This website use cookies for best experience. For more details read our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
The 28th regime timeline
Live timeline of the EU 28th regime for innovative companies (EU Inc.), with sources and the next political and legislative milestones.
Last updated: 11 October 2026
Commission publishes 28th regime proposal
The legal text, communication, annex, factsheet, and impact assessment enter the legislative process.
European Council backs the file
EU leaders endorse the "One Europe, One Market" agenda and call for adoption by the end of 2026.
First minister-level debate
COMPET ministers keep momentum behind the 28th regime, while safeguards, legal certainty, and labour rules remain open.
Parliament's draft report and amendments
The rapporteur's draft report is dated 29 June; JURI debated it on 15 July, and MEPs filed 1,418 amendments by the 17 July deadline.
The Irish Presidency redrafts the proposal in the Council
Its July compromise text deletes the insolvency chapter and the central register; the September text keeps both deletions.
Parliament and Council set their negotiating positions
JURI's committee vote, listed for 8 October, did not take place and has no confirmed date; the Council has not agreed its position yet.
Trilogue negotiations, on the Presidency's timetable
The Irish Presidency's stated aim; talks can begin only once Parliament and Council each have a negotiating position.
Political target: final agreement
The operational date depends on final adoption, publication and an application period that is still being negotiated.
The EU Commission published its proposal on 18 March 2026. Now two things happen in parallel: a Council track and a Parliament track. For the plain-language explainer of JURI, the rapporteur, and trilogue, see JURI, rapporteur, and trilogue.
In the Council (where EU governments negotiate), specialised working groups of civil servants meet regularly to examine the proposal in detail. Session 6 of the Working Party on Company Law opened on 2 June at the Justus Lipsius Building, the first post-COMPET technical session, and Session 7 followed on 11 June at the Europa Building (agenda CM 3040/26), reaching the formation and governance chapter (Articles 35 to 58) with Parliament's Employment Committee (EMPL) present; no public readout from Sessions 1–9 has appeared on the Council register. The proposal has also reached the ministerial layer: on 28 May, COMPET ministers held the first minister-level policy debate on the 28th regime. The public readout signalled momentum, not agreement on text, and left safeguards, legal certainty, national labour rules, insolvency, tax, minimum capital, and the Article 114 TFEU legal-basis question as negotiation points. Sessions 10 and 11 met on 2 and 8 July. Coreper discussed "guidance for further work" on 15 July (ST 11522/26), but no public outcome is available. Session 12 met on 23 July and examined the Irish Presidency compromise text (ST 11829/26), the first Presidency alternative text on the file. The text is now public: it strikes out Chapter X on insolvency (Articles 88 to 102) and Article 34 on the central digital register, and keeps Article 114 as the only legal basis. No readout from the session has been published. One Council document does show where governments stand: WK 9143/2026, dated 26 June, compiles article-by-article drafting suggestions from 21 of the 27 member states (24 by its revision of 15 July), with each comment attributed to the delegation that made it. Eight states question Article 114 TFEU as the legal basis, and eight raise registered-office forum shopping on employee participation. It is delegations' written input, not an agreed position; by the 15 July revision only Belgium, Cyprus and Ireland had not filed. Technical work resumed on 1 September and continued on 10, 17 and 29 September; a session was scheduled for 8 October, and four more are listed for 22 and 29 October and 6 and 13 November. The sessions are closed and publish no readouts. On 24 September the Irish Presidency informed ministers of the state of play at the Competitiveness Council, without a debate.
In the Parliament (where elected MEPs negotiate), the proposal is still in the preparatory phase for procedure 2026/0074(COD). JURI examined the file on 4 May, when Commissioner McGrath presented the proposal directly to MEPs. René Repasi (S&D, Germany) was appointed rapporteur on 23 April 2026, and the committee referral was announced in plenary on 18 May. The Parliament calendar runs: draft report dated 29 June (PE790.143v02-00), consideration of the draft on 15 July, amendment deadline 17 July, consideration of amendments on 7 September (held), committee vote listed on the draft agenda for 8 October but not held (press reports put it at 19 October), plenary indicatively forecast for 19 October. Opinion committees are ECON, with Aurore Lalucq, and EMPL, with Johan Danielsson; BUDG declined to give an opinion. ECON adopted its opinion on 15 July, and EMPL adopted its own on 10 September (PE788.967, rapporteur Johan Danielsson), by 26 votes to 19 with 7 abstentions. The procedure file now lists eight shadow rapporteurs across the seven political groups: Axel Voss (EPP), Pascale Piera (PfE), Mario Mantovani (ECR), Pascal Canfin (Renew), Kira Marie Peter-Hansen and Sergey Lagodinsky (both Greens/EFA), Arash Saeidi (The Left), and Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). Greens/EFA is the only group carrying two names; no appointment date is shown for either, so it is not yet clear from the file whether this is a co-shadow arrangement or a handover. If you only want the short version of who does what, start with What is JURI? and who the rapporteur is.
