4 ms·

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 a

• inanothertime 8mo 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 8mo ago
    National sovereignty in Europe is not possible without international collaboration.
  • tietjens 8mo 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 8mo 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.
      • miroljub 8mo ago
        Just because you accusse people to be "right wingers" because they don't want to fund bicycle lanes in foreign countries doesn't make them wrong. If you want to fund bicycle lanes in foreign countries, go start a fund an fund them privately. For the people that don't know the topic: - yes, German taxpayers are indeed funding bicycle lanes in foreign countries - it's not the only waste of money going to foreign countries And additional questions: - since when is it forbidden to complain against the waste of tax money? - how does favouring tax cuts instead of tax money waste makes you a "right wing"?
        • sevenzero 8mo ago
          What people like you dont understand is what we get back from investing into foreign countries. We dont just build bicycle lanes there because we are such nice people.
          • miroljub 8mo ago
            Can you please explain (ELI style) the great benefits German taxpayers have from the bicycle lanes in Peru?
        • lifty 8mo ago
          I agree with your characterisation of what is going on, and at some point, the EU states will have to decide for full fiscal integration or for removing the common currency. You can't have a common currency without a common fiscal union. So we either have to integrate more or desintegrate more, this inbetween we have now is not working very well. Speaking as a European, not sure what is better.
          • miroljub 8mo ago
            Not related to the comment, but in general I agree with you. You can't have a single monetary system without complete unification, including tax systems, budgeting systems, governance models, retirement systems, benefits. I mean, you can, like we have now, but it's not sustainable, and eventually we all have it worse. As a European, I would not want to go that way, since I'm afraid such a unified EU will be a bureaucratic monster that is even more centralized than the USA, and way more autocratic than any current EU state. I'd rather take a step back, dissolve much of the EU's competences, and go back to pure trade union, dissolve the EURO as a currency, and let every member state take sovereign decisions on their own.
    • direwolf20 8mo ago
      Maybe they're talking about the protection of Israel
    • miroljub 8mo ago
      > You're complaining that DE tax funds go to the EU? Very curious what you're talking about and your rational. Germany is the biggest net contributor to the EU. The money comes from German taxpayers, who receive disproportionately little value in return.
      • jorge-d 8mo ago
        This is wrong on so many levels. The German economy profits _a lot_ from the membership. You can't just look at the monetary in/out flows to/from EU accounts but to the system as a whole.
        • 8964689797595 8mo ago
          [flagged]
          • harperlee 8mo ago
            For example, decades of pegging the value of the currency down, thus facilitating exports on a massive scale and thus pushing up the performance of whole industries, without other member states that would have had their currency devaluated being able to compete on prize.
          • pegasus 8mo ago
            They probably didn't list any because estimating the upsides versus the downsides is what it's about, and that's very hard to quantify. Suggesting, like you seem to, that there are no upsides to the German economy whatsoever, is just not a serious argument so doesn't actually deserve a serious answer.
          • LunaSea 8mo ago
            Tariffs on Chinese EV cars that would obliterate the German automotive industry and economy?
        • deleted 8mo ago
          [deleted]
      • 8mo ago
  • psychoslave 8mo ago
    National sovereignty, like "we are able to feed people with food grown on our soils?" Mercosur anyone?
    • niemandhier 8mo ago
      To be fair: our soil would greatly benefit from being allowed to rest for a decade. In parts of Europe, our soil essentially depleted. I recommend reading.” 100 harvests.”
      • psychoslave 8mo ago
        This can happen without putting the most part of intensive payload in a form of external dependencies that can be cut at any point by many factors, while losing all the skills and knowledge on how to effectively plant and harvest. Qualified farmers don’t appear magically over night, let alone people with the passion required to invest their own life into it. And exporting the model that ravaged one own land, selling the poison that was forbidden in the countries exporting it, what kind of behavior is that? Letting some land having a bit of rest while the same depletion process is applied elsewhere, how fair is that?
  • prasoon2211 8mo ago
    This is incorrect. Taxes, pensions and labour laws apply according to the country where the EU Inc is operating.
