21 ms·

EU–INC – A new pan-European legal entity

• jcmartinezdev 9mo ago
  I really looking forward to this! I love being in the EU and I really like living in Germany. But creating and operating a small company in Germany is a nightmare, I hope this can give smaller EU companies agility and frictionless setup and operation so they can focus on building products and providing services to their customers.
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    Sounds like a German problem. When I last set up a company in Sweden I literally went to web UI and clicked "Create Company" basically, filled in some details and it was done. Similar experience in Spain, fill out 2-3 forms and it's done. How much more process could the German government really add here? Reviews and interviews, or what exactly is the bureaucracy you're complaining about here?
    • kleiba 9mo ago
      > How much more process could the German government really add here? Hahaha, good one, little padavan...
      • jcmartinezdev 9mo ago
        Never underestimate the power of german bureaucracy lol
    • jcmartinezdev 9mo ago
      That's great to know! In Germany it involves a lot of physical paperwork, going to a notary to certify the creation, taxes are a nightmare, every change you need to make again you need a notary. It's so frustrating!
    • noosphr 9mo ago
      It takes 8 weeks from start to finish to be able to get paid for your first sale as a German limited liability company. People outside of Germany really have no idea how sclerotic the state is. Mean while Germans suffer from the brain damage of having lived there their whole lives and don't see a problem with this. If you think brain damage is too strong a word, the last time I brought it up a bunch of Germans came out of the wood work to defend an 8 week process as completely reasonable. Then when told I could do the same thing in Australia in 15 minutes they insinuated I was probably a criminal for wanting less paper work to open a business there.
      • RandomLensman 9mo ago
        What type of company structure was that?
        • jcmartinezdev 9mo ago
          gmbh or UG, takes about that time to set up, you can start billing before, but still... this is a lot of time of manual paperwork.
          • RandomLensman 9mo ago
            But you could choose other forms, no?
      • lm28469 9mo ago
        > It takes 8 weeks from start to finish to be able to get paid for your first sale as a German company. You can bill as soon as you started the process afaik
        • noosphr 9mo ago
          As soon as you talk to a notary to prove that you're really opening a company you can get the provisional business license, or whatever they call it, to open a bank account. After you open that bank account you need to talk to the notary again to start registering the real company. Then you need to transfer the bank account from the place holder company to the real company. I may be misremembering the exact steps because I tried drilling all those memories out of my head as soon as I left Germany.
    • 47282847 9mo ago
      Company formation in Germany requires identity and statute checks by a notary. You can nowadays do that remotely via video appointment but it’s still a bit of a hassle and delay. It’s not as bad as people claim, or rather: if people already have difficulties with that step I wonder how much fun they will have with “bureaucracy” later on. Frankly, I understand how one can be annoyed at certain requirements but how do people imagine it without those? I can totally accept temporary annoyances since ultimately all of it serves to protect me from harm as a customer. I really don’t want to deal with companies whose founders already find the quite straightforward registration procedure too difficult. The claim by others in this thread that you have to wait for the registration entry is false, your company is created the moment you pass notarization. While it makes proof of existence easier to be in the database, you can act and get bank accounts etc with those documents already. And I doubt the stability of your business idea if you cannot even wait a bit.
      • cm2012 9mo ago
        Friction is a death by 1000 cuts. Its a week here, an in person appointment there, another 2 weeks to send in a different ID - all of that adds up to an environment where people are reluctant to do anything new.
        • 47282847 9mo ago
          I have personally founded multiple successful German companies and non-profits, and have advised dozens in doing so, and yeah I really don’t mind if those that are reluctant because of one appointment to not start whatever grand business idea they might have, and doubt that they will make it elsewhere. Not everyone with (maybe) good ideas is made to run a business.
    • westpfelia 9mo ago
      I'm pretty sure Sweden is the most business friendly country. its why so many people move their business from Norway to Sweden.
    • pimterry 9mo ago
      > Similar experience in Spain, fill out 2-3 forms and it's done. This isn't true in Spain - all company creation requires a notary, among other awkward steps (although as of relatively recently in some cases you can now do this over videoconference, without physically visiting at least). It's not as bad as what I hear of in Germany, but it's non-trivial and slow, and the banking setup process is similarly annoying and slower than it should be. You can register as autonomo (an individual freelancer) easily with just a couple of forms, but that is not the same thing as creating a separate legal business entity (SL).
  • direwolf20 9mo ago
    [dead]
  • lnsru 9mo ago
    Can you elaborate more? I am self employed electrician in Bavaria using simple Gewerbe. It is straightforward at the beginning. Literally hundreds of webpages describe the procedure. It is obvious, that growing the company into GmbH with own VAT number increases the complexity. But I haven’t seen it other way in Europe.
    • jcmartinezdev 9mo ago
      I had my experience with bootstrapping a self founded UG (Unternehmergesellschaft), and the process was long (about 8 weeks), involving me getting support from a company (firma.de) to help me prepare all the documentation which involved a lot of physical paperwork, then there's the visit to the notary which is required. After you do that, you need to register with the Finanzamt, and then you start finding out about all this other registries you need to pay and register to, or that you're automatically registered, but you receive separate invoices. Any changes you need to make, adding more capital, change address, requires again, paperwork, tons of hours and again the notary. Taxes are also quite difficult to figure out, I'm not German born, and my German is good for conversation, but to read and understand the tax has been a problem and I had to rely on very expensive tax consultants. (I know, this is my problem, not a german problem) It's not that is hard, it's very time consuming, manual, and involves a lot of paperwork. Other countries do this much easier. Also, shutting down a company... I'm still trying to figure that out :(
      • traceroute66 9mo ago
        > I had my experience with bootstrapping a self founded UG (Unternehmergesellschaft), and the process was long (about 8 weeks) It would have been significantly quicker if you used a well-connected law firm. I know a number of friends of friends in Germany who have all visited the lawyer, the notary and the bank all in the course of one morning. The whole experience was orchestrated by the lawyer because they knew the notary and the bank manager. In some cases the lawyer even drove them around between locations. ;) The Steuerberater then took care of the Finanzamt. Of course this entails extra professional fees. But the point is that there are many examples out there showing it can be done in less than 8 weeks.
  • traceroute66 9mo ago
    > creating and operating a small company in Germany is a nightmare To be fair, I think the problem operating in Germany is its federated nature. And so you have similar issues to companies operating in other federated jurisdictions e.g. US. If you look at the UK (through pre-Brexit eyes, of course) or Ireland, establishing and operating companies is significantly easier.
  • simon_a99 9mo ago
    Unfortunately it's likely that Germany will reject this change. Incorporation in Germany is highly bureaucratic and it requires physical notarisation. Its not a mistake, Germany has an incredibly powerful notary lobby that has already announced its opposition to this. https://www.bnotk.de/en/tasks-and-activities/magazines/bnotk-international/details/heading-towards-a-28th-regime-in-european-company-law?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.bnotk.de/en/tasks-and-activities/magazines/bnotk...
    • causalscience 9mo ago
      Lobbies whose only purpose is to sustain themselves even at the cost of maintaining friction should be made illegal.
      • darthwalsh 9mo ago
        Maybe you could create a ballot initiative for the next election, that would disband the lobby? See how the people vote.
      • runeks 9mo ago
        You should lobby for this
• cjs_ac 9mo ago
  > The ultimate aim is to create a new truly European company structure. We call it EU Inc., with a single and simple set of rules that will apply seamlessly all over our Union. So that business can operate across Member States much more easily. Our entrepreneurs, the innovative companies, will be able to register a company in any Member State within 48 hours – fully online. They will enjoy the same capital regime all across the EU. Ultimately, we need a system where companies can do business and raise financing seamlessly across Europe – just as easily as in uniform markets like the US or China. If we get this right – and if we move fast enough – this will not only help EU companies grow. But it will attract investment from across the world. > Which brings me to the second focus – investment and capital. We are now building the Savings and Investment Union. We need a large-scale, deep and liquid capital market that attracts a wide range of investors. This will allow businesses to find the funding they need – including equity – at lower cost here in Europe. We have made proposals on market integration and supervision to ensure our financial market is more integrated. This covers trading, post-trading, and asset management – as well as driving innovation and making our supervisory framework more efficient. This will help ensure that capital flows where it is needed – to scaleups, to SMEs, to innovation, to industry. > Third priority: building an interconnected and affordable energy market – a true energy union. Energy is a chokepoint – for both companies and households. Just look at the dispersion of prices across European electricity hubs. Europe needs an energy blueprint that pulls together all the parts. This is our Affordable Energy Action Plan. For example, we are investing massively in our energy security and independence, with interconnectors and grids – this is for the homegrown energies that we are trying to promote as much as possible, nuclear and renewables. To bring down prices and cut dependencies. To put an end to price volatility, manipulation and supply shock. But we now need to speed up this transition. Because homegrown, reliable, resilient and cheaper energy will drive our economic growth, deliver for Europeans and secure our independence.
  • techpression 9mo ago
    As a Swede the third one is terrifying, unifying the energy market has been catastrophic for us, both price and environment wise. The latest is added taxes due to choke points designed by EU from the first place..
• pil0u 9mo ago
  I read through the speech, I'm still not sure if this is adopted or not. I found https://www.eu-inc.org/ https://www.eu-inc.org/ which seems to be the origin of the proposal, but mentions a final implementation for 2027. Just heard about this initiative as a European, I don't have an opinion yet.
