frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Open in hackernews

EU inc: a new European company structure

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/speech_26_150
80•nhatcher•2h ago

Comments

jcmartinezdev•1h 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•1h 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•1h ago
> How much more process could the German government really add here?

Hahaha, good one, little padavan...

jcmartinezdev•1h ago
Never underestimate the power of german bureaucracy lol
jcmartinezdev•1h 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•1h 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•1h ago
What type of company structure was that?
jcmartinezdev•1h 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.
lm28469•1h 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•1h 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.

defo10•38m ago
You can bill, but the company owners are completely liable until the process is completed. Then the liability goes over to the company. Quite the risk if you ask me.
47282847•1h 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.

westpfelia•1h ago
I'm pretty sure Sweden is the most business friendly country. its why so many people move their business from Norway to Sweden.
lnsru•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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.

jcmartinezdev•49m ago
But that’s the thing, even though it took weeks I spent a non insignificant amount of euros to set it up, I think it was nearly 2k at the end; and to make it quick would probably be another K or so?

It’s crazy expensive, because of all the bureaucracy. The UG is supposed to be quick and easy to set up, requiring minimum capital… but the process proves expensive.

lnsru•57m ago
The question is always the same: do you really need UG/GmbH at the beginning? It’s typical rookie mistake. I did it too, sold the company for 1€ to some shady people at the end. Gewerbe with 40000€ in the company’s account does not have the problems anymore. And the expensive tax consultants are just another cost of doing business in Germany. Ok, the quality of Finanzamt clerks varies heavily depending on location. Current town has nice ones.

I agree, the process is not easy or nice in Germany, but it’s enough to start businesses despite all the complications and overregulation. But getting VAT number and bank account in other comments mentioned Estonia was huge pita for friends.

jcmartinezdev•47m ago
Maybe I should have taken another road considering the size of my operations, unfortunately I was wrongly advised when starting up, I spent 1k with a Steuerberatung for advice on what was the proper structure for me, and still… I think they just adviced me the option that was gonna cost me the most to operate.

Lesson learned I guess!

mfld•43m ago
Agreed. In case you do not have big investors, just register as an individual entrepreneur, get a bank account and get going! It can be turned into a LLC/GmbH later if business goes well.

Also taxes will be much easier. Just get one of the countless apps where you add invoices, and they generate tax reports for you. With an LLC or when employing other people, getting a tax consultant is advised. IMO, they are not expensive - how many hours of your time are you willing to spend on this topic instead of paying e.g. 200 EUR/mo?

jcmartinezdev•35m ago
Can you recommend a tax consultant that charges 200 EUR/month including preparing the yearly statements?

I’m nearly at 3.5k/year and I have barely 10 invoices a month that I need to process between incoming and outgoing lol

mfld•10m ago
It's a good price because the yearly statements for an LLC/GmbH are costly. We pay about 200/mo for accounting - with some more invoices :) -, 100/mo for payrolls but also the yearly statement alone is more than 2k. You can save that by not having an LLC - I personally think the risk in many software businesses is quite low. And some risks must be accepted as an entrepreneur...
lbreakjai•58m ago
In the UK, it took me half an hour and 30£ to open a Ltd, which I think is the equivalent of a GmbH.

It might have changed, but a few years ago you could go from 0 to a fully functional limited company, with accounting, business account, registered address with mail forwarding, etc. in a matter of days, from the comfort of your sofa.

everfrustrated•27m ago
I think GmbH's have a minimum capital requirement so not entirely the same as UK Ltd which can be opened with £1 of assets.

Possibly closer to the US Inc?

traceroute66•1h 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•1h 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...

causalscience•1h ago
Lobbies whose only purpose is to sustain themselves even at the cost of maintaining friction should be made illegal.
cjs_ac•1h 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•1h 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..
causalscience•1h ago
Wanna tell us more? Why has unifying the energy market been catastrophic for Sweden?
techpression•1h ago
Having to pay more because of Germany going fossil fuel like crazy. When there’s no wind and it’s dark they cause most of EU to suffer since the cost of their coal plants are so high. We also send a lot of green energy out of the country only to import coal powered from Denmark (not as major, mostly happens due to high consumptions) And we’re also getting a price spike fee, don’t dare to put on the dish washer when your neighbor is!

