Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

commission.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 99 posts

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#41

Post by layer8 »

Gormo wrote: post #2

It's funny that the EU pretends not to be a sovereign entity or a state in its own right, but then sets up legal frameworks like this. Even in the US, you can't set up a corporation at the federal level: apart from a handful of entities chartered via special acts of Congress, a business entity must exist under the laws of a particular state.

It’s a mix, some competences lie more with the EU, some remain more, or exclusively, with the member states: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competences_of_the_European_Un.... Importantly, foreign policy and defense lies more with the member states. In addition, proposals by the European Commission must be approved by the Council (consisting of executives of all member states) in a qualified majority (at least 55% of member states and representing at least 65% of the total EU population) or in some cases unanimously.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#42

Post by mrtksn »

Gormo wrote: post #2

It's funny that the EU pretends not to be a sovereign entity or a state in its own right, but then sets up legal frameworks like this. Even in the US, you can't set up a corporation at the federal level: apart from a handful of entities chartered via special acts of Congress, a business entity must exist under the laws of a particular state.

EU is not a sovereign entity or a state but it needs to be and this is one step in that direction. EU eurocrats worked with the people affected of this and put together a proposal and the elected officials of each member state will vote on this.

Anyway, I don't know about the exact wiring of this but an alternative can be to create a virtual country with its own law, sign a trade agreement with the country to give it full access to the EU market and even some special rights and achieve the same effect of getting rid of the regulations and bureaucracy. These arrangements can be very interesting, like the City of London which is like a country inside London that is actually a corporation. Very weird things are possible.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#43

Post by dosinga »

joe_mamba wrote: post #39
surgical_fire wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hungary can leave the EU if it wants. Article 50 exists for this. If it wants to stay in the EU it has to adhere to the bloc rules. It is not forced to stay in the EU (and, in fact, getting rid of Orban would not be such a bad idea). Hungexit when?

[flagged]

Employers and landlords do that sort of thing all the time. Rent goes up, job descriptions change, return to office is suddenly required. And yeah, you can get a different job or a different home if you don't like it.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#44

Post by okanat »

joe_mamba wrote: post #24
okanat wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU didn't fight UK. UK fought EU to not lose their exorbitantly privileged status and benefits while leaving the club itself. They wanted to have their cake and eat it too. When they realized and decided that they will get none of the benefits, the finalization of the exit took merely weeks. EU is a huge privilege / opportunity for smaller countries. EU-6 doesn't need the other ones to be the second biggest market. I…

>EU-6 doesn't need the other ones to be the second biggest market. That's where you're wrong. Where would German industry be today without the labor, suppliers, export market and cheap energy imports from the other non-EU-6 members? Especially after they denuclearized and derussified their energy sector and nuked their birthrates, and so rely on importing energy and workers from everyone to stay afloat. You can't cla…

Germany had its biggest boom when there was no Schengen agreement. Most of the German labor came from Turkey, not from the smaller and less developed EU countries. Its immigration policy was targetted and more selective even. Germany doesn't import much energy from less developed EU countries either: https://www.iea.org/countries/germany/energy-mix#where-does-... most of them come from EU-6 and UK which makes sense since those countries have technology and resources to produce extra capacity. It's the same deal with France with its former and current colonies. They truly do not need to be in a union with the less developed countries to get those benefits. Same for Canada, Canada doesn't need to enter a union with a less developed country to get lots of immigration.

I'm not saying that Germany (or other EU-6) doesn't need immigration. I'm an immigrant in Germany and I do support it for qualified and even non-qualified jobs. However, it is not a clear cut benefit to be in a union with emigrant source countries either.

The current setup of EU is a toxic relationship for both sides though, it is a benevolent colonization setup. Allowing smaller post-Soviet countries without significantly investing and improving their economies and industries and their political stability before ascension, ended up very badly for the other ones. EU-6 siphoned out all the labor, younger population and educated classes of post-Soviet countries, so now their populations are mostly old, resented people, the biggest businesses owned by EU-6 for only cheap labor. Those populations are really susceptible to authoritarian overtakes and the authoritarian governments like Hungary and Slovakia of today and Poland of past can block significant decisions with the veto right.

EU is very beneficial for smaller countries however at a significant cost for both sides in a bad way. It worked best when the candidate / new member nation was already a significantly developed and industrialized part of Soviet Union like Baltics or Poland (for the most part, they are not 100% clear yet).

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#45

Post by storus »

geff82 wrote: post #17

Will I be able to freely move between EU countries when I own such a company or will Germany tax 340% of the average profit of the last three years for doing so as they do now? People with German GmbH are essentially unable to move anywhere.

I think you know the answer already. Another half-baked initiative. I can't imagine countries willingly losing their tax revenues.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#46

Post by victorbjorklund »

dmitrygr wrote: post #9
matthewmacleod wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That obviously makes no sense. A club isn’t a sovereign entity just because it has rules. Hungary is free to leave the EU and set a border policy that conflict with EU law if it wishes - but if it wants to remain part of that organisation, particularly one that has open borders thorough The Schengen area, then of course it needs to follow the rules.

