Germany's opposition Left party has called for the government to resist the European Commission's proposed EU Inc., an optional corporate form intended to make cross-border business easier. The Bundestag reported the party's motion on 13 November 2026, identifying it as parliamentary paper 21/9197. The authors argue that a European company structure could encourage firms to bypass employment and social protections.
The motion is not a Bundestag decision or an enacted EU law. It responds to a Commission proposal published on 18 March 2026 for the so-called 28th regime: a harmonised alternative alongside existing national company structures. The debate is about whether simpler company formation can be achieved without undermining safeguards for workers.
Key facts
- 13 November: The Bundestag reported the Left party's motion, numbered 21/9197.
- 18 March: The Commission presented its proposal for an optional EU Inc. legal structure.
- 48 hours and €100: Those are the proposed limits for the time and cost of fully digital company registration.
- Not yet law: The Commission proposal has not established the new company form, and the German motion has not been adopted as a parliamentary position.
How the proposed EU company form would work
A founder generally chooses a corporate form under the laws of a particular member state. Expansion across borders can then involve different registration practices, administrative steps and legal requirements. The European Commission wants to offer an additional common option, not abolish national structures. Although designed with innovative firms in mind, EU Inc. would be available more broadly to founders who chose it.
The proposal envisages a company being registered wholly online within 48 hours at a maximum cost of €100. It also includes easier digital share transfers, streamlined capital transactions and the transmission of existing business information between authorities under a once-only approach. Other provisions address modern financing, employee stock options and digital procedures for closing or winding up young companies.
These measures are proposed rules, not services available to founders today. The Commission says safeguards against fraud and abuse are included. Their precise final form will depend on legislation, not on a Commission announcement alone.
A European Parliament Research Service briefing in April placed the proposal within a longstanding debate about obstacles to the EU single market. The briefing noted that Parliament supported the approach in a January 2026 resolution but expressed caution about the chances of success. That political resolution did not enact EU Inc. or settle the legislation.
Why employment rights became central to the dispute
The Left party argues that the benefits of simple registration could come at the expense of labour protections if companies gained incentives to choose lower standards. Its motion calls on the Bundestag to press the German government to oppose the regime at EU level and pursue stronger labour and social safeguards. It invokes Article 23(3) of Germany's Basic Law, which concerns parliamentary involvement in EU affairs.
The party's warning is an assessment of possible consequences, not evidence that firms have already used EU Inc. to violate worker rights. The proposed entity does not yet exist. The Commission, by contrast, presents the legal form as a way to reduce administrative costs, attract investment and enable start-ups to grow across the EU. The question is whether its proposed safeguards will satisfy lawmakers worried about the employment effects.
Employee stock options illustrate the trade-off. The Commission proposes an optional common arrangement with deferred taxation for qualifying employee shares. If eventually approved, that could change how young firms recruit and reward staff. It does not mean all domestic employment or tax rules would automatically disappear.
The next decisions concern parliamentary consideration of the German motion and the broader EU negotiations on the corporate framework. Germany has not adopted the Left party's requested position merely because the motion was introduced. For businesses, EU Inc. remains a possible future legal form; its exact protections, final scope and effective date have yet to be settled.