All this in a country where electricity was almost free (to be fair, our dismantling of nuclear doesn’t help here)

brabel•1h ago
Sweden has plenty of cheap hydropower. But as prices are now tied to countries like Germany which made catastrophic decisions around energy, Swedes have to pay much more than if Sweden had an independent energy market.
causalscience•1h ago
In that case it sounds like "unification was bad" is an unfair characterization. Unification was bad by proxy, due to the bad decisions of Germany. If Germany had made better decisions, unification would've been good as Sweden would've had lower prices on a larger market.
techpression•58m ago
”Bad or good by proxy” is how all policy plays out though, your ideas mean nothing if reality says otherwise. And Germany going coal was well known by time of unification (one might think it was because of that, tinfoil hat on).
AndrewDucker•41m ago
Presumably because Sweden is selling some of that cheap power to Germany.

The solution to which is to generate even more power in Sweden (so you can sell it off cheap and have it cheap too) or that Germany produces power more cheaply so that it's not giving Sweden so much money for electricity. Both of these should happen if the market is set up well.

postepowanieadm•58m ago
I may tell from Polish perspective - loosely speaking: Germany and Austria used to share single bidding zone: electricity was produced by wind at the north and then consumed by factories at the south. The problem: no sufficient grid connection - Polish and Czech grids were used instead, what caused major problems - loop flows. It lasted from 2001 to 2018.

Unification needs to be real, including grids, not on paper only.

embedding-shape•1h ago
It's the Euro all over again, mostly because of this:

> Just look at the dispersion of prices across European electricity hubs.

Same Swedes were complaining (and still are!) about having to bail out the poorer members of the Union, should Sweden adopt the Euro and have a tighter integration with the Eurozone.

The common motivation of the EU is to smooth out these things across the countries, so we don't have these wild differences between countries. That might mean electricity gets more expensive for some members, and cheaper for others, but overall should lead to better usage across everyone. Basically socialism, applied to energy, so if you're OK with that for people, health and other things, maybe it makes sense to be fine with it for energy too?

techpression•1h ago
Well it didn’t work for the Euro, and that didn’t require building massive on demand infrastructure that degrades over distance. Socialism for people only work within the confines of a society, my parents putting up solar panels to offset german fears of nuclear is far away from them paying taxes so their neighbor can get health care.
embedding-shape•1h ago
> Well it didn’t work for the Euro

What? Yes, it did work for the Euro, countries that are participating are now more equal than they were before, which is the goal. Who knows what will happen in the future, maybe Greece or someone else will truly sink the entire union, but it hasn't happened yet, so lets not confidently claim "it didn't work".

> my parents putting up solar panels to offset german fears of nuclear is far away from them paying taxes so their neighbor can get health care

That's been the thinking for a long time, but for how long can we continue thinking like this? If the world is fucked, it'll be fucked for all of us, not just for people in Sweden or Germany, so the faster we can realize we're all in the same boat, the better.

techpression•1h ago
Equal in that hey suffer together? When even the SEK outperforms the EUR in times of distress you know it’s incredibly bad. Is it better that all of Europe sinks, maybe, but I’m happy I’m not losing my job because of pension plans in France or financial neglect in Greece, and I’m sure they would say the same if roles were reversed. And to be clear, it’s not about the people, but how governing is done.

The same boat is actually a good metaphor, you tend to want many smaller ones and not one big, risk of losing everything vs something (to a point).

embedding-shape•54m ago
> Equal in that hey suffer together?

Yes, quite literally "hey lets suffer together", this is what we've signed up to, and want. Good for everyone and bad for everyone, we're linked and this helps us focus more on helping each other, rather than just focusing on ourselves.

> The same boat is actually a good metaphor, you tend to want many smaller ones and not one big, risk of losing everything vs something (to a point).