  • matesz 8mo ago
    I don't understand the tax objection. The 28th regime changes corporate law, not fiscal law. A Berlin-based "EU-Inc" still pays full taxes (Körperschaftsteuer, Gewerbesteuer, etc.) to the local Finanzamt. It isn't a disembodied tax haven - it just standardizes the legal wrapper. You are right that this threatens the status quo, though. If this works, founders based in Germany will likely abandon the GmbH. That will require swallowing some national pride and admitting that the current system is simply a less efficient, less competitive legal form for high-growth companies. One thing I think is also worth mentioning are labor rights. I am not arguing against the German model of employee protection. Mitbestimmung could be viewed as a good thing, even if it will mean less power to the VC and / or founders. And frankly, I don't care if the consensus forces strict, German-style Mitbestimmung on the EU-Inc. Stricter form of EU-INC is still vastly better than nothing at all. Asianometry has a great video on the labor rights in germany btw - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0teMtLT9XI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0teMtLT9XI).
• lava_pidgeon 8mo ago
  This idea was made by French and German government . I'm not sure why do you think the German government is against it.
  • matesz 8mo ago
    > This idea was made by French and German government It is true, but lets face it - it is just a high-level proposal. Better than previous ones for sure, but still just a proposal. And there is a massive gap between the PR and the legal reality. Germany and Austria already torpedoed the previous attempt (the SUP) specifically because it allowed online formation without a notary. So I would advise against certainty in that the fight is over. I also don't want to wait another 10 years. Honestly by that time just setup topco in UK and if series A will come just do the flip later if you don't want to go to SV straight away.
    • ronsor 8mo ago
      Reading this thread, I do not get Germany's worship of notaries and notarizations.
      • moooo99 8mo ago
        What I find funny is that in Germany, you can only buy a house with a notary to prevent shady things (reasonable), but up until 2023, you could literally buy the entire thing with cash, without having to provide any proof of the origin of the funds.
        • WilcoKruijer 8mo ago
          Isn't the notary there to take note of the shadiness of buying in cash and, if shady enough, abolish the transfer?
      • rcbdev 8mo ago
        > Reading this thread, I do not get Germany's worship of notaries and notarizations. No-one here worships them, they're just an obscenely rich entrenched institution running a racket as the gate keepers of certain notarized acts and doing anything in their power to lobby against innovation. I could also ask you why U.S.-Americans worship a horribly broken school system or love lacking consumer and privacy protections. The answer is simple, it's not worship.
• sevenzero 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  • matesz 8mo ago
    Its important to understand the context. Germany, and Europe in general, is basically like a falling empire. It will be less and less significant and life won't get any better than it is relatively speaking. The same will almost certainly happen with the US, but first goes Europe. Unfortunately citizens and therefore ruling elites of empires fueled by relatively extremely high standard of living for decades in comparison to the rest of the World always have very hard time swallowing their national pride. They have built very elaborate conceptual framework of linking their nationality to the level of relative success, fueled by politicians who want to make people feel good again about their nationality. Just look at the news, almost everything directly or indirectly is linked to the concept "nation". And in almost all cases of empires a natural consequence of their fall is war. So, it is very important to set expectations right.
    • pegasus 8mo ago
      Are you foretelling the dissolution of the British Empire which happened many decades ago? Are you saying Algeria will soon be free of French colonial rule? Is your middle name Nostradamus?
      • matesz 8mo ago
        It isn't prophecy. The Harvard Belfer Center study (Thucydides's Trap) analyzed 16 cases in the last 500 years where a rising power challenged a ruling empire: 12 of them ended in war. The UK is actually the perfect example of this danger. The British Empire didn't dissolve peacefully - it was effectively destroyed by WWI and WWII while trying to suppress a rising Germany. The subsequent transfer of hegemony to the US was a rare statistical anomaly (a "special case" driven by shared culture and total British exhaustion), but the Empire’s fall itself was catastrophic. The pattern is violence, not peace. And remember that other aspiring nations to maintain it's position as Empire actively acting to destabilize situation in other states. The reason is simple - it is easiest way to maintain their status. Brexit for instance was a boon for everybody but UK and EU. There is clear data already about Russian intervention. Recent overt US intervention into ensuring UK remaining separate and EU becoming separate. Think about it.
• randomNumber7 8mo ago
  [flagged]
• avemuri 8mo ago
  I've asked before - I am not clear what the massive boost is other than saving a few days or weeks at the beginning. I believe all taxation, labor compliance and other such regulation is still the same as the status quo. The one time ease of setup doesn't seem to be worth the ongoing hassle of dealing with the same crap, just with the added friction of a new and unfamiliar entity structure. What am I missing?