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    > Just heard about this initiative as a European, I don't have an opinion yet. Same! I'm cautiously optimistic, but need to await the criticism from the Americans before I can fully know what to think about it. I'm sure it'll pop up here any time soon, NYC is just about to wake up.
    • drstewart 9mo ago
      Because Europeans never share their criticisms about the US
      • embedding-shape 9mo ago
        As a parent you have the obligation to let your child know how well you think they're doing ;)
  • arlort 9mo ago
    > this is adopted or not It's not. However from the speech it sounds like the commission is ready to put forward their proposal soon-ish After they do so the actual legislative process is going to start where the draft has to go through Parliament and the Council to become law The legislative process is going to take time which is where the 2027 date in eu-inc.org comes from I don't know if there will be legal or political issues around this that would delay adoption though
• rozenmd 9mo ago
  More info here: https://www.eu-inc.org/ https://www.eu-inc.org/
  • pantulis 9mo ago
    Builtwith reports this website is built with Framer, is this an official EU asset? If that's the case it's also a declaration of intentions.
    • rozenmd 9mo ago
      the FAQ clearly states that it isn't an official EU website, it was used for petitioning the EU to consider this proposal.
      • pantulis 9mo ago
        Thanks for poiting this out
• janlucien 9mo ago
  [dead]
• kantord 9mo ago
  seems like a great idea
• poly2it 9mo ago
  Is there a comparison to the SE structure? My main issue with it personally is that it is prohibitively expensive to incorporate.
  • nayroclade 9mo ago
    They have an answer to that in their FAQs: https://proposal.eu-inc.org/FAQ-Glossary-14d076fd79c581d18e60def623257a58 https://proposal.eu-inc.org/FAQ-Glossary-14d076fd79c581d18e6... > While both aim to facilitate cross-border operations within the EU, EU-Inc addresses some of the limitations of SE: > - No minimum capital requirement: Unlike SE, which has a minimum capital requirement of €120,000, EU-Inc has no minimum capital requirement, making it more accessible for startups. > - Simplified governance structure: EU-Inc offers a more streamlined governance structure compared to SE, reducing administrative burden and promoting flexibility. > - Digital ecosystem: EU-Inc is supported by a robust online ecosystem, including a digital registry and dashboard, for efficient management and compliance, which is lacking for SE.
• 3rodents 9mo ago
  Seems like a broader version of what Estonia are already doing with e-residency[1]. Registering a company online in a few hours is already easy in a few jurisdictions around the world (e.g: the U.K.[2]) so this isn’t a particularly revolutionary but the intent it signals is good. [1] https://www.e-resident.gov.ee/ https://www.e-resident.gov.ee/ [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house
  • paintbox 9mo ago
    Ease of incorporation is indeed not revolutionary, but is certainly a good direction. What is revolutionary (in context of EU of course) is easier business operation across different countries, a real bottleneck for EU SMEs.
    • embedding-shape 9mo ago
      > business operation across different countries, a real bottleneck for EU SMEs Is it actually a "real bottleneck" for EU SMEs? Granted, I've only participated in help growing 3 companies from the scale of 3-4 developers > ~100-150 and from national sales to international, but "going worldwide" or "EU wide" was never the bottleneck we had. The most tricky part was figuring out exactly how to do VAT for every single country, but after a session with a accountant + setting up the guidelines + creating a .csv, that's basically it. Besides that, it was basically smooth sailing. Today I'm sure there even are hosted services that does all of that stuff automatically for you, probably with Stripe integration as well. What exactly is that bottleneck you're referring to?
      • csantini 9mo ago
        The bottleneck is having a standardized SAFE for Europe. Global investors must be able to invest without having to understand Italian and Polish corporate law
        • embedding-shape 9mo ago
• embedding-shape 9mo ago
  > On Saturday, I was in Asunción, in Paraguay, to sign the EU-Mercosur trade agreement. It was a breakthrough after 25 years of negotiations. And with it, the EU and Latin America have created the largest free trade zone in the world. A market worth over 20% of global GDP. 31 countries with over 700 million consumers. Aligned with the Paris Agreement. This agreement sends a powerful message to the world. That we are choosing fair trade over tariffs. As someone who lives in EU, been skeptical of it for most my life, but for the last 3-4 years kind of turned around on the idea of a stronger EU and more independent Europe, I'm really glad to see and hear that things are swiftly moving ahead. Things like this may seem relatively small, especially with everything going around, but these sort of partnerships and agreements really do have a large impact on the next decades, and I hope we'll see more of this. Fair trade is something we've taken for granted, but we've again learned that it's something you have to fight for, and I'm happy to live in the EU who seem to still realize it's important.
  • alephnerd 9mo ago
    The Mercosur deal is frozen now as it's just been referred to the CJEU [0], which means at least 1-2 years of litigation. [0] - https://www.reuters.com/world/eu-lawmakers-vote-whether-launch-legal-challenge-mercosur-trade-deal-2026-01-21/ https://www.reuters.com/world/eu-lawmakers-vote-whether-laun...
    • embedding-shape 9mo ago
      Hmm, less ideal. > A group of 144 lawmakers put forward a parliamentary motion to ask the EU Court of Justice to rule on whether the agreement can be applied before full ratification by all member states and whether its provisions restrict the EU's ability to set environmental and consumer health policies. The court typically takes around two years to deliver such opinions. Hopefully the court will take a look around what's going on the world, and get a little bit of push to act a bit faster, although hopefully not compromising on "environmental and consumer health policies", that'd be a blunder of it's own.
      • 9mo ago
• mono442 9mo ago
  This doesn't solve any issue. Registering a company is already usually pretty simple in most European countries. It's running the company which is difficult due to regulations and stuff.
  • sixhobbits 9mo ago
    It was pretty complicated in the Netherlands. I had to pay a few thousand Euro to a notary and do a lot of paperwork. I've heard its worse in Germany. Then there are ongoing regulations like needing to have a resident director, so if you're a single-director company you can't move your personal residence even to another European country without shutting down your business and re-establishing it in your new country. Running it also changes from country to country, so if you move you have to speak to new accounts and lawyers in your new country about how tax and vat and other legalities work. In theory, this would let you do all of that once, hopefully all online and in a simpler and faster way. Then it should also be easier to hire and sell to all EU countries without doing a complicated dance of employment regulations and VAT compliance. That would be ideal anyway. Not sure if or when we'll get there.
• MadsRC 9mo ago
  Last I heard of it this was proposed as a directive as opposed to regulation, meaning every single member state would have to interpret it and create their own national implementation. Just like with GDPR. So 27 individual implementations of this, as opposed to the current 27 different implementations of how to incorporate and assign equity? Seems… silly? I’m all for making it more attractive to create startups in the EU… But I don’t think a directive is the right way
• pshirshov 9mo ago
  Yes, it's in the works. Probably in just 3 to 5 years they could open a working group to outline an agenda for a committee which would prepare blueprints of the primary proposals.
  • jcfrei 9mo ago
    This is exactly how its going to go. But the reason is not lazy bureaucrats but that a lot of countries fear they will lose out on taxes from corporations currently domiciled in their country. Of course another big source of friction is different labour laws in different countries. And there's no way these are going to be touched. And of course banks will also oppose the unified capital market because they fear losing fees from their domestic customers to better banks in other countries.
• kristoff_it 9mo ago
  I would love to be able to setup in Europe a non-profit equivalent to the Zig Software Foundation. I haven't looked too deeply into it, but my understanding is that it's not possible to create an equivalent corporation in Italy (where I reside) nor the rest of Europe. I would love to be proven wrong though.
  • traceroute66 9mo ago
    > I haven't looked too deeply into it, but my understanding is that it's not possible to create an equivalent corporation in Italy (where I reside) nor the rest of Europe. You certainly did not look deep enough. ;) Ask Mr Google about gGmbH in Germany, for example. Honestly, I would be incredibly surprised if every single European country does not already have a non-profit structure. In addition, do not forget that in some countries you might also have the option of being non-profit not through legal-form (e.g. gGmbH in Germany) but via your articles of association, i.e. you set up a "standard" company and then formally declare it a non-profit. This is something your friendly local company lawyer would be need to help with as it requires the correct words to be drafted into your articles if you want e.g. the tax authorities to correctly recognise your status.
    • kristoff_it 9mo ago
      Sure we have non profit companies also in Europe, the question if it's possible to create one to support an Open Source project, and which tax benefits donors can get.
      • traceroute66 9mo ago
        > the question if it's possible to create one to support an Open Source project, and which tax benefits donors can get. As the old saying goes ... what has that got to do with the price of eggs ? A non-profit is a non-profit, doesn't matter if you are supporting Open Source or the community homeless. Same goes for donors. A donation is a donation. Codeberg e.v. (a.k.a. Forgejo) is one example that comes to mind, but I'm sure there are many others.
• nottorp 9mo ago
  > with a single and simple set of rules that will apply seamlessly all over our Union For one, I'm worried about what simple means. Likely something that will not make it as cheap to operate in every EU country, but make it as expensive to do that. Also, whatever the EU commission/council/whatever they call themselves in order to not call themselves government decides has to be translated into local legislation by all member countries. So it will get twisted in 27 different ways, some of them incompatible. Also 9 of the 27 will take years to finish the process.