In the advisory bodies, the EESC adopted its mandatory opinion on 15 July 2026 (INT/1123-EESC-00744-00-00-AC, rapporteur Maxi Katharina Leuchters, Workers' Group; co-rapporteur Antonio García del Riego, Employers' Group), by 197 votes to none with 7 abstentions, following the formal consultation triggered by CM 2668/26 on 29 April. The opinion is separate from the 21 April EESC Workers' Group and ETUC conference. The Committee of the Regions adopted its opinion on the EU Inc. corporate legal framework (CDR-1414-2026), with Roberta Angelilli (ECR, Lazio) as rapporteur, on 2 July 2026.
In the national parliaments, which scrutinise the proposal for subsidiarity rather than negotiate it, eight chambers have filed contributions: the Italian Chamber of Deputies (11 June 2026), the Bulgarian Parliament (19 June), the Portuguese Parliament (19 June), the Dutch Senate (25 June), the Romanian Senate (1 July), the German Bundesrat (16 July), the Italian Senate (10 August) and the Romanian Chamber of Deputies (2 September). Both houses of the Italian and of the Romanian parliament have now filed, separately and months apart. The Bulgarian Parliament also filed a reasoned opinion (PE790.116, 24 June 2026), which is the formal instrument for a subsidiarity objection; one is far below the share of national parliaments needed to oblige the Commission to review the proposal. That makes nine documents on the procedure file in total.
Join the watchlist if you want an email when any of these occur:
(Subscribe on the homepage.)
1 September to 13 November 2026 - Council Working Party on Company Law, nine sessions
The Council's technical track restarted after the summer with the densest run of sessions on this file so far. Four have been held, all at 10:00: 1 September (Europa building), 10 September (Justus Lipsius building), 17 September (Europa building) and 29 September (LEX building). A further session was scheduled at 10:00 in the LEX building on 8 October; the Council has not said whether it was held. Four more are listed for 22 and 29 October and 6 and 13 November. Four sessions have a document on the record: the agendas for 10 September (CM 3960/1/26 REV 1) and 17 September (CM 4121/26) both continued examination of the Presidency's second compromise text, ST 12824/26 of 7 September, and the notice of meeting for 29 September, CM 4179/26 of 22 September, put that session on continued examination of the same text, as does the notice of meeting for 8 October, CM 4387/26 of 2 October. No readout has been published from any session held, and for the sessions without an agenda document it is not known which chapters they took or will take.
What those sessions have been doing became public for the first time on 7 September, when the Irish Presidency told the JURI committee that four working parties have met since early July, that a first compromise text has been discussed, and that a second is expected in the coming days.
Source: Council meeting pages for the Working Party on Company Law, 1 September, 10 September, 17 September, 29 September, 8 October - notice of meeting CM 4387/26
19 October 2026 (indicative) - European Parliament plenary vote on the negotiating mandate
The procedure file's forecast section carries 19 October 2026 as an indicative plenary sitting date for the first reading. That is a scheduling forecast, not a confirmed vote: indicative dates move routinely. It is also later than the rapporteur's own stated ambition: at the 15 July debate Repasi said he was targeting a plenary vote "by 2 October at the latest". Neither date is fixed, and the two have been moving apart rather than together.
Source: OEIL procedure file 2026/0074(COD), Forecasts section
8 October 2026 - JURI committee vote on the draft report, not held
The committee's draft agenda for its extraordinary meeting in Strasbourg listed the 28th regime for "Adoption of draft report" in the voting session from 10.30 to 11.15. The vote did not take place: the procedure file still shows the file awaiting a committee decision, and the committee issued no press release on it. ANSA and Agence Europe reported on 6 October that the rapporteurs had not reached agreement and that the vote had moved to 19 October; Table.Briefings reported that the deal fell through over co-determination. On 7 October Repasi said employee participation was the last open issue, and that a German proposal could provide a basis for compromise: a company whose staff in another Member State pass that country's participation threshold would have to set up a local subsidiary under its rules, guarded against splitting a workforce to stay below the thresholds. The 19 October date comes from press reports, not yet from a committee agenda.
