europe’s crypto regulation, bans stablecoins like Tether for payments. Yet, other stablecoins are approved, tokenizing fiat like it’s going out of style. 🏦 Meanwhile, the U.S. is making the dollar king by tokenizing it and letting it roam free on blockchain rails. Europe’s response? “Let’s overregulate and watch innovation flee.” 🏃♂️💨
The irony? Europe used to be the cool kid on the blockchain block. Now, it’s the U.S. stealing the spotlight. 🎭
CN: Why did Europe lose its edge?
WK: Blame the old SEC in the U.S. for being a buzzkill. Projects were blocked, and stablecoins were treated like financial lepers. Europe, with its laissez-faire attitude, gave innovators room to play. 🎨 But then the U.S. pivoted, and Europe… well, Europe kept adding layers of regulation like a grandma knitting a never-ending scarf. 🧣
In the U.S., one regulator (the SEC) calls the shots. In Europe, every country has its own mini-SEC, interpreting MiCA like it’s a Rorschach test. 🇵🇱: 300 pages of rules. 🇲🇹: 11 pages. 🤷♂️ Innovation? Smothered in paperwork. 📜
Guest: Exactly. Europe’s overregulation is like a straitjacket for innovation. And with Trump back, the U.S. is embracing deregulation like a long-lost lover. 💑
CN: Why doesn’t Europe lean into decentralization to counter U.S. Web2 giants?
WK: Good question! Smaller EU countries like Estonia and Malta are nimbler, adapting faster. But EU law trumps national law, so every country adds extra layers of regulation. It’s like trying to bake a cake with 27 chefs in the kitchen. 🍰🤹♂️
CN: Any examples of this fragmentation?
WK: Sure! Lithuania’s EMIs used to be the Wild West of finance. License for €100k? Done in 3-6 months. Now, getting an EMI license is harder than starting a bank. Why? A few bad apples spoiled the bunch, and regulators went full Terminator. 🤖 Even though traditional finance scandals (looking at you, Danske Bank) caused way more damage. 🏦💥
In Poland, running an unlicensed crypto exchange gets you twice the penalty of an unlicensed bank. Priorities, right? ⚖️🤡
CN: What needs to change in regulation?
WK: We need a two-speed system: one for Binance-sized whales and another for minnows. 🦈🐟 Regulate the big guys like banks, but give startups a sandbox to play in. Otherwise, innovation will pack its bags for Dubai or Singapore. 🌍✈️
And let’s stop letting the SEC’s safety obsession kill creativity. We need a dual-track system: one regulator for innovation, one for safety. Like a parent who lets their kid play but keeps an eye out for traffic. 👀🚦
CN: Is the EU open to this?
WK: Not really. The EU’s approach is: “Regulate crypto into submission.” Some countries make MiCA licensing so hard, it’s like they want only three players left standing. Innovation? Dead. 💀
MiCA isn’t all bad-it defines stablecoins and acknowledges tokenized e-money. But the implementation? It’s like giving someone a Ferrari and then handing them a 10-page manual on how to turn the key. 🏎️📖
CN: What about DeFi regulation?
WK: DeFi? Regulators are treating it like a financial product, not a tech revolution. It’s like trying to regulate the internet by focusing on email scams. 📧🤦♂️ We need to start with the blockchain tech itself, not just the financial applications.
DeFi projects are setting up shop overseas to avoid legal headaches. We need clear rules so they can operate legally without fleeing to the Cayman Islands. 🏝️
CN: Are there legal tools that could help?
WK: Absolutely! Crowdfunding licenses in the EU could be adapted for DeFi. The pieces are there-we just need to connect the dots. But if regulators hand DeFi to banks, it’ll move elsewhere. History repeats itself. 🕰️
CN: Did Poland’s growth have anything to do with crypto?
WK: Not really. Most of Poland’s growth came from the Ukraine war-refugees, aid, and logistics. Crypto? Our regulators still think it’s a scam. 🤷♂️
CN: Anything else missing from the conversation?
WK: Digital Asset Management Companies (DACs) are the unsung heroes of mass adoption. They’re bringing institutional money into crypto without the hassle of private keys. It’s like crypto for people who don’t want to be their own bank. 🏦💼
Read More
- USD VES PREDICTION
- USD PLN PREDICTION
- FIL PREDICTION. FIL cryptocurrency
- EUR CNY PREDICTION
- JUP PREDICTION. JUP cryptocurrency
- INJ PREDICTION. INJ cryptocurrency
- BTC PREDICTION. BTC cryptocurrency
- GBP EUR PREDICTION
- USD CNY PREDICTION
- NEAR PREDICTION. NEAR cryptocurrency
2025-10-30 01:27