  • rsynnott 9mo ago
    > For one, I'm worried about what simple means. Likely something that will not make it as cheap to operate in every EU country, but make it as expensive to do that. I mean, if that's the case, no-one will use that structure. In general, having a single set of rules makes things cheaper. That is the whole basis of standardisation. > Also 9 of the 27 will take years to finish the process. You're thinking of directives. I'd assume this will be a regulation (quick guide to the differences here: https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/law/types-legislation_en https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/law... )
    • nottorp 9mo ago
      > quick guide to the differences here They're trying so hard to not call themselves a government that they renamed everything so it doesn't sound like what a government does. Maybe they should start with fixing that... For the record i am in the EU and I think the EU is generally a good thing. Doesn't mean the "commisioners/ministers/whatever" couldn't use a few kicks to bring them more down to earth.
      • rsynnott 9mo ago
        Remember the attempted EU constitution? They discovered at that point that looking too much like a government made the nationalists _very_ upset, so it was recast as the Lisbon treaty (not a constitution, we promise!). A lot of the can't-believe-it's-not-a-government stuff stems from that debacle.
• pu_pe 9mo ago
  Excellent idea. The rules should be the same throughout Europe. However, on the official site (https://www.eu-inc.org/ https://www.eu-inc.org/) I see the following line: Local taxes & employment I guess there is hardly any incentive to open a company in, say, Sweden vs Ireland then?
• bryanrasmussen 9mo ago
  I mean, Denmark used to have LLC's and outlawed them some years ago (a thing that my accountant said, paraphrasing "look at all these thieving lawyers getting rich"), so this will mean that LLC's would be allowed again in Denmark? It seems somehow untrustworthy this >Our entrepreneurs, the innovative companies, will be able to register a company in any Member State within 48 hours – fully online. which sounds like not everyone will be allowed to do this? or is it "our" like European is our.
• kvgr 9mo ago
  Local Taxes… the issue with EU is the taxes and cost of labour.
  • hanspagel 9mo ago
    If I understand correctly, the plan is to add a virtual state to address this.
  • mrtksn 9mo ago
    That's not the issue. If your business is dependent on slave labor and offloading your externalities on the society to make a profit it simply means your business should not exist. Its evident that labor cost and taxes are not excessive in EU by the reality of existence of plenty of businesses in a healthy society. What doesn't exist in EU is the "tech" business, and the tech doesn't have margins too slim to employ people and pay taxes. On the contrary, the margins are fat. The reason that the tech sector isn't a large one in EU is that its easy to incorporate in USA and access the full EU market from there instead of incorporating in some small EU country and deal with their bureaucracy and internal border limitations. The 28th regime and the EU-INC is to address exactly that. If the USA-EU relations deteriorate enough, it will also create instant trillion Euros market. Just look at the quarterly reports of US tech giants, they generate EU revenues that are not that behind the US revenues. For Apple thats %60 of the US revenue, or ~110B$ for the last quarter and that's happening despite Apple having a much smaller market share in EU. A full blown conflict between US-EU will be a huge opportunity to replicate the US tech sector in EU and having an EU-INC will be the necessary facilitator that is currently missing when compared with the landscape in USA.
    • ExoticPearTree 9mo ago
      > If your business is dependent on slave labor There is no such thing as slave labor in the tech sector. Some countries offer a lower barrier to entry than others. The EU has a very high barrier to entry when it comes to taxation. You can believe what you want, but I think every country's goal is to reduce taxation as much as possible for companies and for people. Unfortunately, the current in the EU is to keep raising them and give state more and more monopoly on services.
• sam_lowry_ 9mo ago
  EU's strength is in diversity, and von der Leyen is set on killing that. US tech companies won not because EU is diverse, but because they had access to more money and could undermine all competition by dumping prices. Even before Google, there was Microsoft and it's tacit acceptance of "piracy".
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    > EU's strength is in diversity, and von der Leyen is set on killing that. I feel like it's important to specify "diversity" and not just use it as a catch-all. I don't believe the strength of the EU is in diversity of how companies are implemented and run across the union, it's the diversity of culture, mindset and people that is the strength, and that can be represented inside companies, even if the way of setting up, running and investing in companies would be the same across the union.
    • sam_lowry_ 9mo ago
      Diversity of rules also. And a sane amount of inefficiency and contradictions. That's how we will build a truly resilient system. Don't forget that the most efficient state was the Third Reich, closely followed by the Soviet Union.
• traceroute66 9mo ago
  There is a search box at the bottom of every HN page ;) Already being discussed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46703877 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46703877
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    The way I check for duplicates is to just try to submit it. If it's a duplicate, it'll count as an upvote to the existing one, otherwise I end up submitting it, it's a win-win :) I too tried to submit eu-inc.org yesterday I think, but was then redirected to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46696097 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46696097 Seems someone else might have the same workflow, and the de-dup detector let it through for whatever reason.
  • deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  • nhatcher 9mo ago
    I submitted that link. In all fairness the link in this post is more accurate. I'm glad to see people are interested. Let's see where all this goes.
• petcat 9mo ago
  I always heard that the issue with startup investment in Europe was the general lack of capital investors willing to take Hail Mary risks on founders with a wild idea and maybe little experience. The market is far too risk-averse for a grassroots early-stage startup scene. How would this organization address that fundamental psychological block?
  • throwaway132448 9mo ago
    This is basically just a meme at this point.
  • closewith 9mo ago
    I think a big issue is that Europeans who want to invest in early stage VC do so in the States, because everything is geared towards entrepreneurial success there. Changing the business environment across the EU is necessary but definitely not sufficient to kick start the VC-backed startup scene in the EU.
    • throwaway132448 9mo ago
      I think the big issue is that this is what Americans want to believe because it reinforces their exceptionalism. And of course there are Europeans who would choose to believe it because it absolves them of failure.
    • pornel 9mo ago
      It used to be the same for founders. If you wanted to raise, you went to SV. SV used to be the Schelling point for funding.
    • embedding-shape 9mo ago
      > big issue is that Europeans who want to invest in early stage VC do so in the States I haven't seen that personally, most of the VCs I've worked with here in Europe who live here in Europe, invest in European companies. Most of them invest in companies in the same country they live in, because it's a bit of a hassle to invest in companies from other countries currently (hoping that EU-INC makes that easier), but none of them regularly invest in US companies.
• veltas 9mo ago
  It says "Pan-European" everywhere, but would this include the UK?
  • deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  • enedil 9mo ago
    It says "Pan-European" everywhere, but would this include Belarus?
    • veltas 9mo ago
      That's what "Pan-European" would imply, actually. Similar to what "Pan-American" means for the Americas.
  • graemep 9mo ago
    Its obviously EU - so not the UK, or Norway or Switzerland or Russia... I agree it is Eu-wide or pan-EU rather than pan European. Its probably not going to solve the problems it sets out to given all the differences between EU countries legal systems, tax, regulation etc.
    • deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    • veltas 9mo ago
      It's not obvious to me at all, that's why I asked, precisely because of the use of "pan-European".
    • eclat 9mo ago
      EEA applicability might be less obvious than you imply however.
      • graemep 9mo ago
        The integrated taxes would be a very big step for the EEA, so would common company law and governance for these entities. That said I think the headline proposal (single entity type and single registrar) is not important. The UK and (AFAIK) the US have few practical difficulties with multiple registrars and variations between jurisdictions.
• euboink 9mo ago
  [flagged]
• Klaster_1 9mo ago
  Glad to finally see 28th getting more traction, I was thinking about it just the other day. Personally, I'd love for EU to introduce more institutions that cut at member state sovereignty in favor of tighter integration. What comes to mind immediately is a 28th regime for employment and personal taxes, so companies don't have to resort to workarounds like employee of record or fake "contractors". It seems that EU late binds making big decisions until all options collapse, current events will probably result in more push for federalization overall.
• neximo64 9mo ago
  Can't work legally speaking. There has to be a single sponsoring member state. Just sadly how the EU is designed. The only way would be to copy it individually so it is the same in each member state which breaks the purpose of it.
  • riffraff 9mo ago
    this proposal exists under the umbrella of the 28th regime[0] idea, as per their FAQ. Which.. would be a good idea, but I am not holding my breath for it to happen in the next 10 years. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/28th_regime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/28th_regime
  • dathinab 9mo ago
    this isn't fully true yes you company needs to be rooted in a specific country, and sure moving company roots between countries is still not always trivial (anti capital flight laws are a thing). But that isn't really in conflict with a EU INC per-se. I mean they do point out that it will have > Local taxes & employment and this isn't in conflict with - the same business form being available in all EU members - central EU registry - Standardized investment documents ( * this is only investment documents, not e.g. tax documents) - Standardized EU-wide stock options - For every founder ( * with some limits) Like there are already some "EU level" business models, e.g. you company can operate as a Societas Europaea (SE). Now a SE is for other use-cases so not really the same at all (it's more like the EU version of a German GmbH), but it shows that things "in that direction" are very much viable.
    • pjc50 9mo ago
      > anti capital flight laws are a thing Hmm - any examples of this applying intra-EU? That feels like a violation of the free movement of banking services.