Yeah, that's probably the two mindsets that differ here. EU was created with the goal of "better one big boat than many small", because we've tried the "many small boats" approach for millennials, and somehow we in Europe always end up starting wars against each other. We've had (more or less) continent-wide peace now, for a good while (maybe the longest it's ever been? Not sure), and probably because of the reason that we're more connected now, instead of sitting alone in our tiny boats.

robin_reala•28m ago
The SEK has been underperforming the Euro for years (see the massive dip against the DKK which is Euro-pegged).
hshdhdhj4444•11m ago
> When even the SEK outperforms the EUR in times of distress you know it’s incredibly bad.

Currencies aren’t an asset. They don’t “outperform”.

If the Yuan had “outperformed” the Chinese economic system would have collapsed.

ViewTrick1002•40m ago
I think you’re getting cause and effect wrong.

Previously Sweden was much tighter coupled to German prices, but since fossil fuels were cheap people didn’t really notice.

Today due to CO2 cap and trade fossil emissions are expensive. [1]

Couple it with a massive renewable buildout leading to a decoupling of the prices that didn’t happened before.

We now have maximum volatility. Jumping between expensive fossil prices and an absolutely mindbogglingly large surplus leading to essentially free energy.

As Germany, and the rest of Europe, transitions to renewables we will spend less and less time on fossil fuel marginal prices and see our energy systems stabilize on renewable and storage prices. Outside of emergency reserve style situations.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emissions_Tradi...

Gud•26m ago
As a Swede(working in the energy sector no less), Sweden has only themselves to blame for their catastrophic decisions, like killing a world leading nuclear industry. Don’t blame Germany for Swedens incredibly stupid decision to shut down functioning nuclear reactors prematurely.
vaylian•20m ago
Why was the German shutdown premature?
mono442•1h ago
Energy is expensive because burning fossil fuels is expensive due to taxes. A coal power plant pays around two times more for emissions than for the coal itself. They're trying to solve a problem which they have created themselves in the first place.
embedding-shape•1h ago
So you suggestion is to remove the taxes and go back to mostly using coal for power? Or what's the suggestion here? Because those taxes are there because of the pollution, so unless you have better way of getting rid of the pollution yet using coal for power, I'm not sure there is something better than trying to tax it away so other source can be focused by business and industry instead.
mono442•1h ago
Capping the price of CO2 emissions at a more reasonable level like 10 - 20 euro/t CO2 just like it was 10 years ago could be a decent compromise.
embedding-shape•1h ago
Decent compromise to what? The group who want to pollute the world because it's cheaper? Doesn't sound like a compromise many of us would want.
mono442•1h ago
Countries outside European Union don't care about global warming anyway. It's a futile policy.
embedding-shape•1h ago
So? Countries outside of EU don't always care for human rights or other things we find important.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't still aim for the values we stand for.

mono442•1h ago
Global warming is ultimately a global problem. It doesn't matter if you reduce your CO2 emissions if others aren't following.
embedding-shape•1h ago
Indeed, but if everyone starts thinking "No one else is lowering their emissions so why would I?", how are we supposed to ever make any sort of progress?

Someone doing something is always better than no one doing anything, can we at least agree on that?

mono442•1h ago
But it is by no means obvious that carbon taxes are the right path. Targeted investments in low-emission energy sources might work better.
embedding-shape•57m ago
Fair point, I agree, that isn't obvious. What is obvious to both of us (I assume?) is that pollution has to be lower, not just in the EU, but across the world. But we (Europeans) can mostly just influence what happens inside of Europe, EU and our countries. Hence, we do what we can to reduce it, where taxing it is one approach.

With that said, more investments into other energy sources are totally welcome, and I don't think that should mean we also need to tax pollution less, we can have both :)

piva00•35m ago
It does matter to follow through with your values though. Humanity isn't supposed to be just minmaxing economical output, a common set of values that we strive for is much more inspiring than burning everything to the ground, and leaving a world of ashes for future generations to capture maximum economical output right now.

I don't think it's a hard mindset to understand, giving up because others aren't taking it as seriously is the cowardly way to go about it. It's much more meaningful to show it can be done, help to scale technologies to become cheaper and more accessible for poorer countries, and inspire others with examples that it can be done so action can spread.

