Based in Brussels, Kay Jebelli is Senior Director for Europe at the Chamber of Progress, a progressive tech-industry association. Kay previously worked at the Computer & Communications Industry Association and has over a decade’s experience working as a competition lawyer including in private practice and at DG Competition.

If you’ve been on LinkedIn lately, you’ll have found it impossible to miss the rush of European founders, technologists, and investors clamouring for EU-Inc, a new European legal entity to rival Delaware, and create a true single market for entrepreneurs.

Genesis

It’s an idea that is a long time coming, and has been stifled by legacy interests in the past, but which now has a groundswell of support, not only from Europeans experienced with building companies abroad and driven to duplicate their success here, but from the highest levels of the European Commission, who see it as essential to the post-Draghi-report competitiveness mandate.

The idea is simple: Europe needs a modern, harmonised legal form that allows startups to incorporate once and scale across the EU, without needing to duplicate paperwork, legal advice, and governance structures in each of the 27 Member States.

The so-called “28th regime” would be a supranational company form designed to cut red tape, reduce administrative friction, and finally deliver on the promise of a single market for entrepreneurs.

That might sound like an obvious fix, but the reality for many European founders today is anything but simple. Fragmented legal frameworks, byzantine notarial processes, and overlapping national requirements have created a system in which even launching a company is more exhausting than exciting.

There are now well-known stories of early-stage founders in Germany spending tens of thousands of euros each year in notary fees just to incorporate or accept investment, while pages of governance documents are read aloud to them in the presence of a legal official.

Investors, especially those from outside the EU, are shocked to find that the act of investing in a startup requires the same ritual. It’s an exhausting process, out of step with the digital world startups actually operate in. In the time it takes to navigate these hurdles in Europe, a Delaware C-Corp is already founded, funded, and off to market ten times over.

This friction doesn’t just slow startups down, it bleeds into the broader economy. Fewer high-growth firms means fewer successful exits, fewer reinvestments, and less dynamism overall. The long-term opportunity costs are staggering.

It’s not the first time Europe has tried to create a supranational corporate form. The Societas Europaea (SE) was launched in 2004 with the goal of enabling cross-border operations. But it fell flat for startups. The SE required firms to already have a presence in multiple countries before incorporating, included rigid governance structures, and required capital levels far out of reach for young companies. Instead of replacing national complexity, it layered a European one on top.

What is EU Inc. about?

The 28th regime, with the EU-inc proposal the most concrete and start-up supported interpretation, is a different kind of project.

Born out of startup frustration, it is crowdsourced and community-led. A public petition and detailed proposal have drawn together over 600 VCs, 9000 startups, and 20 associations, coalescing around the idea of a single digital-first company form that would allow for seamless operation across the EU.

Backers include some of the most important investors in European companies, as well as a range of start-up associations, who have long highlighted the costs of regulatory fragmentation for Europe’s competitiveness.

EU‑Inc would be fully digital from day one: setup, governance, reporting, entirely in English and online. It wouldn’t require national duplication. It would exist alongside national legal forms, but would simplify cross-border operations, such as employment and capital flows. It could also standardise the investment process, and establish a unified employee stock options program to share startup success more widely.

Political support is also building.

In her September 2024 Mission Letters, President von der Leyen tasked Commissioners with closing the innovation gap and delivering a more competitive Europe, with the 28th regime often mentioned in the same breath.

The Commission has launched a Call for Evidence, open for public comment until 30 September 2025 (so it’s not too late). A legislative proposal is expected in early 2026.

Meanwhile, the European Parliament is working in parallel. The JURI Committee is drafting a legislative-initiative report, with René Repasi as rapporteur. However, the current draft has been met with disappointment by many in the startup community, who see it as too cautious and too narrow in scope.

MEP Axel Voss has submitted amendments to strengthen the text, and debate on the final version is set to begin on 13 October, with a committee vote expected in mid-November ahead of a year-end plenary vote.

Should it only be for startups?

As the debate continues, one big question looms: should this new company form be limited to “innovative” startups?

Many in the ecosystem argue no, and they’re right. While it’s understandable that a narrower scope is more politically palatable, it would be a mistake to include limitations from the start.

Europe should be aiming to attract global founders, scale-ups, SMEs, and international entrepreneurs looking for a stable, rules-based market to launch and grow. A more expansive regime would send the right signal: that Europe is open, ambitious, and willing to design 21st century institutions for 21st century companies.

The opportunity couldn’t be better timed. In a world marked by geopolitical fragmentation, growing regulatory divergence, and rising barriers to talent mobility, Europe can become a haven for builders, talent, and investors.

After years of EU-level hesitancy, there is now a chance to do something bolder, with overwhelming grassroots support.

Policymakers can change the institutions’ relationship with founders and see them not as photo opportunities at best, or pesky disruptors at worst, but as the force that will drive Europe’s future competitiveness. And it all boils down to the EU’s original mission, truly completing the single market.