      • dathinab 9mo ago
        > violation of the free movement of banking services Isn't the same as freely moving the jurisdiction under which a company exist. It also mostly applies to cash/legal tender but most wealthy peoples wealth is only in small amounts in cash. Technically relevant laws are also often not classified as "capital flight" laws per-se, but are very close to it. E.g. in Germany there is a "Wegzugsteuer" (~moving away from Germany Tax), which only applies to "hidden/unrealized reserves". When you leave Germany (~for good, kinda, it's complicated) the tax treats them as if you sold them, i.e. you have to any tax you would have to pay if you had sold them. "Hidden reserves" include stuff like you owning more then 1% of a company, certain investment founds, crypto currency, etc.. So while it's not a capital flight law as it doesn't affect cash (weather digital or physical) it is very similar to it. (clarifications: yes in EU crypto currency is not a legal tender, i.e. it's treated more like gold. You still can use them to buy things as you can buy things based on an exchange of goods if all involved parties agree to it. Similar for a lot of the things covered by the law it's possible to sell them for very low taxes under the right circumstances, so if you don't move very spontaneously you have a lot of ways to largely reduce this tax.)
• miyuru 9mo ago
  I am also looking for a stripe atlas alternative. Having a EU based one will be great. previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25006716 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25006716
  • 3rodents 9mo ago
    Germany is your problem. If you’re open to looking outside Germany, there are many options. You can open a U.K. company same day, an Estonian company with e-residency in a couple of days. Germany is uniquely nightmarish.
    • ExpertAdvisor01 9mo ago
      That's not good advice . If he lives in Germany he should incorporate a German company otherwise he will run into big Issues .
  • yafra7 9mo ago
    It's not EU wide but in France we have Legalplace (https://www.legalplace.fr/ https://www.legalplace.fr/) to create a company online quickly.
  • eclat 9mo ago
    The problem isn’t incorporation - it’s having accountants in your jurisdiction familiar with the structure. You can incorporate in the UK for £50 instantly but you might have trouble finding an accountant in Italy that is willing to sort your accounts out.
  • ExpertAdvisor01 9mo ago
    It's never an good idea especially in an EU country to incorporate outside your personal jurisdiction especially as single founder.
• notpushkin 9mo ago
  So, a privately held SE? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea
  • layer8 9mo ago
    Maybe read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea#Formation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea#Formation.
• dbuxton 9mo ago
  Of all the challenges you face as a startup, the legal entity you choose is possibly the least consequential. Just choose a jurisdiction where investors understand how the legals work (Delaware C-corp, UK Ltd is OK too) and there's a finite administrative burden and/or commoditized tooling in place to help you handle it. Now, that may not work in all jurisdictions for reasons of local taxation etc (and you'll have to work out payroll tax, benefits etc) but that's almost never anything to do with the legal entity type!
  • arka2147483647 9mo ago
    > Delaware C-corp, UK Ltd is OK too Neither of which is in EU, which is exactly the point. Should be an EU one which is usable...
    • veltas 9mo ago
      The title says "One Europe" and "Pan-European".
      • arka2147483647 9mo ago
        This is a EU initiative. Confusingly, EU is often called Europe in spoken/non-official speech. Sort of the same way it is said that Washington does something, when it is the US gov doing something.
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    > investors understand how the legals work (Delaware C-corp, UK Ltd is OK too) Man, at least read the title of the submission, even if you're not gonna be bothered reading the contents. This is clearly about EU, incorporating in either of those two places would defeat the entire purpose :) > the legal entity you choose is possibly the least consequential I think this is a bit of the goal with EU-INC, so people don't have to think about it as much. Right now, if you're multinational, you really have to be careful what country you use as your base. Hopefully, with something like this, in the future, you can also include a "EU-INC" in there, and advice people to just go with the simplest way. I think that's the dream at least.
• M2Ys4U 9mo ago
  >The ultimate aim is to create a new truly European company structure. We call it EU Inc., with a single and simple set of rules that will apply seamlessly all over our Union. I hope this is an indication that the Commission proposal will be for a Regulation and not a Directive. I still don't understand why it's been such a contentious decision to pick between the two.
• fkarg 9mo ago
  This would help a lot. Many European startups are strongly local (also in talent search), because while moving is simple, share distribution and ownership structures are anything but, and investors usually don't want to bother with local regulation on that they don't even know.
• carlosjobim 9mo ago
  There is nothing hindering European startups to raise money from all over Europe. Except that Europeans hate to invest in real businesses and love investing in real estate. American startups and businesses get investor money from all over the world, including from Europe. Willingness to invest in startups depends on the downstream of willingness to invest in business in general. If venture capital investors know that there's a lot of money willing to invest after the startup phase, then they are willing to take more risks. And so on for every phase of investors, until you reach big institutional investors like retirement funds. It looks like the proponents here have fallen into the classic European thinking: "Let's talk and make papers to make our wishes become true". Instead of trying to understand reality and why things are the way they are. They should ask themselves why any European investor would want to invest in a European startup instead of in an American startup. They should ask themselves why European entrepreneurs should create their startup in Europe instead of in America. When they have the answers to those questions they know what solutions to propose. My experience doing business in and with America has been nothing but fantastic. They have all the infrastructure and all the culture to help entrepreneurs and anybody who wants to do business. They want to do business as well. Need a credit card processor? Need an LLC? Need a bank account? Need a business loan? It's easy, the USA is fucking open for business. In Europe it is hostility mostly all the way, from banks to regulators to governments, and so on. The easy part is registering a company, which is just as swift in Europe as it is in the USA. But apart from that you won't find any friends in the process. Even if you're European. Even in the country and the city you were born in. Americans love new things and new ideas and see them as opportunities. Europeans see them as threats. And that is mirrored everywhere you turn. You might agree with the European perspective in a society-wide perspective, but for startup businesses the American mindset fits much better.
  • thinkindie 9mo ago
    There might be a cultural component, but as a matter of fact if you want to expand to other countries within Europe you will have to create a local entity or hire through an EOR. EU-inc will solve this.
  • pjc50 9mo ago
    > They should ask themselves why European entrepreneurs should create their startup in Europe instead of in America. What if the founders can't get a visa? The assumption that the world is flat, trade is free, and people can just be anywhere - globalization - may not hold true for much longer.
• shevy-java 9mo ago
  In principle this is a good idea. In practice ... there is always so much bureaucracy and inertia. I don't think the current EU model works well. I also don't think a copy/paste USA 2.0 works either, yet this seems to be the primary objective by the people in Brussels (that is, = politicians, not all folks in Brussels of course). There is such a huge disconnect between what people such as Leyen babble, and what people want or need or may want. And a lack of decision-making power too. So I think most of those projects will end in failure. Personally I think an EU model will only work when the agendas are NOT unified, because unification leads to disagreements. You can already see this happening in regards to politics or war - some countries want to, oddly enough, serve Russia. That may be a fine decision for a state, but if other states push for another approach, you have a problem here. Now there are discussions to simply isolate the "non-compliant" states, but this is a bad approach since it will again lead to fragmentation and more people being angry at Brussels here. So this is a failing model. Splitting up things into separate aspects will also, of course, lead to more bureaucracy, but states would more easily form a specific opinion and align towards that, without being handicapped by other states that don't want to go that route. I don't see any other way for this to work. The EU in its present form is just setup for failure - the current model simply does not work, and the proposed new model is even worse in many ways e. g. 2/3 majority basically means that the big states will dominate the small ones. For instance, if Germany and France want to go to war against Russia (let's assume this were the case), then they'd have to send troops to the front - and they are unwilling to do so. So other states are more likely to be threatened. That model not only does not work but is also unfair. Of course legal or taxation models are different to war, but the different countries have different wealth and opportunities, so a one-size-fits-all also can not possibly work. We saw this with the EURO where weaker countries struggle permanently. The whole EU needs to be completely re-designed - and this is not going to happen due to inertia alone.
• atmosx 9mo ago
  IMO this is half-measures. You wanna a strong EU? Merge the salaries and living standards from the north the south and west to east. Germans workers shouldn't blackmailed by auto-motive companies leaving for Poland unless they accept smaller salaries and vice-versa polish workers shouldn't emigrate to Germany to find a decent salary, pension, etc. Flat out these social differences and you'll have the social support you need to fight and/or collaborate as equal with everyone else. It's very simple. ps. I'm not saying everybody should stay "put". But ppl shouldn't be migrating within the EU for these reasons. That was the initial goal anyway, then they started celebrating things that no one in the EU cares about as if it's something that matters (i.e. Apple vs EU dispute over the charger...)
  • elric 9mo ago
    > It's very simple. Is it? I doubt it. There isn't a large country on earth where the salaries don't differ across regions.
    • tiborsaas 9mo ago
      It's probably the most complex and impossible to solve take, it's not even true in the US or any other place in the world. It doesn't even work in a single country for the simple reason that governments have very different ideas how to redistribute taxes. If one country can't do it well, how could the EU?
  • pjc50 9mo ago
    This is the least simple thing. Countries aren't even flattened out within themselves, in the EU or US.
  • troupo 9mo ago
    Ah yes. The simple thing of fixing all societal issues.
  • blitzar 9mo ago
    You wanna a strong US? Merge the salaries and living standards from New York to Flint Michigan. Didn't think so.
