Mastodawn

Gero Stein

@EUCommission As if that is the real problem people of Europe are facing today.

Petr Ferschmann 5d ago

@tdr @EUCommission I think we really face that today. When you want to expand, we have to enter 27 different markets and register 27 branches. When you are in USA or China, you need only few branches.

So let's solve this.

@fersman @EUCommission The proposed EU Inc. framework misses the main concerns of most EU citizens. People are primarily affected by rising living costs, housing shortages, high energy prices, and pressure on public services and not by the legal complexity of setting up cross-border companies. (1/4)

The EU has already introduced similar instruments, such as the European Company (SE) and the European Cooperative Society (SCE). These were meant to simplify cross-border business, yet their practical impact has remained limited. The reason is simple: the real obstacles are different tax systems, labor laws, and administrative practices and they still exist and are not fundamentally addressed by EU Inc. (2/4)

In reality, the proposal mainly benefits startups, investors, and larger companies seeking easier expansion. While faster digital registration sounds efficient, it does little to reduce the broader regulatory and economic burdens businesses face across member states. (3/4)

At the same time, the focus on corporate flexibility and investment conditions highlights a policy priority that is more aligned with capital markets than with everyday social and economic challenges. As a result, EU Inc. risks becoming another technical reform with limited real-world impact, rather than a solution to the structural issues affecting most people in the EU. (4/4)

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, definitely do not expect one piece of legislation to magically solve everything. It solves problem in its field. Let's celebrate this 🎉

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission Sure, it solves a problem, in its own narrow field. For most businesses and especially for the European citizens, the real obstacles remain untouched. And of course, one can celebrate everything funded with taxpayer money.

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, real societal obstacles are touched and solved by a long series of improvements, such this one. Some improvement here and there, for long time, combined and accumulated, standing one on another is what pushes society forward.

As you evidently want improvements in other area, the healthy way would be to celebrate the start of EU Inc and supporting your representatives to do even more improvements.

If you want better Europe, don't be grumpy about real improvements 😊

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission This isn‘t about being grumpy. I’m questioning whether this is actually a meaningful improvement. Small steps only matter if they address the real bottlenecks, and here many of the core issues remain untouched. And as a citizen, I’ll question that, especially when taxpayer money is involved and the issues people are actually facing right now aren’t being meaningfully addressed. I guess critical thinking isn’t always as fun as celebrating 😊

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, ah, I think that now I understand better!

From my point of view this *does* help with some bottleneck. And I celebrate 😎

The question is whether this specific bottleneck is relevant or meaningful *for you*. If you believe that not, than, first I invite you consider how your life could be better if Europe would have stronger enterprises, and in the same time I generally better get your frustration.

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission Companies will be fine, many in Germany and the EU are still performing solidly even in a difficult environment. I’m more concerned about citizens, because they’re the ones a state is supposed to serve and for them, things are clearly getting tougher. (1/2)

Making it easier to set up companies in 48 hours, fully online, without capital requirements doesn’t fix that. We’ve tried similar models before with the Ltd. and UG, and it mainly led to a race to the bottom. That doesn’t improve life for residents, and capital, as always, is the first thing to leave; people can‘t. 🙂 (2/2)

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, part of possible solution for citizens is stronger (and ethical) commercial sector. For example, now Europe as a continent is paying cca 7 billion euros every single month for just couple of IT services by USA companies. Imagine how much societal development we could fund if that money would stay in Europe. Things are connected.

@kubofhromoslav @fersman @EUCommission I get your point about keeping value in Europe but what does that have to do with EU Inc. and these specific measures? Faster company setup, fully online processes, and no minimum capital don’t solve the issue of public money flowing to US tech companies. (1/2)

That’s primarily a public procurement problem. Authorities often choose non-European providers, even when alternatives exist. There are already European solutions, just look at Schleswig-Holstein, which is actively moving public administration toward open-source and European IT systems. So the issue isn’t the lack of companies, but how decisions are made and contracts are awarded. (2/2)

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, EU Inc (not only in the specific wording by EC) is part of making setting up and scaling up companies easier, so to increase productivity. Eg. now it is hard to raise funds to start and scale company across borders (to big extend because investors are usually not deeply familiar with laws of every European country). Also that should be addressed sometime 🤔

Petr Ferschmann 5d ago

@tdr @kubofhromoslav @EUCommission now it is expensive to create alternative to eg. Netflix. I wanted to use european alternative. But there is none. I can use streaming service in my country but I can't use Germany's. And EU Inc. will make easier to expand in Europe. And then we will have stronger companies that can expand overseas like Spotify. It small step by small step.

@fersman @kubofhromoslav @EUCommission I think you’re mixing up two different things. The streaming issue is about the Digital Single Market and licensing, not about company formation. EU Inc. doesn’t fix cross-border access to services.

And Spotify actually proves the opposite point, it succeeded without EU Inc. The real barriers in your example aren’t about founding companies, but about regulation and market structure. So I don’t see how this proposal changes that. 🙂

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission, the wider proposal for EU Inc is to provide a framework where regulation is same while providing goods and services in any EU country. So no more need to deal with many different regulations for the same thing.

But the original proposal is not necessary the same thing that EU will adopt..

Bogdan Buduroiu 5d ago

@tdr @fersman @EUCommission are people ready to face down the fact that welfareism and an upside down triangle population pyramid cannot coexist tho?

European Commission 5d ago

Hi @tdr, a good administration is capable of doing more than one thing at a time. We have experts working on all kinds of issues, like keeping Europe safe from threats, and making life more affordable for people who live here. Just last week, we put forward some initiatives to boost investment in homegrown clean energy solutions, increase resilience and lower energy bills for our citizens. You can read more about it here: https://link.europa.eu/vc4M4x

@EUCommission Sure, the EU can do more than one thing at a time. But citizens are still facing high energy prices, housing shortages, and rising living costs. All issues intensified by the Ukraine war and global supply risks.

In that context, it’s fair to ask whether something like EU Inc. is really a priority for people, or more of a technical reform with limited immediate impact for the citizens. 🙂

@tdr @EUCommission, I have been and still am leading world-wide non-profits based in Europe and can assure you that fragmentation of Europe is definitely pain in a tail... In order to be able to do more good / provide value, it is very beneficial to have less administrative burden and be able to just work more. Remember that especially for innovation is needed high quality attention, so let's not waste it on byrocratic shit.

@kubofhromoslav @EUCommission I get your frustration with fragmentation. But isn’t your case exactly one this doesn’t really solve? EU Inc. targets startups and for-profit entities, while non-profits remain tied to national systems, especially when it comes to tax status and recognition. So the core complexity you’re describing would largely stay the same.

@tdr @EUCommission, from my nonprofit work I know some struggles of for-profit companies, what enables me to empathize with them. I am very happy for them and for the general societal progress than can stem from that. I personally may benefit non-directly, what is much better than not benefiting at all, while other doers will just have easier life.

It is what it is, I accept it and don't require it to be something more. Some devil may be in details, but we can solve it later and it seems great!

Justi 5d ago

@tdr @EUCommission I'd say staying competitive economically is definetly a real problem concerning the people of Europe. Especially today when big power politics is the new normal.

@justive @EUCommission I agree that economic competitiveness matters. The question is whether this is really a key measure to achieve it. Making it possible to start a company in 48 hours, fully online and without capital, may sound good, but we’ve already seen similar approaches with the Ltd. and the UG. It mainly lowered entry barriers, created more finacially unstable or shady businesses, but didn’t fundamentally strengthen competitiveness. (1/2)