Europe Inc is not law yet. It is a signal.

In a Davos dominated by talk of tariffs, subsidies, and geopolitical risk, Europe used the stage to question its own economic limits. At the World Economic Forum, Ursula von der Leyen put forward one of the clearest signals yet that the European Union is preparing a structural shift in how it treats business, competitiveness, and economic power. 

The phrase that stuck, “Europe Inc”, is not the name of a regulation, nor a new Brussels invention ready to roll out. It is a political framing for a shift that the European Commission wants to accelerate.

What Europe Inc actually refers to is an idea long discussed in EU policy circles and now pushed into the spotlight: the so-called 28th regime. An optional, EU-wide corporate framework that would sit alongside national systems and allow companies to operate across the bloc under a single legal structure.

The problem it is meant to solve is real and well-documented. Europe has a single market in theory, but in practice, companies still face 27 different company laws, registration processes, capital requirements, and administrative timelines. Startups incorporate in one country, then struggle to expand. Scaleups hit legal friction. Many leave.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol' founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It's free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

The Commission’s answer is simplification through centralisation. Under the proposed 28th regime, entrepreneurs would be able to set up a company digitally, once and use that structure across the EU. One registration, one legal form, one set of rules. The ambition presented at Davos goes further: company creation within 48 hours, fully online.

That figure matters. It is also where political ambition risks being read as immediate reality.

The 48-hour setup is not in force. It is a target attached to a proposal that still needs to be formally drafted, negotiated, and approved by both the European Parliament and member states. Nothing in current EU law allows this yet. What exists is intent, not implementation.

Von der Leyen was explicit about why this push is happening now. Global conditions have hardened. Trade is increasingly weaponised. Industrial policy has returned, unapologetically, in the US and China. 

Supply chain shocks and energy crises exposed Europe’s vulnerabilities. In that environment, regulatory fragmentation stops being a technical issue and becomes a strategic one.

Europe Inc is Brussels admitting that rules alone do not build power. Scale does. There is also a political recalibration underway. The EU has traditionally defined itself as a regulator first, a market shaper second. 

The message from Davos suggests a change in emphasis: competitiveness, capital mobilisation, and strategic autonomy are moving closer to the centre of EU policymaking.

Still, limits remain. The 28th regime, as currently described, would be optional. It would not harmonise taxation overnight. Labour law, insolvency rules, and social policy remain largely national domains. Europe Inc would coexist with national systems, not replace them.

That coexistence is both its strength and its risk. Optional frameworks can attract fast-growing companies, but they can also deepen a two-speed Europe if not carefully designed. This tension is not resolved yet.

What Davos revealed is not a finished Europe Inc, but a Commission willing to say openly that Europe’s economic model, as it stands, is too slow for the world it operates in. Whether Europe Inc becomes a meaningful tool or another unrealised promise will depend less on slogans and more on legislation, compromise, and political courage across 27 capitals.

For now, Europe Inc is best understood as a warning shot. Europe intends to compete as a bloc, not as a collection of administrative borders. The clock, as Ursula von der Leyen implied, is already running.