• academia_hack 9mo ago
  It's inordinately difficult and expensive to start an LLC or SA in some EU countries. It's even difficult and expensive to _stop_ an LLC and dissolve it. Huge amount of risk and cost on founders and a huge distraction from running a business. I think that EU-Inc _could_ be an improvement, but it needs to avoid the committee laundry list of ideas/requirements/form fields that plagues the EU startup ecosystem. My worry is that the end result will require notarized declarations of honour, financial plans stretching decades into the future, 30 page business plan documents, reams of corporate governance documents, and tons of other nonsense to protect against the perceived risk that someone who failed at starting a business once fails a second time. There needs to be UX requirements on the process from day one against which the end result is judged. (E.g. "a company should be able to register in x days", "a complete application should be no longer than y pages", "application costs should be less than z euros").
  • Daniel_sk 9mo ago
    Dissolving an LLC is a in ideal case a multi month process. It's often easier and cheaper to just keep the LLC as zombie instead of trying to dissolve it.
  • egorfine 9mo ago
    > a company should be able to register in x days Which EU bureaucrats will fully pass by treating this as "a company should be able to register in x days once the full set of documents has been collected".
    • moritzwarhier 9mo ago
      Companies are treated like persons legally and while I'm sure there is too much bureaucracy in many places, I'm also sure that there are important documents that should be required. For example to make sure that a company can be held responsible when it breaks the law. There are already enough loopholes to disconnect legal responsibility from profit-taking, and not every company is benign. Sure, if the documents cannot be acquired in X days for other reasons, that would undermine the tagline. But I don't think that's the main risk. Let's not forget that some requirements make sense. In Germany, the government recently decided that some minor applications to local governments must be answered within X days or else are automatically approved. But "minor" is important here... great for a small business that applies for a permit to renovate there outdoor seatings or whatever. I wouldn't want for company foundings to be auto-approved without submitting the legally required documents.
• Kim_Bruning 9mo ago
  Yes please! I tripped over this recently. It's a bigger deal than it might seem. You'd be surprised at some of the weird things that can happen in the current systems in the EU if you try to do business across borders. Like: your company suddenly automatically becoming deregistered, or you might get a sudden huge tax bill, or you might even inadvertently get charged with fraud. Hasn't happened so far knock on wood, but it's a lot more work to stay on the light side than you'd really like. This is all because the national systems still sort of assume that you'll live and work and stay inside one EU country. You end up constantly fitting square administrative pegs into regulatory round holes. A lot of the EU's promise is actually theoretical without a proper pan european legal entity.
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    > A lot of the EU's promise is actually theoretical without a proper pan european legal entity. Yeah, I feel a bit the same way. Just to make it clear to random passerby's, this is exactly what the proposed EU-INC is for, to create this "pan european legal entity", in case it wasn't clear from the context. I initially asked myself "But that's exactly what it is..." so maybe others end up thinking the same :)
  • kvgr 9mo ago
    This doesnt fix the issue with taxation right? You would stull have to figure out where to pay taxes if you have customers from different countries.
    • embedding-shape 9mo ago
      What issue? VAT is paid by the user (collected and remitted by you) and differs by country (used to be hassle, easy today), but the taxes you pay in your country for your company is the same regardless of where the users who paid you are based (assuming there isn't something country-specific about that), it's more about where your company is tax-resident. Unless there are permanent-establishment issues, withholding taxes, or other country-specific digital tax regimes, where your users are based shouldn't affect how/what taxes you pay. Otherwise, if you don't have any employees or presence in other EU countries and only doing digital services B2C, you shouldn't have to do anything specific about the taxes you pay.
• seydor 9mo ago
  I would like to see the details on this. The EU has alredy jurisdictions that make it "too easy" to run a company and others that make it exceedingly difficult, and the two are in competition. It's one thing to start a company in cyprus, another to start in Germany. TBH I doubt it's going to be possible with current status. Where will an EU-inc be based, Luxembourg? and how would that be different from any other Lux company. But maybe we could at least have some business standards that will be enforced all over the EU. It says "Local taxes & employment" , which also means local laws, which means 27 laws for every little thing. I thought they were going to address that
  • jonathanstrange 9mo ago
    I'd also like to see the details, it seems to be a difficult undertaking but something the EU really needs. As an example, when I incorporate a company outside of Portugal then the tax authority can classify it as a CFC (controlled foreign company) and tax it very high, and it can lead to double taxation. AFAIK, the rules are quite complex. A EU-wide registry should prevent that, but that might require a EU-wide harmonization of 27 tax systems (plus potential associated countries like Switzerland and the UK).
  • eclat 9mo ago
    It’s the 28th regime. Look up societas europaea.
• egorfine 9mo ago
  > Local taxes & employment Completely and totally defeats the purpose.
• GardenLetter27 9mo ago
  Unfortunately this does not override employment and tax laws - so you still cannot hire someone as an FTE in Paris, from a startup in Berlin for example (without them being a freelancer, or you opening a payroll / tax office in France). But hopefully we can move towards that - standardised taxation (especially VAT and corporation tax would help massively here), the abolition of notaries, standardised requirements for document certification, and EU-wide digital ID so no need to fly in and sign in person.
  • gpjanik 9mo ago
    You can, Deel etc. make this pretty easy.
    • tadzik_ 9mo ago
      Deel is one of the reasons why my policy for working for foreign companies is "B2B or I'm fucking off". Everyone I know (employees/contractors using it, not the other side) who went for it hated and regretted it. Singling out Deel because you brought it up (and I ragequit after reading their "deel" and consulting it with a local lawyer), but I have the exact same story for every employer of record I've been involved with here in EU, and I don't know a single person who's been happy with them either (again, all employees/contractors). I understand that it's comfortable and convenient for the employer (presumably, or at least the perspective of outsourcing this and reducing liability outweighs everything else), but these companies absolutely do not know what they're doing wrt local laws.
    • colinb 9mo ago
      How certain are you of this? I only have anecdata, but when I tried to use a 3rd party agency to hire someone in France, from Ireland I got the process through several layers of management, up to and including the CEO and COO of my American employer, and HR, and legal counsel, only to be warned away in the most emphatic terms by external counsel. They told us of the risk of large fines and jail time in France for executives of companies doing this. As I said, anecdotal, and a few years old.
      • 9mo ago
• benimar 9mo ago
  I scrolled it high level but it does not look to me like this is solving any real problem and probably its creating new ones. Sure if you are cash strapped startup and can't afford getting a tax advice or an investor that does not want to pay for a due diligence this could save some money on paper. Most of the supposed benefit of this pan European legal entity seems problem that has been already solved in the real world. The same type of entity works more or less the same through out of Europe with mostly marginal difference, and sounds more like an excuse than anything. Of course each jurisdiction has is own jurisprudence which make the landscape more complex, but once you get a new type of "inc" you are going to get new jurisprudence, only that in this case you are going to be a lot of jurisdictions conflicts and potentially you might have to take into account multi-jurisdictions jurisprudence making everything even more complex. Also I would remove as second point an "EU-central registry", it's not exactly a killer feature considering that all the European registries are currently accessible from a single web page already.
• krisknez 9mo ago
  I’m from Croatia, and starting and running a company here is expensive. Estonia makes it much easier, so you might think: why not open a company in Estonia? But here is a problem: If your clients are in Croatia and you have a Croatian company, you don’t have to charge VAT if you earn under 60k per year. But if your company is in Estonia, you are required to charge VAT even if you earn under 60k.
  • eclat 9mo ago
    Estonian fiscal law doesn’t apply if your company operates from Croatia. The only reason you can’t do this in practice is because you’ll have a hard time finding a Croatian accountant willing to work with your Estonian company. That’s something EU-inc aims to address.
  • ExpertAdvisor01 9mo ago
    Even if you incorporate in Estonia it wouldn't change anything . Because the company would still be considered tax resident in Croatia .
  • mmunj 9mo ago
    >But if your company is in Estonia, you are required to charge VAT even if you earn under 60k. Is this not simply because companies in Estonia enter VAT at 40k per year (rather than 60k)? (and IIRC Croatia was also at 40k a year ago, now is at 60k with some politicians trying to raise the entry to 100k)
    • alibarber 9mo ago
      If the clients are cross border - there is no threshold, you have to charge the VAT rate of the country in which they are located from the start.
• matesz 9mo ago
  My Dear German friends, please accept that EU-inc is a massive boost for EU competitiveness. Continuing to block progress here only proves that the EU is good at making promises on paper but fails to deliver real change. The reason this "28th regime" actually works—and bypasses the previous vetos — is that it’s optional. It doesn’t try to force Germany to change its local GmbH laws or kill the notary system overnight. Instead, it creates a parallel, voluntary path. Berlin doesn't have to give up its red tape for local shops, but they have to let a "Unified European Company" exist alongside them. If we let national pride or local bureaucracy stop this again, we are essentially telling our best founders to leave for the US. Let’s stop protecting red tape and start protecting our future.
  • inanothertime 9mo ago
    National sovereignty is not national pride. Paying company taxes to the 28th regime evicts tax contributions to the company's home nation. Massive German tax money is already today used for non-national interests. EU-inc makes this only worse.
    • jcattle 9mo ago
      National sovereignty in Europe is not possible without international collaboration.
    • tietjens 9mo ago
      > Massive German tax money is already today used for non-national interests. Please elaborate. You're complaining that DE tax funds go to the EU? Very curious what you're talking about and your rational.
      • sevenzero 9mo ago
        It's one of the idiotic "our tax money is spent for bicycle lanes in foreign countries" mindsets many right wingers share in Germany.
        • 9mo ago
• odiroot 9mo ago
  I'm skeptical. At least Germanic countries love their bureaucracy. It's an etatism thing.
