Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

The European Commission is responding to mounting criticism of over-bureaucratization with the introduction of a new corporate legal form. “EU Inc” is intended to create a uniform legal structure that applies across the entire European Union economic area. A charming idea—but one that quickly sinks in the general bureaucratic madness.

The European Union has reached a point where it is considered lucky if a handful of days pass without new regulatory initiatives from the Brussels central apparatus.

To ease some pressure and deflect growing criticism of the EU’s bureaucratic jungle, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the idea of a Europe-wide corporate legal form during the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The proposed new pan-European company type is called EU Inc. It would become the 28th European legal form, alongside national corporate types such as GmbH, SA, or Limited.

What von der Leyen pitched as an innovative project aims to simplify company formation for startups and scale-ups. The goal is to operate cross-border in all 27 member states of the Single Market without needing to create additional subsidiaries to comply with each nation’s legal requirements.

EU Inc is intended to enable a uniform, fully digitalized formation and administration process. Companies could be registered online within 48 hours—without a notary and without cumbersome paperwork.

The Commission also plans to introduce a central EU register, functioning as a one-stop shop and providing transparency on company formations, capital increases, and ownership structures. The project is currently in the early parliamentary consultation phase and could take effect in national law no earlier than 2027.

The Commission’s idea is attractive. Besides facilitating fast and simple company formation, it would be the first substantial initiative in years moving beyond mostly repressive regulation—truly aimed at deepening the European Single Market.

Faster market entry, simplified mergers, and potentially easier venture capital financing could follow—if national tax deregulation also occurs. That, however, seems unlikely given European regulatory practices.

The politically oft-cited capital markets union would thus receive its first, modest boost—a real-world link to the situation of entrepreneurs. Evidently, fragments of criticism from the business world occasionally reach Commission circles—who would have thought?

Where Are the Entrepreneurs?

As always with Brussels initiatives, the devil is in the details. First, national adoption of this new legal form must be achieved.

It is expected that powerful lobbying groups—from tax advisors to auditors—will work intensively to protect their interests, which are largely derived from the complexity of tax law, capital requirements, and formation procedures.

Over any supposed liberalization of economic activity looms the long shadow of European regulatory policy.

This is the real crux of European politics. Considering the economic structure of the European economy, one inevitably asks: where are the entrepreneurs who would even be willing or able to utilize this new EU Inc framework?

A single number illustrates the grotesque regulatory work of Brussels: last year alone, the European economy was flooded with over 1,400 new EU legal acts. That’s four new regulations per day. Directives, regulations, delegated acts, implementing acts—companies are drowning in an ideologically driven Brussels regulatory swamp.

CO₂ policies and supply chain directives are often in focus, scrutinizing every economic activity in detail and generating immense bureaucratic costs. Entrepreneurs increasingly work to fund administration—less to serve their markets.

What we see in Brussels is classic bureaucracy: once established, politically nurtured, and treated as a political vanguard, it develops a life of its own. Cynically, the production of legal acts is the only “good” keeping it alive.

The truth of this bureaucratic phenomenon often reveals itself openly—when politicians proudly list the laws they initiated, without any understanding of real economic life. It is the work record of a gravedigger, carving a path through the increasingly paralyzed productive sector of society.

Political and media support for EU climate regulation has created a self-referential bureaucracy now spreading into member states. With state quotas beyond 50%, the Rubicon of economic imbalance is crossed. Europe risks becoming a purely administrative hub while productive economy steadily shrinks.

The parasitic body consumes its host, accelerating its decay. Europe is degenerating into an administrative site with declining production activity.

Centrifugal Forces Gain Momentum

EU Inc could indeed be a charming solution for deepening the Single Market—if one day an orderly regulatory turnaround is initiated.

It is quite likely that the accelerating downward spiral of high public debt, falling productivity, rising unemployment, and a dramatic geopolitical decline of the continent will eventually pave the way for a conservative, market-oriented shift.

For Brussels central planners, particularly in Eastern Europe, a political storm is brewing that, once unified, could one day shatter the regulatory chains.

From a German perspective, however, it seems likely that the driving forces of climate-socialist transformation—undoubtedly concentrated in Berlin—will marshal their forces to continue the fatal path toward a command economy after breaking with the opposition.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a Germany a graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

A fiscal storm is brewing in the Netherlands. With the potential introduction of a tax on unrealized capital gains, The Hague is set to become a testing ground for the systematic transfer of wealth from the private sector to the state. Across all government levels, the European Union is increasingly transforming into an aggressive parasitic system.