Swenrekcah•24m ago
You might be interested to learn that both of those statements are very wrong.
dariosalvi78•23m ago
that is simply untrue. China, for as bad as it has historically been in terms of environment, it has invested waaaay more than anybody else in clean energy [1]. It's a game we are all in together and things are moving forward, albeit too slowly.

[1] https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/annual-invest...

paintbox•1h ago
Energy is expensive because fossil fuels are destroying the only planet we have.

If a person is taking lifesaving medicine that unfortunately makes their skin itch, you wouldn't call itchiness "a problem which they have created themselves in the first place"...

yread•1h ago
And how pays for the healthcare that's indeed for the people downwind of that plant? How much does lung cancer treatment cost compared to coal?
dv_dt•50m ago
That is a dubious claim of the accounting chain for expense of fossil fuels, which also ignores defensive tariffs for energy sources like Chines manufactured solar, wind and batteries. Though maybe it speaks to more beaucratic process around the energy not the core energy costs itself.
ViewTrick1002•45m ago
Europe is energy poor. We will never be able to compete on raw cost with the US, China and similar.

Our path forward are through renewables, which today are vastly cheaper than fossil fuels.

We decide the speed of the transition to green cheap energy by how much we tax fossil fuels. Low taxes = slow transition. High taxes = fast transition.

mono442•40m ago
I don't believe this is true. The US has also seen a big growth of the renewables in recent years and they have managed to do it without carbon taxes.
ViewTrick1002•26m ago
That tells you how cheap renewables are today, especially when American energy markets generally are more monopolistic in structure.

The faster we get off fossil fuels the better.

The growth in the US is much smaller than Europe, except a few cases like California.

pil0u•1h ago
I read through the speech, I'm still not sure if this is adopted or not. I found 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•1h 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•1h ago
Because Europeans never share their criticisms about the US
embedding-shape•1h ago
As a parent you have the obligation to let your child know how well you think they're doing ;)
arlort•1h 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•1h ago
More info here: https://www.eu-inc.org/
pantulis•1h 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•1h ago
the FAQ clearly states that it isn't an official EU website, it was used for petitioning the EU to consider this proposal.
kantord•1h ago
seems like a great idea
poly2it•1h ago
Is there a comparison to the SE structure? My main issue with it personally is that it is prohibitively expensive to incorporate.
nayroclade•1h ago
They have an answer to that in their FAQs: 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•1h 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/ [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house

paintbox•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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•1h ago
That's a different thing all together, but a good point nonetheless. Always been dealing with local investors when building startups, because of that.

The claim was that "business operation across different countries" is a "a real bottleneck for EU SMEs" currently, I don't think that has anything to do with investors?

paintbox•1h ago
There's a reason I rarely see local subsidiaries of cool small companies from other EU countries - it's too complicated to open them, have a couple of local employees on a payroll, handle notarization, translations of documents, not to mention labor laws etc.
embedding-shape•1h 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.

mono442•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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•1h 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•57m 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•52m 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.

kristoff_it•38m ago
My experience with the US tax system is that you need to get approval to get non-profit status, and more in general I do think this has something to do with the price of eggs in the sense that you should obviously be prevented from being able to setup a non-profit company if what you're doing has nothing charitable about it.

I made the mistake of leaving this unsaid, but 501c3 in the US also means that the company is tax exempt, which is the actual concrete thing I was implicitly asking about.

nottorp•1h 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•1h 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... )

nottorp•1h 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.

a_ba•1h ago
Maybe the implementation will be challenging in one aspect or another but are there any reasons why you would you rather keep the current patchwork?
pu_pe•1h ago
Excellent idea. The rules should be the same throughout Europe. However, on the official site (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•1h 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.

sam_lowry_•1h 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•59m 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.

Klaster_1•54m 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.
M2Ys4U•44m 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.