• oellegaard 9mo ago
  I have seen promotion of this idea multiple times but every time I read about it I fail to understand the gains. I’m based in Denmark and have incorporated multiple companies. It is very easy and digital and costs very little, even if you get a lawyer to do it for you. Maybe the issue is a few member states that are behind on digitalization? In my experience EU is better at setting the guidelines and then the member states can implement the details themselves. When they try to push things it becomes bureaucratic - just look at the cookie law and GDPR. Both great ideas but overly complicated.
  • tietjens 9mo ago
    Have you started a company that took investment from funds located in other countries within the EU? That is the main focus of this idea. Lowering the barrier to investing in startups across EU nation states. Austrian company and you want to take investment from a venture fund in X country? It'll get complicated very fast. That's part of what this trying to fix and make simple.
    • whizzter 9mo ago
      I think starting and investing per-se really isn't the major issue for some time (at least in Sweden and probably Denmark), we've gotten many small business friendly laws over the past 15-20 years. At the same time there are many discrepancies that makes it hard for companies from one country to mesh with companies from another country. Law tradition (Napoleonic, German or Nordic), tax rules (German rules were (are?) notorious for their complexity,etc. , then there's certain laws such as the Finnish money gathering law that can be a problem for very early stage development ( https://solhsa.com/wishlist.html https://solhsa.com/wishlist.html ). All the above creates friction, and if EU-inc would follow German rules, I'd rather just stay with a Swedish company because.. Luckily the EU has harmonized things so a startup in one country can mostly work within local rules as long as we make sure to distribute earnings from different countries correctly. The trickier part is forming bonds, such as for investor and/or startup protection for across-border investments when one wants to grow, various scams over the years has played out differently in various countries so those kinds of laws could be quite an issue outside of the stock market.
• titaniumrain 9mo ago
  [flagged]
• _el1s7 9mo ago
  This is good, but don't think it will change much. The EU suffers from bureaucracy and disparate rules for each country, which is a pain in the ass for startups, it really needs unification on taxes, and less rules.
• jongjong 9mo ago
  [flagged]
• ta20240528 9mo ago
  Its not that difficult to setup a company in Europe. Tedious but not impossible. What's really difficult is setting up a compnay and opening a bank account in the company's name from abroad.
• deadbabe 9mo ago
  IMO Europe will lose its soul if it tries to be too competitive. Once it becomes too easy to start a business or raise capital, it becomes easy to spiral into workaholism. Gone will be the days of month long holidays and leisurely pace.
• jsumrall 9mo ago
  I wonder who owns this eu-inc.org website and is selling the merch. In the ToS it states: >These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of California
  • joelthelion 9mo ago
    Someone in Silicon Valley really wants this to happen :-)
  • 1337biz 9mo ago
    It is by some guy on X who memed about the EU Inc for a long time.
  • jcattle 9mo ago
    The FAQ states: > Imprint: eu-inc.org, Factory Lisbon, Av. Infante Dom Henrique 143, 1950-406 Lisboa, Portugal
    • direwolf20 9mo ago
      Which is odd, because Germany is the country that requires the "imprint", and it absolutely must be labelled "impressum" and not "imprint".
      • jcattle 9mo ago
        Can you point to any law which states that it has to be Impressum? Could not find anything and I doubt that this naming is a law. Also: Germany is by far not the only country which requires a sort of imprint.
  • dewey 9mo ago
    One of them is https://klinger.io https://klinger.io who has been lobbying and working on this EU Inc topic for a while if you follow him on Linkedin.
  • patrickmcnamara 9mo ago
    Yeah, I think there is some confusion in this thread. eu-inc.org isn't an official source or anything, though von der Leyen did say "EU Inc" in her speech at Davos. The European Parliament specifically mentioned not liking "incorporated" because it was American terminology preferring "Societas Europaea Unificata" instead which is pretty funny.
• c7b 9mo ago
  Isn't there already the SE (Societas Europaea) [0]? How does this differ? Would be good to address in the FAQ. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea
  • pell 9mo ago
    The SE has a minimum capital requirement of 120k € so is not within reach for most people. I think this EU-Inc would be a simple structure with a lower threshold. I am absolutely for it. There are too many different types of company structures in the individual EU countries and they don’t work well when you move and come with all sorts of different risks. Obviously many are also just cumbersome to start and dissolve. You could start five US LLCs within ten minutes of filling out some online forms whereas to start one European entity depending on the country you might have to make a notary appointment, register with the national registry and the tax authority. I think there’s a lot of room for improvement which can take days to weeks.
  • _petronius 9mo ago
    Per the Wikipedia article, an SE cannot be incorporated directly. It must be created out of one or more national, public (!) companies already formed under the law of a member state.
• kvgr 9mo ago
  This + abolish VAT. The amount of money stolen in VAT scams is jn bilions of euros.
  • peterspath 9mo ago
    This + only pay taxes where the company is founded, not where you live at that moment in time. That's what the personal income tax is for.. and all the other taxes payed by the individual. That way countries can compete in being the best environment for companies.
    • kvgr 9mo ago
      Yes please. The whole centre of interest. Form company in Estonia, move yourself to Spain. But hey lets tax the company in spain :D
      • deleted 9mo ago
        [deleted]
    • scirob 9mo ago
      yea so annoying, and the ambiguity with which the center of business is decided...
    • ExpertAdvisor01 9mo ago
      That's the dumbest stuff I've heard. This way you avoid incredibly huge amounts of taxes. There is a reason why cfc rules found their way into atad.
      • kvgr 9mo ago
        Yes the reason is that the countries cant compete on business infrastructure and taxes. It is basically a cartel.
• apexalpha 9mo ago
  As a Dutch person I never understood this push until someone told me (and this is true in 2026!!!) that if you open a LLC (Gmbh?) in Germany you have to physically go to the notary and have a person READ OUT all the statutes to you. The whole process including banks accounts etc... can apparently take months in total. Personally I would not create "EU-INC" but just make all local entities legal in every country. Then countries could compete to be the best system to attract companies and entrepreneurs.
  • _petronius 9mo ago
    This is true of all contract notarization in Germany (even when buying a house, jesus that is a slog), and although it is a bendy-banana level silly thing that people focus on, isn't actually the biggest problem in company founding here. MUCH more problematic is unfavorable tax rules making equity compensation difficult, capital requirements, legal/notary fees, and an investor class that is notoriously skittish. If you could solve all those problems and still had to go listen to the Notar recite the contract in a monotone, it would be a worth trade.
    • askonomm 9mo ago
      That's crazy. Notarization in Estonia can be done entirely online using a digital signature, just like everything else here is done (including voting, getting married, getting divorced, filing taxes, opening/closing a company, etc). From all I hear Germany is still stuck in the 90s for some reason.
      • tietjens 9mo ago
        90s is charitable. Most important thing here is that nothing changes. Everything new is considered suspicious.
        • askonomm 9mo ago
          The weird thing is that, at least as an Estonian, I would've never expected this from Germany. Italy, Spain? Sure. Germany? That just feels weird.
• patates 9mo ago
  Can you guys please somehow involve Switzerland too? I'm thinkng about moving there and my German employer is like, "No! Even France would be extremely hard, Switzerland is plain impossible for payroll!". Dude come on, I know they're not in the EU but like, there it feels like practically the same country if you don't mind the loveable accent and the crazy prices in another currency :)
  • hvb2 9mo ago
    Before you move there, for fun, look into what it would take to buy a house there :)
    • patates 9mo ago
      It's impossible here, triple impossible there, so still the same price from my perspective.
• thelastgallon 9mo ago
  Doesn't Estonia already offer something similar?
  • ExpertAdvisor01 9mo ago
    No they don't. The most similar thing would be a SE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea
• xinayder 9mo ago
  Er, what exactly is this? It's not mentioned anywhere for laypeople like me. Perhaps they should focus on explaining what this project is, before asking for people to spread awareness. How can you spread awareness about something you don't even know what it is?
  • tggycom 9mo ago
    There is a pretty good TL;DR on their "In-Depth Proposal" site: https://proposal.eu-inc.org/TL-DR-14d076fd79c581959325c8e52d0ff388 https://proposal.eu-inc.org/TL-DR-14d076fd79c581959325c8e52d...
    • xinayder 9mo ago
      Thanks, but from a quick glance I couldn't find it on the homepage. Also, it's a Notion document, they could instead just write all of these points on their landing page? It reveals too much that this is actually done by amateurs. Heck, even the most basic business courses I took at a European uni show that this is NOT how you want to attract potential customers or investors.
      • layer8 9mo ago
        > couldn't find it on the homepage It’s the first link on the home page (“in-detail proposal”). One would presume anyone interested in what EU-INC is to read the first section titled “WHAT IS EU–INC”.
  • Archelaos 9mo ago
    I agree. It looks very unprofessional. No contact adress. No representative person. No explanation of the acronym "EU-INC". Big buzzwords, visions, clichés and self congratulation.
    • solaire_oa 9mo ago
      Which isn't to say that "making commerce cheaper in Europe" isn't a worthwhile goal, it is- but at face value this attempt looks comically inept. "We wrote an email to a politician! Progress due any moment! Like and share!" Doing the insufferable, thankless work of mitigating the commercial choke-points of bureaucracy on a Continental scale makes this effort's failure a forgone conclusion. I would take the attempt more seriously if the individuals tried to make their own country more commerce-friendly, rather than all of Europe. Even so, points for trying something- anything- and raising "awareness".
