Today is the last day to have your say. The European Commission’s consultation on the proposed 28th Regime championed by the EU Inc., closes tonight — if you’re a founder, investor or ecosystem-builder, now is your final chance to submit feedback.
Tell Brussels what you think before it’s too late.
Europe’s founders and investors don’t lack ambition. What they lack are legal and regulatory systems built for modern, cross-border scale. Fragmentation, red tape, mismatches across jurisdictions — these are the invisible brakes holding us back.
From Draghi’s warning shot to a founders’ movement
When Mario Draghi’s report on European competitiveness landed in September 2024, it pulled no punches: Europe’s innovation gap isn’t due to a lack of talent or capital, but structures that block their free flow.
One year on, that warning still resonates. Without a unified framework, the continent risks “slow agony” as capital and talent continue to gravitate to friendlier jurisdictions.
In response, EU Inc. launched in late 2024 — a coalition of founders, investors, and ecosystem builders pushing for a truly pan-European startup entity.
Their open letter framed the 28th Regime not as a technical tweak, but a fundamental reset for how we build across borders.
By December, they’d released a detailed blueprint for what this could look like: a single legal vehicle, a digital registry for fast incorporation, a standard investment tool inspired by SAFE/BSA, and a unified ESOP regime. Not just vision — execution.
European startups: running a marathon with their shoelaces tied
Earlier this month, Goedele “G” Mangelaars (founder of Pink Notebook) shared how Europe’s current system handicaps founders.
"Startups don't have the luxury of waiting years for decisions. At some point, the EU has to take a risk. Even if the 28th Regime isn't exactly ironed out on all counts, being 80 per cent right and moving quickly is better than standing still."
Estonia’s playbook: digital sovereignty in action
Before Eu Inc., there was EE-Inc. Estonia’s digital infrastructure has long shown how small, coherent frameworks can leapfrog legacy bureaucracy. Its e-identity, digital registries, and automated admin aren’t theoretical ideals — they work. EU Inc.’s proposal channels that same ethos: interoperable, digital-first, sovereignty-minded. The difference is scale.
Angels are hitting structural ceilings
Today we reported on why angel investors are rallying behind the 28th Regime.
The reality is stark: early-stage investors face notaries, tax ID bottlenecks, mismatched stock option regimes, and AIFMD red tape. Simon Leicht of SDAC put it bluntly:
“We need common, streamlined frameworks that let capital flow to innovation. Let us focus on what we do best: backing great founders, not navigating redundant paperwork.”
Fixed regulatory costs are often the same for a €10 million fund as for a €100 million one — but the resources aren’t. It’s no wonder micro-funds and angels max out at Europe’s edges.
The 28th Regime directly addresses this: harmonised ESOPs, digital incorporation, standardised legal instruments, and shared investor frameworks. It’s not about erasing national sovereignty. It’s about giving startups and investors a legal route designed for scale — not fragmentation.
Today is the last day to act
The European Commission’s consultation on the 28th Regime closes today.
Fill in the questionnaire. It's quick, and it shows that the startup community is engaged and active on this issue. Or share your experience with an anecdote or two:
Examples to write about:
- The mental load of juggling multiple legal regimes while trying to build a product.
- How much money and time you’ve spent on lawyers vs. R&D.
- How bureaucracy has shaped your strategic decisions (e.g., where to raise, hire, or base HQ).
- Expanding from one EU country to another but having to re-do incorporation, shareholder agreements, or option plans from scratch.
- A “we wanted to launch in X, but our lawyers said don’t bother” story.
- Fragmented VAT, tax, or labour rules that meant months of legal bills before signing a single customer. when setting up cross-border entities turned into a bureaucratic obstacle course.
- Delays opening a bank account or getting a tax ID that cost you a funding round, grant, or key hire.
- Having to set up multiple national subsidiaries just to raise from investors in different EU countries.
- Deals, partnerships, or hires that fell through because timelines in Europe couldn’t keep up with the speed of global competitors.
- Grants or innovation programs you couldn’t access because your company structure didn’t fit national eligibility quirks.
- The “we went to Estonia to register because it was faster” story — or worse, “we went to Delaware.”
- Losing a great candidate because your ESOP terms didn’t translate properly across borders — or because exercising stock options was legally or tax-wise a nightmare.
This is the most concrete chance Europe has had in decades to build a truly single market for startups and investors. If Europe wants its next generation of companies to build here and stay here, this is the moment to act.
Submit your views now— and make sure Brussels hears from the people building Europe’s future.
Would you like to write the first comment?
Login to post comments