Founders don’t need Europe. Europe needs founders. Urgently.

Jan 12, 2026 · 7 min read · 53 views

The 28th regime is happening. The question now is whether it'll be useful, like EU–INC, or another Brussels half-measure. Here's what's actually being decided right now, which details matter, and how you can help push it over the line.

First up, I'm confident that EU–INC will pass.

Not because Brussels suddenly became perfect.

Not because we spoke on stage with the VP of Europe about it (sorry this was too cool, had to brag).

But because EU–INC is desperately needed. Now more than ever.

  • Geopolitical crisis.
  • Economic pressure.
  • A time in which tech innovation is geostrategic.
  • A world where only large blocks matter.
  • And fragmented regions become weak vassals.

In times like these, startups and technological progress are not “nice to have”.

They are one of the very few real paths out. A path towards us being able to define our own rules and keep sovereignty

And we need actual decisions and solutions, not more reports. If reports could accelerate an economy, Europe would already be unstoppable.

So a simple truth comes now to play: if time for "messing around" has stopped, and if you want to do this for startups, you better do it with startups.

Why EU–INC will be a regulation

There are two ways to pass a law in the EU: via regulation or via directive.

EU–INC only works as a regulation.

A directive gives us:

  • 27 interpretations
  • 27 half-standards plus the 27 we already got
  • zero confidence and even more confusion

A regulation gives us:

  • one legal entity
  • one market
  • one signal to founders and investors

Here a full explainer on regulation vs directive by EU Made Simple.

The simple reason why: Standards create confidence. Confidence creates momentum. Momentum creates global winners.

I have no worry if the 28th regime will be proposed as regulation or not. It will be proposed as regulation. There is no possible real solution in which it couldn't.

But this is almost a distraction. The real fight is now about the details.

Passing something is easy. Passing something useful that will be adopted and actually solves the problems is hard.

This is the moment where it can still go wrong. This is no longer theoretical. This is being decided right now.

Here the details

The centralized registry is the cheat code

The registry is not a detail. It's the leap.

The level of digitalisation in Europe's company registries varies widely. And more importantly, many don't even agree on what the role of a company registry is.

There is no universe in which we will be able to streamline those into a competitive unified product in our lifetime. And this would miss a large opportunity.

Having a new European-level registry:

  • digital-first from day one
  • one entry point across Europe
  • an API that creates an ecosystem
  • a clean break from 27 uneven registries

Sounds small and technical but this is how Europe can digital leapfrog instead of catching up.

This is how – in theory – we create an ecosystem and allow even non EU countries to join the regime. We need a central registry!

It must be available to everyone

This isn't ideological. Because it's practical.

The moment Brussels limits EU–INC to “startups”:

  • lobbying starts
  • definitions get weird
  • companies get trapped or forced to reincorporate once they scale
  • momentum dies

Defining “startup” is a trap. Regulating who is allowed to raise money or who is “innovative enough” is the worst possible outcome.

Infrastructure is for everyone. EU–INC is tech-innovation infrastructure.

What we explicitly don't want inside the entity: Employment and Taxation

No harmonization of employment law no taxes.

Not because we don't want those solved. But because bundling them will force countries to limit access to the legal entity or even kill the whole thing. Full explainer here.

If Brussels wants those special rules:

  • do sandboxes
  • do programs
  • do opt-in regimes

Decouple it. Negotiate it. Define for which small groups they should be available and why.

Don't bake politics into the chassis.

Why we explicitly ask for Article 352

This is now super-inside baseball. Sorry… and welcome to my current life.

The EU can only do things it has legal permission to do. That permission comes from the EU treaties, basically the rulebook member states agreed to.

Different "articles" in these treaties give Brussels authority to act in different areas. Think of them as permission slips. Article 352 is the special one. It says: "If the EU needs to do something to achieve its goals, and no other article covers it, we can act. But everyone has to agree."

It exists for exactly the situations where:

  • Europe needs to move as one
  • The problem is cross-border by nature
  • 27 separate solutions would defeat the purpose

A unified company structure is textbook Article 352 territory. There's no "German version" of a European company that makes sense. Either it's one European thing or it's nothing.

Passing a regulation via TFEU Article 352 is the true solution on European level that's needed. And if unamity votes sound scary to you, know that there is a potential path of "enhanced cooperation" for those that agreed, afterwards.

Why I am not worried for founders, if this fails

The uncomfortable truth is a simple one. Even if Europe messes this up, founders will be fine.

They'll move. They'll incorporate elsewhere. They'll build anyway. They'll thrive.

For them individually it will be fine. For us as a group, as a continent it won't.

Europe needs a large functioning tech innovation sector.

If the next 25 years (or even 10) are again like the last 25 years:

  • GDP slips
  • leverage disappears
  • sovereignty becomes a slogan, being vassals a reality

If we fail, we won't have to worry about Russia or Trump dismantling the EU. Economically frustrated voters will do it for them.

If you don't like the word startups use the word tech, if you don't like tech use innovation, if you don't like innovation use economy, if you don't like economy as a term, use being able to afford our premium quality of life.

No matter how you call it, the message is the same:

  • Scale matters.
  • Capital pooling matters.
  • Standards create those large pools.

This quarter is the hot phase

Brussels committed to shipping a proposal this quarter – which means end of march in their (and let's be honest, my) language.

The question is not if they will propose something in this direction. Also no longer if it's a regulation or not.

The real question is now, if we use this moment to show ambition and create something that's more than the sum of its parts.

Something that unifies Europe for Startups. Something that actually leapfrogs and creates an infrastructure tool for Europe.

Today, tech sovereignty is geopolitical sovereignty. Tech innovation and hence startups are economically critical. Let's take this seriously and create infrastructure that actually works for our founders.

Let's push this over the (current) finishing line.

How you can help

What we need: EU–INC as defined in the proposal – built with Europe's best startup legal teams, founders, investors and 100+ open-source contributors. A pan-European legal entity via Article 352, a unified digital registry, open to all companies. No tax or employment law bundled in, because that's the compromise that can actually pass.

What you can do: Get this in front of every European head of state. If you know someone who can open doors to Prime Ministers, Chancellors, or Presidents – reach out: contact@eu-inc.org

thanks for reading!

– Andreas