• storus 9mo ago
  OK, but how is this going to be taxed? That's where the problem is. Maybe it will be cheaper to incorporate but then what, are individual countries going to lose on their expected taxes?
• lava_pidgeon 9mo ago
  Can some people share why there is a need for incorparation on European level? Lobbyist fighting for it so but I don't get the problems to solve it.
• goldenarm 9mo ago
  @dang This post is an Ad for unofficial merch, profiting from an ongoing news story. Should we change the URL ? https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/speech_26_150 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/speech... https://tech.eu/2026/01/20/the-european-commission-launches-eu-inc-the-long-awaited-28th-regime-for-startups/ https://tech.eu/2026/01/20/the-european-commission-launches-...
  • embedding-shape 9mo ago
    This submission originally did link to https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/speech_26_150 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/speech..., but was later changed to this. Or two submissions (one for each URL) was linked/merged. But something used to link to the press release rather than this website, FWIW. Also, about reducing it down to "an Ad for unofficial merch", isn't this literally the grassroot movement that led to what was announced today? Or am I getting the relationship wrong? The domain in question was registered 2024-10-09.
    • goldenarm 9mo ago
      [deleted]
      • embedding-shape 9mo ago
        > The grassroot movement is from https://proposal.eu-inc.org https://proposal.eu-inc.org So correct me if I had way too little coffee, but that subdomain is under eu-inc.org meaning eu-inc.org is in fact the grassroot movement then? I don't understand the complaint, seems to be the right people? You're mad about that they also sell hats?
        • goldenarm 9mo ago
          Apologies, misred that part, but I maintain the rest of my argument. This is unofficial, pushing for merch, 5 lines of info page, and should not have replaced a post about more detailed news reports.
• psychoslave 9mo ago
  Note we already have European Cooperative Society (SCE), but of course its not going to make a capitalist/shareholder fond mindset really appealed. https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/proximity-and-social-economy/social-economy-eu/cooperatives/european-cooperative-society-sce_en https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/proximity...
• sunshine-o 9mo ago
  Anybody get a xkcd 927 [0] feel here? Also to move forward maybe it is time to stop using words like "innovation", "ecosystem" and "startups" all over because they seem to have lost their meaning over time. Most of Europe have been screaming those buzzwords, invested a lot of money and tinkered its bureaucracy to enable them for at least 25 years. With obviously very little results. So maybe it is time to think out of the box. Maybe the real "ecosystem" includes the people cleaning the toilets, the farmers growing potatoes and the electricians. Those people are even more crushed by the bureaucracy. Maybe lifting up everybody is the way forward. I would welcome any reform that does not target a specific type of actor (like "startups"), need to be plugged in to the latest tax shelter or need for a lawyer. - [0] https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
• bluecalm 9mo ago
  EU like making new regulation. There are simpler steps to make doing business here easier: -force banks to respect EU free trade union and stop them from discriminating EU citizens and companies who are not citizens -stop abuse when it comes to currency conversion rates -raise VAT-free threshold to something that doesn't catch very small companies, 200k EUR in sales to EU would be a good start (currently it's 10k) -force EU countries to move all the bureaucracy online; it's very realistic, Poland has done it (it's not 100% yet but close to it) -enforce English as 2nd official language for business related paperwork Instead I am pretty sure we will get more paperwork, requirements and way for bureaucrats to prolong every process and request more documents on the way.
  • fhennig 9mo ago
    This is the way. Refactor the law.
• alibarber 9mo ago
  This is a great initiative that I've been following, but the stumbling block is still 'local taxes [and employment]' - that's still 27 different tax codes to deal with, submitting returns to in 27 different languages. Even now with cross-border selling, there are 27 different VAT codes to follow when transacting within Europe. Sure, you can report and actually settle it to a single national authority (and then that national process separately). Unless a country will actually defer parts of its company and tax law to Brussels, for companies present in that country - then I just don't really see what this brings over just starting a limited company in another state (even outside of the EU) - as you'll still have to follow national law in the country where you're resident anyway, which could be anything. (e.g. I start an Estonian OU with E residency, I live in Finland. I am obliged under Finnish law to submit a return for that company in Finland too as a person of control. In Finnish, along with the Estonian return, in Estonian)
  • tcldr 9mo ago
    Agreed. If the CFC (controlled foreign corporation) rules still apply for founders in EU-member states, it will fail. I’m hoping they can be creative and find a way to distribute revenues to member states in a way that works for everyone. For employment taxes, one way could be to tax EU-inc employees as if self-employed in their personal tax domicile.
• deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
• dzonga 9mo ago
  wasn't usurlla saying this was now law at her Davos address ?
• Imustaskforhelp 9mo ago
  Wow, I was writing about something like having an easy way to create EU legal entity (all be it from India) on a different thread. I hope this succeeds and also hopefully allows easy creation of EU company from outside EU as well. Atleast personally I am interested in creating a EU company which holds Indian company instead of vice versa because as I said on other comments, I think I deeply align with EU privacy laws & usually most of EU in general. Currently someone messaged on my other comment and the best way which is estonia would cost me around 1500 euros or more which is just a no go for me personally right now. I have only read it from top of the page but if I may ask, can someone tell if does this benefit my use case?
• jurschreuder 9mo ago
  People are completely overreacting how much regulation there is in Europe here. There is more regulations against monopolies and USA BigTech is always crying about that and spreading propaganda about that. But starting a startup is way cheaper in Europe you won't need funding like in the USA even.
  • tokai 9mo ago
    HN users has the wildest takes on Europe. Often completely made up, or something specific to one country made out to be true on the whole continent.
    • disgruntledphd2 9mo ago
      It's pretty funny. Europeans get so angry at US people claiming to have seen "Europe" when they've been in London, Paris and Rome, and yet they (we) do the same thing on lots of other topics. I think it's just human nature, tbh.
  • pdabbadabba 9mo ago
    Then why do you think virtually all of the most successful tech startups are U.S. companies? (Excluding Asia, for the purposes of this discussion.) Is it just Silicon Valley network effects?
• trilogic 9mo ago
  Europe need to open the pipe to free markets, simply said buy and sell with no damn taxes or restrictions. People is afraid to start a business because of many bullsh.t regulations and taxes, uncertainty and intentional lack of transparency. Doing business shouldn´t be so damn hard, it should not require so many licenses, permissions, burocracy. It should be instead given priority and treated like gold as it is business that move the economy, employ people, create jobs, give you a reason to wake up motivated in the morning and even an incentive and right condition for population growth. Then 3-5% of the entire money flow goes to private pockets/bankers. Are you f.cking kidding me, an optimal gpd growth is ~3% but we giving it away to some parasite for free? Why, I do not consent nor agree. This parasites, blood suckers, ignorant puppets, with full power and kart blanch can´t see further then their nose. BUt ofc a parasite kill the host and move elsewhere, so I guess no issues here. Stop this nonsense throttling damn it, you need to be prosecuted legally for economic murder and sufferance caused because of it.
• Nemo_bis 9mo ago
  The first point already exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea The second point is dubious. A central registry may be better or worse than the best national registry. The third and fourth are what is usually called the Capital Markets Union in eurobubble speak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Markets_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Markets_Union The Draghi report had some specific proposals which are rather realistic: > Reduce capital market fragmentation > > A. Introduce a European Security Exchange Commission > > B. Reduce regulatory fragmentation to deepen the CMU > > C. Encourage retail investors through the offer of second pillar pension schemes where the successful examples of some EU Member States can be replicated. > > D. Assess whether further changes to the capital requirements under Solvency II are warranted by further reducing the capital charges on equity investments held for the long term. https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en?filename=The%20future%20of%20European%20competitiveness%20_%20A%20competitiveness%20strategy%20for%20Europe.pdf https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3... https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/ec1409c1-d4b4-4882-8bdd-3519f86bbb92_en?filename=The%20future%20of%20European%20competitiveness_%20In-depth%20analysis%20and%20recommendations_0.pdf https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/ec1409c1-d4b4... (p. 292)
  • M2Ys4U 9mo ago
    >The first point already exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea SEs are public companies, and must have at least €120k in capital during formation. The proposed EU Inc. will be for private companies with no capital requirements.
    • Nemo_bis 9mo ago
      SE companies can be unlisted, if that's what you mean. The capital requirements can be changed.
• csmpltn 9mo ago
  The EU in a nutshell. It's never about achieving anything through actual work - it's all about the illusion of progress through buying domain names, custom fonts, padding: 200px, marketing, and more paperwork.
• observationist 9mo ago
  By the time they've figured out how to properly document and annotate the process of removing their collective head from their ass, the US and China will have moved well past completion of several cycles of the AI revolution. The EU is fundamentally broken because they are led by people who have never accomplished things, with credentials from institutions that have forgotten how to teach and train and prepare for the real world. They have fully embraced the credentialism and pompous titles in lieu of competence and effectiveness, have leeched off of their wealthy and successful citizens, and made progress or dynamic change impossible. The leeches and bureaucrats don't care about actually accomplishing things, about ending corruption, or fixing any of the real world problems experienced by the citizens of the EU. They just want their grift to continue, to feel morally and intellectually superior, and to feel the validation of exercising power over their subjugates. Because they know better, and their education is superior, and if everyone would just listen to the experts, the whole world would just get along and run smoothly. Everywhere else in the world that allows people to actually do things - and the Europeans that "just do things" in defiance of all the idiots in charge - will own the world in ten years. The EU will be a sad little footnote about the dangers of bureaucratic overreach and pompous elitism.