Sources: JURI draft agenda for 8 October 2026, item 10; OEIL procedure file; ANSA, 6 October; Agence Europe, 6 October; Table.Briefings, 7 October; Agence Europe, 7 October
30 September 2026 - The second Presidency compromise text becomes public
ST 12824/26 of 7 September, the text the Council's working party has been examining since 10 September, is now downloadable from the Council's document register. It is marked against the first compromise text rather than against the Commission proposal, so it shows what changed over the summer rather than the whole redraft. Chapter X on insolvency (Articles 88 to 102) and Article 34 on the central digital register do not appear in it: the deletions made in July held through the September redraft rather than being reopened, and Article 15, the EU central interface, remains. Two bracketed options on employee participation are put to delegations, not agreed: a new Article 103a on wholly artificial arrangements, paired with recital 16, would name the evasion of national law on employee participation as an abuse; and Article 12(2a) to (2d), optional for each Member State, would cap the employees of a branch at the host country's participation threshold over two consecutive financial years, with a split into a local subsidiary as the way to comply. The text also moves the date of application from 12 to 27 months after entry into force.
Source: ST 12824/26, cover page and Annex pages 71 to 72, 75, 94 to 95, 144 to 146, 150
28 September 2026 - JURI sat without the 28th regime on its agenda, so there was no committee vote
The committee's draft agenda for the sitting, PE792.201 of 22 September, has sixteen items and none of them is the 28th regime.
25 September 2026 - A second "Guidance for further work" note goes to Coreper, for 30 September
The Council register lists ST 12849/26 of 25 September, a note from the General Secretariat to the Permanent Representatives Committee (Coreper, the member states' ambassadors), with a meeting date of 30 September; its content is not public. The previous note of that title, ST 11522/26 of 10 July, is public: it asked Coreper to confirm deleting the insolvency chapter and to give guidance on the legal basis, and the first compromise text, two days after Coreper's 15 July discussion, deleted Chapter X and kept Article 114.
Sources: Council public register entry for ST 12849/26 - ST 11522/26 - ST 11829/26
24 September 2026 - Competitiveness Council - ministers informed, no debate held
The Council's second-half planning document, ST 10983/26, provisionally listed a policy debate on the 28th-regime regulation for this meeting. The Council's forward look of 11 September listed it as information only, and the meeting's Main results confirm it: under any other business, "the Irish presidency informed ministers about the state of play" of the 28th regime, among other proposals. The debates were on the Chips Act 2.0 and the merger control guidelines.
7 September 2026 - JURI took up the amendments, and the Irish Presidency put a date on trilogue
The committee met from 15.00 to 18.30 in Brussels and took up the amendments filed by 17 July. An hour earlier, in the same room, Ireland's Minister of State Niamh Smyth set out the Presidency's priorities: four Council working parties since early July, a second Presidency compromise text expected in the coming days, ministers briefed at the Competitiveness Council this month, a Council negotiating mandate wanted as soon as possible, trilogue negotiations in November, and political agreement by the end of 2026. Those are Presidency targets stated to a committee, not scheduled stages: trilogue cannot start until the Council has a position and Parliament has a mandate, and neither exists yet.
The rapporteur named the clusters the amendments concentrate on: protection of labour and workers' rights, employee participation in company decision-making bodies, preventive control at least equal to what comparable national forms face, a workable employee stock option scheme, and the legal basis. The Commission offered to move its scope assurance out of recital 83 and into the binding articles, saying it is open to making explicit in the legal provisions that the regulation does not touch labour law, social security rules or taxation, apart from the timing of taxation of employee stock options. No compromise amendments existed yet; the rapporteur asked each group for its priorities and the first negotiations began the same evening.
Source: JURI committee meeting of 7 September 2026, webstreamed; quotations transcribed from the recording. No official readout, minutes or press release has been published.
2 and 15 July 2026 - CoR and EESC advisory opinions adopted
The Committee of the Regions adopted opinion CDR-1414-2026 on 2 July. The EESC followed on 15 July with its mandatory opinion INT/1123-EESC-00744-00-00-AC. Both inform the co-legislators but do not decide the file.
