26,000+ FOUNDERS, INVESTORS, OPERATORS. 27 COUNTRIES.
We went through Brussels' proposal with legal experts. The conclusion is clear:
WHAT IT’S NOT
The 28th regime we campaigned for
One harmonized European startup entity
A new EU company law or court system
WHAT IT CAN BE
A plug-in into every country’s legal system
A path to a pan-European standard
– Only if implemented correctly
Several lobby groups are pushing to remove the one clause that makes this work. Help us get this right by July 16.
JUNE IS OUR WINDOW TO ACT
Don’t let free choice of registration seat get watered down.
The startup ecosystem needs to be loud before July 16.
Post on LinkedIn. Ask for One Europe. One Standard. Tag your MEPs and heads of state — and make it clear that founders need a usable European standard, not fragmentation.
Your MEPs: René Repasi, Axel Voss, Pascal Canfin, Arash Saeidi, Sergey Lagodinsky, and Mario Mantovani
How Brussels' proposal can work
01
FREE CHOICE OF
REGISTRATION SEAT
Founders choose where to incorporate – independent of where they operate, hire, and pay taxes.
02
ONE CENTRAL
REGISTRY
One digital registry. Strong KYC/AML/UBO enforcement. Fully digital, 48-hour incorporation. One-click bank account creation.
03
ACCESS FOR
ALL COMPANIES
No size caps. No revenue thresholds. Founders and markets decide what innovation looks like – not politicians.
WHAT MATTERS MOST
Free choice of registration seat
As defined in Brussels’s current proposal, founders are free to choose where they incorporate, independently of where they operate from.
This would allow individual countries to compete to become a de facto standard place of registration for startups. This is very similar to how Delaware became a standard in the US.
Politicians would not mandate the standard. But founders, investors, and lawyers will converge around the countries that work best for them.
Without free choice of registration seat, the proposal becomes 27 new national regimes, with a shared logo – fragmentation, but with slightly better branding.
And useless for founders who need standards to fundraise globally.
WHAT EU–INC DOES NOT CHANGE
Local rules still apply
The goal of our EU–INC campaign is not to avoid local obligations.
EU–INC is not a tax loophole. Taxes follow where the company operates and is administered, not where it is registered. The registered office does not override national tax rules.
EU–INC does not replace local employment law. Employment law follows the country where employees work, not where the company is registered.
If you hire in Germany, German labor law applies to these workers. If you hire in Poland, Polish labor law applies to these workers. Neither should Polish law apply to German workers, nor German law to Polish workers. No matter where you are incorporated.
WHAT IS AT RISK NOW
Brussels’ proposal now moves into negotiations between the Council and Parliament.
Several stakeholders are pushing to remove free choice of registration seat, arguing it enables “forum shopping”. It does not enable it. There is European anti-abuse law to prevent it.
The answer to this concern is to ensure local tax & employment law is respected, to introduce strict KYC/AML/UBO standards and modern digital infrastructure - not removing the one clause that makes this useful.
“Continental scale is our greatest asset in a world of giants.”
URSULA VON DER LEYEN — PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION
We need your help!
This next phase
matters.
Talk to your policymakers. They are not from the tech industry. Explain why One Europe. One Standard is needed. The startup ecosystem needs to be loud before July 16. This is our window to act.
If you build, invest, or operate in Europe:
Post about EU–INC
Talk to your policy makers (find them at the top of this page ↑)
Push for free choice of regististration seat
→ EU-INC logo & social media images are available here
A FULL LEGAL ANALYSIS
We did a comprehensive legal gap analysis with global law firm Dentons, and our own position paper.
Together they highlight three things:
The current proposal is NOT a standard without the free choice of registration seat.
Multiple gaps prevent the current model from working legally.
The concerns of stakeholders related to employment law, taxes, and identity, and how to potentially address them.
→ Download Denton's legal gap analysis (PDF)
→ Read our Position Paper & FAQ