EU–INC – One Europe. One Standard. – Pan-European Legal Entity

https://www.eu-inc.org/
220•tilt•2h ago•102 comments

Batmobile: 10-20x Faster CUDA Kernels for Equivariant Graph Neural Networks

https://elliotarledge.com/blog/batmobile
31•ipnon•3d ago•1 comments

SETI Home Is in Hiberation

https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/
43•keepamovin•3h ago•24 comments

Anthropic's original take home assignment open sourced

https://github.com/anthropics/original_performance_takehome
403•myahio•10h ago•202 comments

EmuDevz: A game about developing emulators

https://afska.github.io/emudevz/
61•ingve•3d ago•8 comments

Stories removed from the Hacker News Front Page, updated in real time

https://github.com/vitoplantamura/HackerNewsRemovals
42•akyuu•54m ago•4 comments

A 26,000-year astronomical monument hidden in plain sight (2019)

https://longnow.org/ideas/the-26000-year-astronomical-monument-hidden-in-plain-sight/
501•mkmk•18h ago•98 comments

Hightouch (YC S19) Is Hiring

https://hightouch.com/careers
1•joshwget•1h ago

RSS.Social – the latest and best from small sites across the web

https://rss.social/
124•Curiositry•10h ago•25 comments

200 MB RAM FreeBSD Desktop

https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2026/01/18/200-mb-ram-freebsd-desktop/
122•vermaden•3d ago•98 comments

What Is a PC Compatible?

https://codon.org.uk/~mjg59/blog/p/what-is-a-pc-compatible/
9•edward•5d ago•0 comments

cURL removes bug bounties

https://etn.se/index.php/nyheter/72808-curl-removes-bug-bounties.html
284•jnord•6h ago•155 comments

The percentage of Show HN posts is increasing, but their scores are decreasing

https://snubi.net/posts/Show-HN/
116•plastic041•5h ago•83 comments

Nukeproof: Manifesto for European Data Sovereignty

https://nukeproof.org/
20•jamesblonde•1h ago•2 comments

The challenges of soft delete

https://atlas9.dev/blog/soft-delete.html
200•buchanae•15h ago•111 comments

Libbbf: Bound Book Format, A high-performance container for comics and manga

https://github.com/ef1500/libbbf
75•zdw•8h ago•38 comments

The super-slow conversion of the U.S. to metric (2025)

https://www.thefabricator.com/thefabricator/blog/testingmeasuring/the-super-slow-conversion-of-th...
43•itvision•1h ago•56 comments

Hypnosis with Aphantasia

https://aphantasia.com/article/stories/hypnosis-with-aphantasia
21•danhite•3d ago•17 comments

Show HN: Mastra 1.0, open-source JavaScript agent framework from the Gatsby devs

https://github.com/mastra-ai/mastra
182•calcsam•20h ago•56 comments

Instabridge has acquired Nova Launcher

https://novalauncher.com/nova-is-here-to-stay
221•KORraN•17h ago•146 comments

IPv6 is not insecure because it lacks a NAT

https://www.johnmaguire.me/blog/ipv6-is-not-insecure-because-it-lacks-nat/
217•johnmaguire•18h ago•323 comments

The GDB JIT Interface

https://bernsteinbear.com/blog/gdb-jit/
55•surprisetalk•4d ago•8 comments

Which AI Lies Best? A game theory classic designed by John Nash

https://so-long-sucker.vercel.app/
141•lout332•14h ago•67 comments

Unconventional PostgreSQL Optimizations

https://hakibenita.com/postgresql-unconventional-optimizations
381•haki•22h ago•58 comments

California is free of drought for the first time in 25 years

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-01-09/california-has-no-areas-of-dryness-first-time...
406•thnaks•14h ago•204 comments

Are arrays functions?

https://futhark-lang.org/blog/2026-01-16-are-arrays-functions.html
143•todsacerdoti•2d ago•101 comments

The Unix Pipe Card Game

https://punkx.org/unix-pipe-game/
229•kykeonaut•20h ago•73 comments

Parliament tells Dutch government to keep DigiD data out of American hands

https://nltimes.nl/2026/01/21/parliament-tells-dutch-govt-keep-digid-data-american-hands
109•TechTechTech•1h ago•38 comments

The space and motion of communicating agents (2008) [pdf]

https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/archive/rm135/Bigraphs-draft.pdf
47•dhorthy•5d ago•6 comments

Maintenance: Of Everything, Part One

https://press.stripe.com/maintenance-part-one
133•mitchbob•18h ago•23 comments