15–17 July 2026 - ECON opinion delivered; JURI amendment window closes
ECON delivered its opinion in the form of a letter on 15 July (PE788.878, adopted 34 to 13 with 9 abstentions, ECON Chair Aurore Lalucq). It backs the proposal as a first step but asks JURI to go further on two points in particular. First, let EU Inc companies access public markets (multilateral trading facilities and regulated markets), which runs against the draft report's ban on public listing. Second, add an optional tax module (opt-in, or enhanced cooperation as a last resort) with a single consolidated tax base, centralised VAT and withholding, and mandatory employee stock options taxed on disposal as capital income. The JURI deadline for shadow rapporteurs and any committee member to file amendments passed on 17 July. The amendments filed are listed in the procedure file as PE791.127 to PE791.131, dated 22 July 2026; JURI took them up on 7 September.
15 July 2026 - JURI debates the draft report
The Legal Affairs Committee considered rapporteur René Repasi's draft report (PE790.143v02-00, dated 29 June) in a single sitting. Repasi framed his changes as guardrails on a fast highway: keep two-working-day, EUR 100 digital formation, but add preventive anti-money-laundering checks, protect labour law and co-determination (applied by the place of employment), keep employee equity as a top-up rather than a wage substitute, add an optional steward-owned variant, and build a Delaware-style dispute mechanism. The groups then divided, mostly on how far the form should reach.
Scope: the EPP (Axel Voss) and ECR (Mario Mantovani) argued the 28th regime must stay open to all companies, with no sector exclusions; the rapporteur and the Patriots for Europe shadow (via Tom Diepeveen) want it limited to innovative start-ups.
Legal basis: the EPP wants it kept as a regulation on Article 114; the Patriots read it as clearly Article 50; the rapporteur is open to an Article 50 plus 114 directive if the Council moves that way.
Listing and labour: Renew (Pascal Canfin's remarks, read on his behalf) questioned both the public-listing ban and applying one country's co-determination rules across borders; the Greens (Kira Marie Peter-Hansen) backed the safeguards and excluding listed companies; The Left (Saeidi) weighed the impact assessment's projected gain against the risk of fraud.
The Commission, speaking in the same debate, said Article 4 was never intended as an unlimited country-of-origin rule and could be clarified in the text, opposed the draft report's public-listing ban, was sceptical of the steward-owned variant as a poor fit for a flexible-governance form, and warned that a place-of-employment connector for co-determination risks subjecting one company to several national regimes at once. Angelika Niebler (EPP), speaking outside the shadow-rapporteur roster, went further than Voss: open to steward ownership and employee equity in principle, treated the narrower insolvency scope as a step forward, and floated a partial co-determination compromise.
The amendment window closed on 17 July. The amendments filed are listed in the procedure file as PE791.127 to PE791.131, dated 22 July 2026, and JURI took them up on 7 September. We read all five documents in full; the group-by-group analysis went to subscribers on 9 September, and the compromise amendments go the same way. Subscribe for the next issue.
Source: the 15 July JURI debate (European Parliament webstream). No official readout was published; this reflects the public debate, not a formal committee conclusion.
2, 8, 15, and 23 July 2026 - Council work moves from examination to a Presidency text
Sessions 10 and 11 met on 2 and 8 July. Coreper discussed "guidance for further work" on 15 July (ST 11522/26), and the note is public: it asked Coreper to confirm deleting Chapter X on insolvency and to give guidance on the legal basis, Article 114 or Article 50 alongside or instead; no public outcome is available. Session 12 met on 23 July and examined Presidency compromise text ST 11829/26 of 17 July, which is also public: it strikes out Chapter X and Article 34 on the central digital register, and keeps Article 114 as the only legal basis. No readout, outcome note, or summary record from the session has been published.
Sources: 2 July meeting page - 8 July meeting page - Coreper guidance note, ST 11522/26 - first compromise text, ST 11829/26 - 23 July revised agenda, CM 3679/1/26 REV 1
29 June 2026 - JURI draft report dated (PE790.143v02-00)
Rapporteur René Repasi's draft report on the Commission proposal: 151 pages, 246 amendments, the rapporteur's opening rewrite. Among the changes proposed: Article 4 deleted and replaced by a labour-law firewall and designated national gap-filler forms (Article 1a), a numeric startup definition plus a list of excluded sectors (Annex Ia), a ban on trading the shares on public venues (Article 60), a steward-owned variant (EU Inc. SO) and an employee stock ownership plan (EU-ESOP). The report is now listed on the OEIL procedure file and in Parliament's JURI document register, where the current version carried is PE790.143v02-00. Full analysis: inside the European Parliament's draft report.
