Comparisson: Regime 0 vs EU–INC vs the EU “28th regime”
This page compares three ideas that are shaping the debate on an EU-wide company regime:
-
Regime 0 (Bruegel): a targeted optional regime for innovative, high-growth startups.
-
EU–INC: a community proposal for a new pan-European company structure + registry + EU-wide stock options.
-
“28th regime” (European Commission): the Commission’s upcoming initiative (details still evolving until the draft law is published).
Status snapshot: The Commission’s legislative proposal is currently expected in Q1 2026.
Last updated: 03.01.2026
|
Dimension |
“28th regime” |
|
Regime 0 (Bruegel) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Harmonisation scope (corporate / labour / tax / insolvency) |
Public messaging suggests a “single set of rules”; exact scope will depend on the final draft |
Pan-EU company structure with central registry; keeps local taxes & employment, aims to remove cross-border friction |
Corporate regime focused on scale barriers; explicitly avoids harmonising general labour & tax |
||
|
Entry criteria (open vs selected) |
Unknown until draft; consultation materials focus on startups/scaleups & innovative firms |
Generally framed as broadly usable for founders/innovative firms; details in proposal |
Selected / gated: innovation + credible growth plans; intended for startups (not incumbents) |
||
|
Registry model (Hub0 vs national) |
Not final; recurring theme is “digital-by-default” and simplification |
EU-level central registry + dashboard |
EU-level one-stop digital registry concept (“Hub0”) |
||
|
ESOP / equity taxation principle |
Frequently mentioned as pain point; outcome unknown |
Strong emphasis on EU-wide stock options (EU-ESOP concept) |
Strong push for tax at sale for founders/key equity holders (with holding period concept) |
||
|
Dispute resolution / courts |
Unknown until draft |
Proposal discusses legal architecture; specifics depend on final text |
Alternative dispute resolution first; specialised/fast-track structure described |
||
|
Procurement / subsidy non-discrimination |
Unknown until draft |
Generally pro “operate anywhere” principle; details in proposal |
Explicit: Regime 0 firms should be treated like national firms; no discrimination |
Notes on interpretation (important)
-
The Commission column is provisional: until the draft regulation/directive is published, comparisons should be read as “direction of travel”, not final design.
-
The biggest “fork in the road” is scope (startup-only vs broader) and how much gets harmonised vs kept national (labour/tax/insolvency).
Want updates when something changes?
Subscribe on the homepage (takes 10 seconds).
Link map
Bruegel “Regime 0” page:
https://www.bruegel.org/policy-brief/regime-0-europe-wide-in...
Bruegel “Regime 0” PDF:
https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/2025-12/PB%2033%...
EU–INC homepage:
EU–INC proposal hub:
European Parliament legislative train (28th regime file):
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-new...
Commission work programme 2026 (EUR-Lex):
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A...
European Parliament brief (backgrounder on 28th regime):
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2025/7792...