• logifail 9mo ago
  Sorry, but I'm not convinced that the EU is actually capable of reducing regulation. There are some who talk the talk, but when it comes down to it, the behemoth that is the Brussels (and Strasbourg!) machine will never accept reducing its influence. Re: Strasbourg, ditching the EU Parliament in Strasbourg completely would a really great first step to indicate that the EU is serious about cutting waste. However, the French have a veto, so it will never happen. https://www.euronews.com/2019/05/20/eu-parliament-s-114m-a-year-move-to-strasbourg-a-waste-of-money-but-will-it-ever-be-scrapp https://www.euronews.com/2019/05/20/eu-parliament-s-114m-a-y...
• Sprotch 9mo ago
  How is this different from an SE, which has been existing since 2004? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea
  • sirlantis 9mo ago
    > Current EU company structures like the European Company (SE) are made for public companies and ill-suited for startups due to high capital requirements, complex formation processes, and heavy administrative burdens. A flexible, tailored EU-wide entity for startups will solve these issues. From the FAQ https://www.eu-inc.org/faq https://www.eu-inc.org/faq
    • Sprotch 9mo ago
      Thank you - it is indeed €120k minimum capital Then I suggest they make noise to lower it to €1 - much easier than creating a new legal structure
• bflesch 9mo ago
  So if it is a european legal entity why they host it on .org which is only controlled by USA instead of using a .eu domain which is a ccTLD controlled by European Union?
• rmoriz 9mo ago
  Starting a company is not the issue, running costs, taxes, bureaucracy is a huge burden. Take US LLC. It‘s a bargain to operate.
  • hwj 9mo ago
    Do you have any in-depth resources on how to start and operate a US LLC as a foreigner?
    • rmoriz 9mo ago
      short: no long: It depends. If you are a foreigner, e.g. no US resident, you are fully taxable with your US LLC profits in your country of residence, e.g. let's say Germany. There is no way to get a tax discount or any other simple magic hack. However, if your lifestyle allows, to become a digital nomad (not living in a single country for more than 183 days) in theory you may operate tax-free (only sales outside of US, domestic US sales are taxable). The big benefit of a US LCC in this case is, that it's 100% trustworthy limited liability company that does not automatically enforce taxation residency for you individually and can be operated from anywhere in the world. No UAE, no Caribbean islands shell companies needed, that ring all bells and will keep business away.
      • hwj 9mo ago
        Thx. Am I taxable in my country of residence even when the money is kept on the LLC's bank account in the US? Let's say a small side hustle earns me $200/month. The money is kept on the LLC's bank account. Later on, when I visit the US, the LLC is paying for traveling and hotel. Would I still need to pay taxes in my country of residence? (Even though you probably aren't a lawyer, I'd still appreciate your thoughts on this).
        • rmoriz 9mo ago
          I'm not a tax advisor and most of my knowledge is about Germany, but if you have no physical business in the US, like office and proper residency (decision-making process), you have to tax in your own country. Tax evasion would be easy if that would not be the case. It's not only about profits but even the expenses need to be taxed/settled under e.g. German law. So if your LLC collects $200/months and pays $100 for operations, you need to provide both positions to the German tax authorities, not just the $100 pro-forma profit. They treat the LLC as "shell company" unless you have an office and can document that the business decisions are made there (because you are there a decent amount of time or have a hired manager and you just a shareholder). US authorities have to report to the German authorities that you own an LLC, not the fiscal details, but the business facts. If you are successful in your business, and your LLC is really making money, you can reduce your taxation duties in your current home country if you move abroad for half a year. If you don't stay longer than 182 days in one country, you are not taxable (except US citizens). This is also true if you move within the EU every couple of months. Of course this is not easy and comes with a lot of expenses and mental load (you MUST leave a country or you will have to tax everything their AND you have to document your stays carefully). The LLC works great if you do that. The German GmbH does not. Hence starting an LLC can make sense if you plan to start this nomadic lifestyle. Owning a property (home) causes tax residency in Germany, so this is another story to take care of, if you are lucky enough to own something.
• burnt-resistor 9mo ago
  Not the EU, but the UK: About 2012, it was incredibly difficult to start a limited liability partnership/corporation in the UK, roughly physically-located around Chelsea to Canary Wharf. One of the big hurdles was acquiring specific record-keeping instruments that weren't sold in specialty legal stationery shops, but only by some dude literally selling them out of his boot (trunk in America). Maybe the other partners had outdated information, which was a possibility. Contemporaneously, it was possible to start a Delaware corporation online in the US in under 3 days and for less than $300 USD.
  • roryirvine 9mo ago
    I think your partners were mistaken - the requirement for having a company seal and paper company register / minute book went away in both England & Wales and Scotland with the Companies Act 1985, and company formation has been done online UK-wide since the Companies Act 2006. I'd guess the guy operating from his car was an artisan engraver who made the seal for you. They're easy to buy online too (I got one around 25 years ago), but they're mostly a curiosity rather than a necessity. I doubt more than one in a hundred new Ltd or LLP companies will bother with one.
• alangibson 9mo ago
  Please Lord don't let the Austrians any where near this. The Notar system is the the closest thing to outright theft by paperwork I've ever seen. We paid 3K on a 50K plot of land for some dingus to read a contract out loud.
• nine_k 9mo ago
  I think it should be stupid simple to create a small company, Sorry, "stupid" is important here, anything lesser would not convey the meaning against the EU background. Something like a proof of identity, a one sheet stating the structure of the company (a sole proprietorship or a small LLC with limited funds and employees), the nature of the business (e.g. "software development"), and a moderate processing fee. The process should be serving a notification, not obtaining a permission. It should be equally simple to shut down a small company, once all its dues are paid. Once a company grows larger (say, past 15 full-time employees, or past €10M in revenue), maybe something additional might be asked, because now the company would be able to afford handling it. And, of course, sensitive things like selling food or medicines would require extra licensing, but it's not that the lack of bakeries or pharmacies what's holding back the tech industry progress in the EU.
• ultim8k 9mo ago
  This is really great news! We also need a paneuropean banking & tax system and ideally some paneuropean telephony (plus voip) and internet providers.
• philsnow 9mo ago
  Please please tell me it's pronounced "yoink" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJh1hmmLLzw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJh1hmmLLzw
• deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
• slim 9mo ago
  This thing is dismissed because it cites Zensurla von der Leyen in its front page
• Stancyhd8 9mo ago
  Thanks so much to Henryclarkethicalhacler for helping me hack into my husband's phone so I could see what he is up to and I was able to catch him red handed, now I am out and a lot happier credit goes to earlier mention hacker for a good job. If you are also interested in any hack job you can contact him via his email – HENRYCLARKETHICALHACKER@ G MAIL. COM Tell him Victoria refer you
• Stancyhd8 9mo ago
  [flagged]
• KarenDaBass 9mo ago
  And i thought we already have the EU, Inc. (Davos, Brussles, "The Commision")
• ExpertAdvisor01 9mo ago
  Don't forget that you have to pay the for a useless IHK in Germany...
• ThomPete 9mo ago
  Since it's inception in 1993, not a single global top 100 company have been created by any of the EU countries so the struggle is real. However I would strongly caution against thinking that reducing paperwork to set up your company is somehow going to magically solve any of the fundamental problems with EUs ability to create sector dominating companies. But even if we assumed it would, that just means that the bigger companies now have even more leverage. The real problem is deeper. It's about how EU is designed and structured. EU was created as a way to harmonize and standardize regulation between member countries to make trade simpler. (Anyone remember the cucumber directive) However as technology have improved and manufacturing started supporting a much more bespoke and customized world, the union started started looking at other forms of regulation that went deeper, each step: expanded central authority and reduced national discretion We've seen things like one EU Patent court, GDPR, Cookie Law, AI Act, monetary currency all attempts at improving the efficiency of the single market, in reality, none of that have changed the fact that the EU still have not created a single industry leader since it's inception. It's simply impossible to create a SpaceX, Tesla, Uber, OpenAI, Nvdia, Airbnb, even X, Linkedin or Facebook in Europe, not because of bureaucracy but because of the following 3 things: 1. EU tries to solve problems politically and centrally that startups are much better at solving locally 2. EU utilizes the extreme caution principle on everything and thus end up creating an extreme risk averse approach to what is allowed and what isn't. In effect startups end up creating businesses that the EU allow, rather than what the market need. 3. It's very hard for anyone let alone a startup to challenge the EU regulative system. Yet anyone of the above mentioned companies have constant battles with regulation and legislation. Even those companies can't really win over the EU regulative system, now try and be a startup trying to challenge som of the regulation, good luck. Europe have plenty of talent and plenty of problems that the startup world could help solve, but as long as the EU politicians compete with their own startup environment at solving these problems no amount of bureaucratic easing is going allow for the full potential of the European talent base.
• freakynit 8mo ago
  I summarized all comments and prepared comprehensive discussions summary using LLM for better understanding: https://hn-discussions.top/eu-inc-pan-european-startups/ https://hn-discussions.top/eu-inc-pan-european-startups/