Source: draft report PR\1347416EN.docx, PE790.143v02-00 (29 June 2026) - OEIL procedure file 2026/0074(COD)
26 June 2026 - Twenty-one member states' drafting suggestions become visible (WK 9143/2026)
A Council General Secretariat compilation, "Table with Member States Drafting suggestions (Articles and Annexe)," sets out article-by-article written comments and proposed amendments from 21 of the 27 member states, running to 618 pages. It is the first primary, document-numbered, country-attributed source on this file: before it, member-state positions were visible only through ministerial summaries and press reporting. One caveat travels with it: this is the 26 June version. The revision of 15 July, WK 9143/2026 REV 2, adds Germany, Italy and Romania, so by then 24 of the 27 had filed and only Belgium, Cyprus and Ireland had not.
Legal basis: eight states question Article 114 TFEU, in two challenges that are easy to conflate and should not be. Austria, Bulgaria and Slovakia doubt it for the whole instrument, Austria citing the Council Legal Service and naming Article 50 or Article 352 as the alternatives, Slovakia naming the risk that a regulation founded on the wrong basis could be annulled. Czechia, Estonia, Croatia, Luxembourg and Sweden object only to the tax provisions, on the ground that Article 114(2) TFEU expressly excludes fiscal provisions and that Article 115, with unanimity, is the correct route; Austria makes the same point about Article 86. Several of the tax objectors say they support the substance and object only to the vehicle, and Croatia proposes carving the tax articles into a separate act. Legal basis is not a majority question: a single state can bring an annulment action.
Employee participation: eight of the 21 (Sweden, Austria, Slovenia, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Lithuania and Finland) raise registered-office forum shopping on Article 12. Sweden proposes changing the connecting factor outright, striking "registered office" and inserting "of employment," on the principle that employees' rights should follow the place where the work is carried out; Austria is open to giving greater weight to the administrative headquarters or the place of employment. That is dated roughly three weeks before the rapporteur took essentially the same position at the 15 July JURI debate. Malta proposes an anti-circumvention clause instead, Slovenia asks for the participation rules to be harmonised outright, and the Netherlands redrafts Recital 16.
Source: Council document WK 9143/2026 INIT, dated 26 June 2026, content updated 24 June 2026, served in full by the Council's public register. This is a compilation of delegations' written input, not an agreed Council position, and it predates the Irish Presidency compromise text of 17 July.
25 June 2026 - Working Party on Company Law - Session 9 held (unofficial count)
Held under the Cyprus Presidency, agenda CM-3330/26 (continued examination of doc. 7498/26 + ADD 1–6). The session ran one day before Repasi's expected JURI draft report, putting the Council and Parliament tracks in direct parallel. No public readout has appeared yet; a compound readout covering Sessions 6 through 9 (or 6 through 10) remains possible after Session 10 on 2 July.
Sources: 25 June meeting page - Council agenda CM 3330/26
17 June 2026 - Working Party on Company Law - Session 8 held (unofficial count)
Held at the Council Lex Building. Further technical examination; no public readout has appeared on the Council register yet. Public documents do not officially assign session numbers yet.
Source: 17 June meeting page
11 June 2026 - Working Party on Company Law - Session 7 held (unofficial count)
Held at the Europa Building. The agenda (CM 3040/26) covered continued examination of doc. 7498/26, reaching the chapters on formation and digital systems and on internal organisation (Articles 35 to 58), including governance and worker-participation provisions, with Parliament's Employment Committee (EMPL) present. That made this the first session to touch the codetermination and worker-board-representation questions several delegations and the labour-side bodies flagged after COMPET. No public readout has appeared yet.
Sources: 11 June meeting page - Council agenda CM 3040/26
2 June 2026 - Working Party on Company Law - Session 6 opened
Session 6 started at 10:00 CET at the Justus Lipsius Building in Brussels. Agenda item 2 is examination of doc. 7498/26 + ADD 1–6. No public readout has appeared yet.
Source: Council agenda CM 2921/26
28 May 2026 - COMPET ministerial Council - first minister-level debate held
Ministers held a policy debate on the 28th Regime Corporate Legal Framework: EU Inc. The Council readout was high-level: momentum toward continued work and the end-2026 target, but no agreement on text.
The debate also made the political price of speed visible. Many delegations pushed safeguards against fraud, tax evasion, and money laundering; some raised legal-certainty questions around legal basis, taxation, minimum capital, and insolvency; several highlighted respect for national labour rules. Cyprus Presidency chair Michael Damiano summarised the line publicly as "competitiveness and trust must go hand in hand".
