91探花

The European Commission has presented a proposal for EU Inc., described as a new 28th company law regime. It has one set of corporate rules that businesses can choose instead of dealing with 27 national systems and more than 60 company forms.

The Commission says that this legal patchwork can delay the setting up of a company for weeks or months. That delay costs money and time. EU Inc. comes as a regulation, meaning it would apply across the EU in the same way in each country.

The proposal follows calls in the March 2025 European Council conclusions for an optional 28th regime to help innovative companies grow across the Single Market.

听

How Would It Work In Practice?

听

Under the proposal, entrepreneurs could create a company within 48 hours, fully online, for less than 鈧�100 and without a minimum share capital requirement. The system would run on a once only principle. Companies would submit their information one time through an EU level interface that connects national business registers.

President Ursula von der Leyen said: 鈥淎ny entrepreneur will be able to create a company within 48 hours from anywhere in the European Union, fully digitalized, for less than EUR 100 and without minimum share capital.鈥�

She added: 鈥淐ompanies will provide their information to public authorities 鈥� their data 鈥� one time only. That information will then be shared automatically between relevant administrations.鈥�

EU Inc. companies would also receive tax and VAT numbers without resubmitting paperwork. A new EU business register would store their information.

听

What About Talent And Risk?

听

The proposal allows EU wide employee stock option plans. Stock options would be taxed only when income is generated and sold. The Commission says this helps startups compete for skilled staff.

Von der Leyen said: 鈥淲ith EU Inc., employee stock options will be simpler to offer and easier to manage across borders.鈥�

The framework also includes fully digital liquidation and a fast track insolvency process for startups. On labour law, she said: 鈥淭he EU Inc. proposal will in every way respect existing social standards and labour law, including employees鈥� rights to participate in company boards.鈥�

The Commission has asked the European Parliament and the Council to reach agreement on EU Inc. by the end of 2026.

听

听

What Are Experts Expecting?

听

Upon the proposal being presented, this is what experts think鈥�
听

Our Experts:

听

听

Jeppe Rindom, CEO and Co-Founder, Pleo

听

听

鈥淓U-Inc represents a significant step toward reducing fragmentation and enabling true pan-European scale for startups and fintechs. The proposition emerged from a broader realisation that Europe has been weak on innovation, and that European countries are individually small on the global stage. Combine this with recent geopolitical and economic events, the urgency for Europe to become more independent and self-sufficient has only intensified.

鈥淥perating across Europe has been costly and time-consuming, with expansion today requiring different partners, structures and processes in each market 鈥� much of which is still analogue. For companies like Pleo, a proposal like EU-Inc could have enabled faster expansion, lower costs and greater ambition, with the fragmentation of planning growth across borders removed. We could鈥檝e scaled faster, and taken on US competitors, with far less friction.

鈥淲hile it won鈥檛 solve every challenge 鈥� such as currencies, infrastructure and cultural differences 鈥� EU-Inc meaningfully lowers legal and operational barriers, and signals a shift in Europe鈥檚 mindset toward innovation and competitiveness. There will undoubtedly be necessary evolutions that take this further, moving Europe toward acting as a unified market on the global stage. But what we鈥檙e seeing announced today is a first step 鈥� and a hugely significant one.鈥�

听

Sebastien Marchon, CEO, Rydoo

听

听

鈥淭he EU Inc initiative is a very positive step and I strongly support the direction the European Commission is taking.

鈥淥ne of the biggest challenges for European startups today is fragmentation. Building a company across Europe still means navigating multiple legal systems, regulatory frameworks and administrative processes. Anything that reduces this friction and helps entrepreneurs scale faster across the continent is a step in the right direction.

鈥淓U Inc should be seen as a starting point. If implemented well, it could help create a more coherent European market and give startups and scale ups the conditions they need to compete globally with the US, China and other innovation ecosystems.

鈥淭his is a race against time. Europe has an extraordinary opportunity to create a more founder-friendly environment that benefits everyone 鈥� entrepreneurs, employees, investors and governments alike 鈥� but it will need to move quickly.

鈥淎t the same time, reforms of this scale must be implemented carefully and thoughtfully. The goal should be to move fast, but without creating new layers of complexity, while ensuring that the benefits are shared across the entire ecosystem.

鈥淚f Europe gets this right, it could unlock a new era of innovation and entrepreneurship across the continent.鈥�

Matias Rodsevich, CEO and Founder, PRLab

鈥淚n my experience owning an EU-registered company and working with over 200 tech startups, the fragmentation problem is not theoretical. It is the reason so many European founders quietly incorporate in Delaware instead. Legal uncertainty and administrative complexity are not just inconveniences. They are competitive disadvantages that push talent and capital out of the continent.

鈥淓U Inc. addresses the right problem. A single digital registration, no minimum share capital, unified share classes, and a simplified insolvency path. Founders have been asking for exactly this for years. And honestly, if it works, it might signal something bigger: that the EU is finally willing to modernize how it treats businesses, not just regulate them. That shift in mindset matters as much as any single policy.

鈥淢y concern is simple. The proposal still lets national courts decide how the rules are interpreted. That means each country could apply the framework differently, and you end up with 27 versions of the same law. Which is the exact problem EU Inc. was supposed to solve.鈥�

Charlotte GOUNOT, Deputy CEO & CFO, Defacto

鈥淥ver time, the 28th regime should decrease complexity due to EU cross-boarder issues. After the Rome I and Rome II regulations, it鈥檚 a positive step forward!

鈥淣evertheless, ahead of the deployment at scale, governments need to ease the transfer of any EU receivable (such as B2B invoices). These are currently processed via different mechanisms, so something as easy as sending an invoice to another country can be difficult.

鈥淭he new rules should build on a simple principle: as long as the originator of a receivable, the debtor, the receivable itself ,and the transfer deed are all governed by one of the 28 EU laws, the transfer should be acknowledged in each and all of the 28 EU laws. In other words, we all have to be willing to accept the validity of other EU countries鈥� invoicing rules, simply to send goods and money back and forth.

鈥淥therwise, major processes are at stake: export capabilities, SME refinancing, manufacturing industries scalability (such as DITB). The 28th regime does not undermine the need of a Rome III regulation to deepen the single market.鈥�

Steven Drost, Co-founder and Executive Vice Chairman, CodeBase

鈥淓uropean Commission鈥檚 proposal for EU Inc feels like Europe finally recognising the problem out loud. We have no shortage of talent or ambition, but we have built a system where scaling means navigating a maze with 27 different barriers.

鈥淭he proposal has some genuinely practical signals. The ability to incorporate in 48 hours, fully digitally, and the move towards a shared EU registry are exactly the kind of changes founders have been asking for.

鈥淏ut implementation will decide everything. The common registry, clear rules, and a way to resolve disputes across borders will be fundamental. Otherwise, the barriers just morph into another form.

鈥淓urope is very good at starting companies, but too few manage to scale and stay. Many still leave because it is easier to grow elsewhere.

鈥淭his is a step in the right direction. The real test is whether it delivers a system that is simple, usable, and actually supports growth across borders.鈥