As UK showed, leaving EU is hard and EU will fight you on it as well as seek to penalize you

It was super easy for UK to leave EU? No one tried to stop them. The ”hard” part was that they wanted to keep some benefits of the membership after canceling the membership.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#47

Post by joe_mamba »

okanat wrote: post #44
joe_mamba wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>EU-6 doesn't need the other ones to be the second biggest market. That's where you're wrong. Where would German industry be today without the labor, suppliers, export market and cheap energy imports from the other non-EU-6 members? Especially after they denuclearized and derussified their energy sector and nuked their birthrates, and so rely on importing energy and workers from everyone to stay afloat. You can't cla…

Germany had its biggest boom when there was no Schengen agreement. Most of the German labor came from Turkey, not from the smaller and less developed EU countries. Its immigration policy was targetted and more selective even. Germany doesn't import much energy from less developed EU countries either: https://www.iea.org/countries/germany/energy-mix#where-does-... most of them come from EU-6 and UK which makes sense s…

>Germany had its biggest boom when there was no Schengen agreement.

I'm talking about the state of the German economy of today, how it's deeply tied to non-Eu-6 countries in a big way. Their past economic success of a lone wolf, is irrelevant today when they're struggling. Different times. China wasn't even on the radar as a competitor back then and German cars were all the rave worldwide back then. Times have changed.

> Its immigration policy was targetted and more selective even.

So why doesn't it want to be as selective anymore today? You know, like back their economic boom days you mentioned before.

>They truly do not need to be in a union with the less developed countries to get those benefits.

Then what's the point of the EU if they can get everything they need without a union? Why doesn't Germany and France just leave the EU and take their money with them?

Because you only focus on the argument of the German EU integration being all about importing cheap labor with your argument, but my argument is beyond that. For example, countless suppliers to Germany economy are in Poland, Romania, Slovakia, etc. And such trade and IP collaboration NEEDS an union. Same for defence parts for French companies that are now made in post-communist countries.

>The current setup of EU is a toxic relationship for both sides though, it is a benevolent colonization setup.

It wasn't always like that though. Only in the last 10 or so years did the EU start to be authoritarian towards member states.

>EU-6 siphoned out all the labor, younger population and educated classes of post-Soviet countries

True, but guess what, for the first time ever, more post-Communist EU migrants are now leaving Germany and returning home, than the number migrating to Germany from post-Communist members. Reasons are many, but it seems like the days of Germany (and others) being the lands of milk and honey are over.

>Those populations are really susceptible to authoritarian overtakes

And German population ISN'T?! They just prefer a different flavor of authoritarianism, one with nicer PR, where the jackboots are eco friendly, as they take you to court for "hateful" Tweets, stuff that doesn't happen in the post-Communist states.

>authoritarian governments like Hungary and Slovakia of today and Poland

Why are they considered authoritarian? Because they do what their voters want and not what the EU wants?

>can block significant decisions with the veto right.

Good? Shouldn't nations be able to have a say themselves from EU decisions that might negatively impact them?

I didn't hear many people calling the Austrian regime autocratic for constantly vetoing Romania and Bulgaria's Schengen memberships, despite those countries having met the criterias long before.

So the "autocratic" label keeps being applied very inconsistently across the EU. Dare I say hypocritical.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#48

Post by riffraff »

Gormo wrote: post #2

It's funny that the EU pretends not to be a sovereign entity or a state in its own right, but then sets up legal frameworks like this. Even in the US, you can't set up a corporation at the federal level: apart from a handful of entities chartered via special acts of Congress, a business entity must exist under the laws of a particular state.

You could setup a European company (SE) for 20 years or so, this is a new kind that solves some of the issues that one had.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societas_Europaea

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#49

Post by victorbjorklund »

woodpanel wrote: post #40
surgical_fire wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hungary can leave the EU if it wants. Article 50 exists for this. If it wants to stay in the EU it has to adhere to the bloc rules. It is not forced to stay in the EU (and, in fact, getting rid of Orban would not be such a bad idea). Hungexit when?

Oh we all saw the true colors of the glorious and open and free-to-leave EU when Brits wanted to leave.

Yes, they were free to leave. No one stopped them from leaving the free trade area and having the exact same status as any other random country in the world. Or did you mean that Uk wanted to leave EU but keep all the good benefits? Like canceling Netflix and bitching about not being able to watch the latest series.

Re: EU Inc.: A new harmonised corporate legal regime

#50

Post by victorbjorklund »

joe_mamba wrote: post #39
surgical_fire wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hungary can leave the EU if it wants. Article 50 exists for this. If it wants to stay in the EU it has to adhere to the bloc rules. It is not forced to stay in the EU (and, in fact, getting rid of Orban would not be such a bad idea). Hungexit when?

[flagged]

You are free to leave EU just like any other agreement.
Post reply on HN