Sources: Council main results - Provisional agenda CM 2753/26 - Presidency background brief ST 8598/26
18 May 2026: Working Party on Company Law, Session 5 (held)
Single agenda item: examination of doc 7498/26 + ADD 1-6. No public readout published yet.
7 May 2026: ECGI-Bocconi-LawFin academic workshop on EU Inc. (completed)
The workshop tested EU Inc.'s legal design across venture contracting, insolvency, political adoption, and targeted harmonisation.
Sources: ECGI workshop page · our editorial report
6–7 May 2026: Working Party on Company Law, Session 4 (held)
Two-day session: Day 1 at the Europa Building, Day 2 at the Council Lex Building. No public readout has appeared yet.
4 May 2026: JURI Committee, Commissioner McGrath presents the 28th regime proposal
The European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee examined the proposal. Commissioner McGrath presented COM(2026) 321. René Repasi (S&D, Germany) had already been appointed rapporteur on 23 April; the committee referral was later announced in plenary on 18 May.
Sources: JURI agenda · OEIL procedure file
17 and 27 April 2026: Working Party on Company Law, Sessions 2 and 3 (held)
Technical examination continued across both sessions. No public readout, outcome note, or negotiating text has appeared yet.
23–26 March 2026: First Council working-party discussions took place.
The Company Law working party (23 March) and the Internal Market working party (26 March) both took the 28th regime proposal for Commission presentation. No public outcome note is visible yet.
19–20 March 2026: European Council endorses "One Europe, One Market" agenda
EU leaders launched the "One Europe, One Market" agenda and named the 28th regime for company law as a priority measure for 2026. The conclusions call on the co-legislators to adopt the regime by the end of 2026, on the basis of the Commission proposal of 18 March. António Costa confirmed at the post-summit press conference that timelines should be implemented by end of 2027 but mostly this year, in 2026. No new legal text, just political direction and deadlines.
Sources: European Council conclusions · Costa press conference
18 March 2026: Commission publishes the 28th regime proposal package (branded EU Inc.)
The Commission has now published the EU Inc. package: the Communication “Towards a 28th regime for EU companies”, the Proposal for an EU Inc. corporate legal framework, the annex, factsheet, and the impact-assessment papers. This is the real shift from expectation to text: the debate can now move from timing to substance.
Early reading of the published text: the 28th regime is harmonised, but not fully centralised. Registration still runs through national register infrastructure / BRIS, the central digital register comes later, and specialised courts are optional. This is likely to become one of the main negotiation points.
EU Inc. document hub
Q&A on EU Inc.
European Council conclusions, 19 March 2026
24 Feb 2026: FISC hearing: "Feasibility of a 28th tax regime"
Parliament's tax subcommittee held a public hearing on whether tax-policy elements (barrier removal, incentives, administrative coordination) could accompany the forthcoming EU-Inc / 28th-regime proposal. Hearing page with all submitted documents.
16 Feb 2026: President von der Leyen “One Europe, One Market” roadmap
President von der Leyen describes a “One Europe, One Market” roadmap with five building blocks. The key insight: EU-Inc is being positioned as single-market infrastructure, not a startup perk. That’s why it’s bundled with simplification and digital. The EU is trying to remove friction that makes cross-border scaling feel like operating in 27 parallel systems.
20 Jan 2026: Parliament adopts recommendations (major milestone)
The European Parliament adopted its resolution with recommendations to the Commission on the 28th regime (procedure 2025/2079(INL)). This resolution now formally feeds into the Commission’s drafting work.
16 Jan 2026: Parliament previews priorities ahead of the plenary vote
Parliament’s press materials outlined priorities for a new legal framework (incl. fast digital formation and cross-border recognition), ahead of the vote. The link is here.
30 Sep 2025: Stakeholder consultation closed
The Parliament’s Legislative Train file notes the stakeholder consultation concluded on 30 September 2025.
The Commission's EU Inc. proposal is built on Article 114 TFEU, which does not itself harmonise tax. On 16 April 2026, Parliament's Subcommittee on Tax Matters opened a parallel workstream examining whether a 28th tax regime could complement the company-law proposal.
That does not change the legal basis of the current Regulation, but it is the clearest institutional signal so far that the tax gap is being considered separately. On 3 June 2026, the ECON committee formally adopted the Ódor draft report on tax regime feasibility (36 votes to 18, with 2 abstentions; document ECON-PR-785418). The report then went to the full Parliament, which adopted it on 9 July 2026 by 366 votes to 192, with 39 abstentions (adopted text A-10-2026-0167). It is a non-binding own-initiative report and does not change the legal basis of the company-law proposal.