And all done as a grass roots effort from a few dedicated and motivated folks like Andreas Klinger.
The EU has a long history of doing things like this -- forcing the hand of national governments to do what they all knew needed to be done, but lacked the political willpower or mandate. Freeing monopolist-dominated or coddled industries like telecoms, delivery, airlines, railways would never have happened without the EU.
We'll need a bunch of steps like that, to get closer to the efficiencies we're hoping for.
Noice!
(I'm of course spitballing ;)
Go into loss on purpose for 3 years, then move. If law is written literally, they will calculate negative tax and thus pay you for moving away.
Apart from that: How is that de-facto locking in of individuals compatible with the EU‘s foundational freedom of movement?
Holy crap.
> People with German GmbH are essentially unable to move anywhere.
Well, that's not entirely true, but I can see how it might complicate things considerably.
A good idea in theory
> legal framework provides faster (within 48 hours), cheaper (maximum EUR 100) and fully digital company registration, simplified procedures throughout the company life cycle
Did not expect this
.
If they deliver, this might actually make startups in europe a bit more common
Just in time for AI to make startups no longer possible for labor capital to undertake as financial capital alone (plus the hyperscalers) take the reigns.
Once there's a $1M Claude Code button to implement an entire business, it's over. Engineeers and business folks and the startup hustle are over.
I was hoping open source would save us, but it's not keeping pace with the leading edge of foundation models. Plus the hyperscalers own all of the infrastructure to run and scale anyhow. Piddly RTX cards are nothing in the face of this.
This is tech (and humanity's) final "embrace, extend, extinguish".
This is the last few years of startups.
I bet not, because you don’t know their laws, and you don’t want to litigate in Croatian. You also don’t know the tax implications and chance is you will only find out when it’s too late.
So if an EU Inc happens, it needs to be based on a shared English law, otherwise it doesn’t change much
This is only because the drafters of the US constitution didn’t think to list corporations law as an enumerated power of Congress - I don’t think they omitted it out of an ideological conviction, simply because nobody thought of it at the time. That said, given SCOTUS’ expansive reading of the interstate commerce clause, there’s a decent chance SCOTUS would let them get away with a federal corporations law, but they’ve never had the political will to attempt a general federal incorporation law
The drafters of the Australian constitution did list corporations law as a power of the federal government-but they were working over a century later, and they studied the US system intently to try to identify what worked and what mistakes to avoid. However, it took until 1989 for a federal corporations law to be enacted, and then the High Court ruled in 1990 that the new federal corporations law was unconstitutional, because the corporations power in the constitution only authorised federal regulation of existing domestic corporations, not the act of incorporating them - however, this was fixed by a federal-state agreement voluntarily ceding corporations law power to the Commonwealth (this is another innovation the Australian constitution has compared to the US - the ability of the federal level to gain new enumerated powers without constitutional amendment, by the states voluntarily agreeing to cede them)
It’s possible to be registered in a state you’ve never been to - how many people have actually been to Delaware or Wyoming - and employ nobody at.
Some countries play this game too - after the Cayman Islands enacted anti money laundering laws, they tried to keep companies with privacy and efficient dispute resolution.
Anyway, I don't know about the exact wiring of this but an alternative can be to create a virtual country with its own law, sign a trade agreement with the country to give it full access to the EU market and even some special rights and achieve the same effect of getting rid of the regulations and bureaucracy. These arrangements can be very interesting, like the City of London which is like a country inside London that is actually a corporation. Very weird things are possible.
That means there’s no barrier to movement.
It’d also possible to reincorporate relatively easily.
Question: Anyone know if this is open internationally or is just for European Residents?
> The objective is to enable innovative companies to operate under a single, harmonised set of EU-wide rules, covering relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency, labour and tax law.
Especially the last two topics are the nitty gritty details, subject to day-to-day populism by local politicians. It’s why „relevant aspects“ dampens my hopes.
Sometimes I wonder if we should just reduce the EU to a non-geographical sovereign state with which EU countries have a shared agreement. I‘d the incorporate within this state, have it taxed and regulated there. Sort of like a mixture of the City of London and the Holy See.
It imagines new registry so OBVIOUSLY any company in existence will need to do additional work to re-register itself and plaster that number on all invoice issued. You will see.
So all that years of meetings and documents and laws are just to instruct clerks how to handle additional work to workers ?
How about "destroing barriers" for doing business ? For example WHY THE FUCK EVERY COW NEED TO HAVE A FUCKING eu PASSPORT YOU MORONS ????????? Do milk is cheaper that way ? Do hard working agriculture peoples asked for this ? Or you just trying to get rid of agriculture businesses ? And now more stupidity to send in "digit" form ??
So more "digital services" bureaucrats can juggle all months and years and push into workers throats ? How wasting a time helps EU ?? In which reality things bureaucrats do helps small business peoples ? How new register number helps in anything ???
You aware that only way to re-industrialization is to have a lot of WORKING small businesses ? You know difference between "created" startups and existing businesses ? Startups often do not know when they are doing and giving money to "starting business" just ups statistics in temporal number of paper preparing "businesses". 20 years of doing that practice didn't improve anything.
> "attract private investment through common fast, digital and cost- effective procedures"
Do you even know how that thing "business" works ? peoples do things that business domain requires. Now you know. And _ANY_PAPER_WORK_FOR_GOVERMENT_AND_CONTROLING_INSTITUTIONS_OR_JUST_TO_PUT_IT_INTO_PAPER_STACK_BECOUSE_SOME_MORON_IMAGINED_MORE_PAPER_FORMS_END_PROCEDURES_NOW_ALSO_IN_DIGITAL
... is wasting time that can be used for business domain. or research and innovation.
So more perfect procedures for whom exactly ????????? To consume by time wasters , right ?
What is needed is the arrest of the Commission for a coup d'état and high treason, with its powers being transferred to the European Parliament.
Corporate law is inherently somewhat bureaucratic; better simplify it and unify it if proven necessary.
- It would discourage share buying.
- somebody with control packet can do terrible things, while minority stock owners have no impact. Blame attribution might be tricky.