A fundamental clash between the public and private sectors is intensifying across the EU. In March, both chambers of the Dutch parliament will decide on the implementation of an annual tax on unrealized gains. Going forward, all increases in value—from real estate and stocks to bonds and cryptocurrencies—would fall under this fiscal framework.

This move significantly accelerates the extraction of capital from the private sector, constituting a political rule violation. Already taxed income and assets would be hit again based on hypothetical gains, severely impeding private wealth accumulation.

Support for this measure spans both right- and left-wing parties. It reflects a form of fiscal horseshoe logic, apparently anticipating a severe national financial crisis.

For the EU as a whole, this is disastrous. That a nation with a debt ratio of just 46% and new borrowing of slightly over 2% of GDP would effectively declare war on private capital signals profound economic distortions in one of Europe’s most successful economies. One naturally asks: if this is happening in the Netherlands, what does it say about the rest of the European Union?

The End of the Productive Economy

A glance at Eurozone manufacturing suggests a storm is brewing. Deindustrialization in Germany, the largest industrial base in Europe, began in 2018 and has accelerated ever since, with massive capital flight. What applies to Germany applies even more so to the fragile peripheral European economies.

For decades, Europe’s economy has shifted from production toward financial and wealth-rentier models. As financialization advances, production and value creation increasingly relocate abroad. This mirrors a process the United States underwent for decades and attempted to reverse under President Donald Trump.

European states see no escape from the economic death spiral created by expanding welfare systems, uncontrolled migration, and slowly shrinking core industrial productivity. Politicians are buying time through the expropriation of citizen savings to evade growing reform pressure.

Once societal patience reaches a tipping point, Europe may witness scenes similar to those currently unfolding in the U.S., where the government has effectively declared war on illegal immigration amid a media-driven defensive battle coordinated by far-left forces, globalist media, and foreign foundations.

The pressing question for Europe: how long will native populations tolerate financial assault from the state without demanding corresponding migration and welfare reforms?

Several EU states already levy progressive inheritance and gift taxes. Norway recently introduced a wealth tax of roughly 1% on net assets above €160,000 per person, raising eyebrows in one of Europe’s richest nations. Spain applies a progressive wealth tax up to 3.5%, plus a solidarity wealth levy for assets above €3 million—“solidarity,” a political buzzword used to rhetorically justify impending fiscal expropriation.

This expropriation is imminent. Coalition parties have spent the past year laying the groundwork for a massive expansion of inheritance taxes. It would be unwise to rule out Germany’s politically influenced Constitutional Court approving a national wealth tax in the future.

Building the Command Economy

Germany is driving Europe toward socialism. Capital formation and independent family structures, which could form a powerful societal opposition, are increasingly despised by political elites.

There is no longer any denying it: the EU’s economic model and the manic drive to transform it into a green command economy reflect growing panic in Brussels, Berlin, and Paris. Every attempt to mask economic collapse with debt fails—the collateral damage of centrally planned green “artificial” economies seeps into public awareness.

The economic plight of weaker Southern European nations hardly needs detailed exposition. It is well known that the Eurozone has failed as a currency union attempting to integrate economies with wildly divergent productivity, such as Germany and Greece.

Now, cracks are visible, and states are defending their power through systematic extraction of private capital. Europe is on the defensive.

Europe in the U.S.

Wherever the European model has been adapted, politics is employing similar tools. The election of socialist Zohran Mamdani as New York City mayor last year drew attention. His victory was fueled by politically guided settlement of Muslim migrants, allied with the financial-left establishment, orchestrating a successful campaign.

With Mamdani’s election, vast capital is now politically—literally—trapped. Those who fail to relocate face massive taxation. Mamdani, campaigning on free public transit, rent caps, and public markets, announced plans this week to close a $10 billion budget gap with a wealth tax. 

New York is now a Democratic Party campaign hub, positioned against the heart of the conservative resurgence initiated by Donald Trump’s deregulation and tax cuts.

In California, the most European-leaning U.S. state, the “Billionaire Tax Act” was introduced, with Governor Gavin Newsom planning a one-time 5% wealth levy on net assets above $1 billion. Outmigration from the Golden State has already begun, along with tens of thousands of jobs relocating elsewhere. The shortsightedness of this policy is only surpassed by its childish aggressiveness.

Worldwide, it remains vital to preserve economic centers that defend market principles and private wealth accumulation—the torchbearers of civilization. Meanwhile, the EU’s descent into socialist barbarism seems all but inevitable.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a Germany a graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.