The debate on crypto regulation remains one of the hottest topics of 2026.
During a panel organized by Merkle Science on April 14 in Paris, various industry leaders shared insights and challenges on an ecosystem still evolving, balancing compliance requirements and technological innovation.
On stage, Nevo Lapidot (eToro), Natalia Maximova (Bron Wallet), and Valentin Faye (Morpho) provided a clear picture: regulation exists, but it is not yet suited to the reality of decentralized finance.
Summary
Crypto Regulation: Too Complex to Innovate?
According to Lapidot, the main issue is that the current regulatory approach risks slowing down innovation, especially for smaller players. The rules, often generic, fail to keep pace with specific use cases like stablecoins or prediction markets.
The result is an ecosystem where companies must continuously balance between market demand and regulatory constraints. The pressure mainly comes from retail users, who are increasingly interested in directly interacting with DeFi protocols.
And here a crucial issue arises: how to offer these services while remaining compliant?
One of the solutions currently being considered is indirect integration through already regulated platforms. An approach that, according to the panel discussion, might be tolerated by the SEC, with possible clarifications expected soon.
However, it remains a fact: a completely risk-free financial system does not exist, neither in Web3 nor in traditional finance.
DeFi and Regulation: A Still Blurred Boundary
One of the most critical issues concerns the very definition of DeFi. Faye highlighted how the current regulatory framework, including MiCA, still leaves significant gray areas.
According to the current interpretation, some truly decentralized platforms might be exempt from regulation. However, in practice, distinguishing what is “truly DeFi” is not always straightforward.
The risk is that projects may find themselves operating in a regulatory limbo, without knowing for certain which rules to apply.
A key point that emerged is that decentralized technology, by its nature, cannot be regulated like a traditional intermediary (CASP). Instead, authorities should focus on verifying the actual decentralization of the protocols.
The Role of Institutions and the Adoption of DeFi
Another central theme concerns the entry of institutional players into DeFi.
According to Faye, it is crucial for regulators to provide greater trust to institutions that wish to integrate decentralized solutions. Without clear guidelines, the risk is that banks and platforms will merely offer interfaces without taking real responsibility for the functioning of the protocols.
This creates an important distinction: integrating DeFi into a regulated environment is different from completely opening access to users.
In the first case, it is a controlled adoption; in the second, new regulatory implications emerge that are still largely unexplored.
Global Rules or Regulatory Fragmentation?
According to Maximova, one of the most pressing issues is the regulatory fragmentation across different jurisdictions.
Crypto platforms operate on a global scale, but they must contend with regulations that are often inconsistent with each other. This makes it difficult to develop scalable products and increases compliance costs.
The demand is clear: greater harmonization and regulatory clarity.
At the same time, Maximova emphasizes that the role of the regulator should not be to educate users, but to ensure transparency. Platforms, on the other hand, must provide clear disclaimers so that users understand the associated risks.
The UK Case: When Even the Interface Becomes Regulated
A concrete example of regulatory challenges comes from the United Kingdom.
According to the discussion, even platforms that function solely as interfaces — without holding custody of funds — can be classified as regulated operators.
A stance that raises doubts in the industry, as it risks equating very different models, penalizing innovation without necessarily increasing user protection.
The Future of Crypto Regulation in Europe
The panel highlighted a key point: the regulator is trying to adapt, but the process is still ongoing.
Europe, with the MiCA framework, represents one of the most advanced attempts at sector regulation. However, to be truly effective, it will need to evolve towards more specific rules applicable to the different segments of the crypto market.
Meanwhile, the sector continues to move faster than the regulations.
As users and institutions push for greater integration of DeFi, the risk is that regulatory uncertainty may become the main brake on innovation.
2026 could be a pivotal year: with anticipated regulatory clarifications and increasing demand for decentralized products, the future of crypto regulation will hinge on the ability to strike a balance between control and freedom.
