How Europe is killing makers and micro-entrepreneurs (lectronz.com)

1148 pointsby l-one-lone16 hours ago682 comments

mstaoru 15 hours ago

I don't know if this EU regulation will work or not (most likely not), but I can share how it is done in China (where package volume is orders of magnitude higher).

China identifies "choke points" most packages pass: large platforms and logistics companies. Yes, Chinese e-commerce is more centralized on Alibaba/JD/PDD etc, but there are actually much more logistics companies in China than in EU.

They also do not introduce these regulations "from tomorrow" (well, sometimes they do, but it's a different topic). E.g. the non-degradable plastic regulation was issued in 2020 to come in effect in 2025. This gives time to prepare and implement (unlike EU border controls mess...)

So now if something is shipped in non-degradable plastic, the logistics company is fined along with the sender. This is much more scalable and easy to implement. Logistics companies might rise their prices a bit in light of expanded work scope, but it would be peanuts compared to every individual seller.

Could EU just ask DHL/Hermes/whatever to charge an additional €1 "for recycling"? Yes, but...

But of course EU is fundamentally different in a way that the politicians need to please the electorate, so nothing is really planned ahead.

pjc50 14 hours ago

Per downthread, this whole crisis arises because of Chinese companies shipping to Europe. The EU Directives are definitely visible in advance, none of this is dropped on people.

mistrial9 14 hours ago

> this whole crisis arises because of

hmm that is not systems thinking there.. there are more layers than that!

mstaoru 14 hours ago

I think this directive was from Feb 2025? Is 1 year enough for everyone to register in 25 different packaging regulation bodies, appoint representatives, etc etc?..

I also fail to see how this will stop Chinese companies from shipping to Europe. No Chinese company will register in this farce.

hvb2 14 hours ago

> No Chinese company will register in this farce.

What makes you so sure? It really depends on enforcement but your Chinese company sure isn't going to just drop Europe as a market.

mstaoru 14 hours ago

Exactly. I don't see how EU can enforce it against China, when most of the goods are imported from China. Or any other non-EU country, for that matter.

philipallstar 14 hours ago

> Is 1 year enough for everyone to register in 25 different packaging regulation bodies, appoint representatives, etc etc?..

Also, are those bodies ready for the volume of applicants? They certainly weren't when MDR came in.

radicalbyte 14 hours ago

Erm I've been talking about this for 4 years now. So I'm not sure how it can "come out of nowhere" unless you're paying 0 attention to really important regulation in your field.

There will be a post in 9 months from software companies crying about the PLD and CRA because their leaders were asleep at the wheel for the last half decade.

ihateolives 14 hours ago

"in your field"? All small businesses and solo enterpreneurs that I know who are hit by this are not "in this field". Their field is making jewelry or knitted toys or something similar. Now many are just not planning to ship EU wide just because it's too high risk for them.

teiferer 13 hours ago

> All small businesses and solo enterpreneurs that I know who are hit by this are not "in this field". Their field is making jewelry or knitted toys or something similar.

Are they shipping within EU? Then they literally are in the field of shipping within the EU.

xboxnolifes 13 hours ago

Thats a stretch of the term "field". Are they also in the field of making money and the field of working within European law?

warkdarrior 12 hours ago

Yes, of course. They need to be aware of regulations in all aspects of their business (manufacturing electronics, shipping, consumer warranty, and taxation seem applicable).

kvemkon 2 hours ago

> CRA

Well, how small business can report anything during 24 hours through weekends, long weekends, 1-week Christmas, 3-4-weeks summer vacations?

mns 14 hours ago

> They also do not introduce these regulations "from tomorrow"

This wasn't introduced "from tomorrow", people had 1 year and a half to prepare for this (at least) or to protest this. See some comments below how individual countries actually messed this up.

> But of course EU is fundamentally different in a way that the politicians need to please the electorate, so nothing is really planned ahead.

> I don't know if this EU regulation will work or not (most likely not)

It's good that you take the time to just make assumptions about how the EU is bad based on your knowledge on how it operates...

formerly_proven 14 hours ago

It's yet another EU regulation that requires a rep for each EU country or you're not allowed to do business. EU single market is a bad joke at this point.

akie 14 hours ago

People here REALLY love to complain about the EU.

Do you understand what the EU even is?

Imagine trying to create a single set of laws to apply to all of the countries in North and South America at the same time. Just try to imagine it, because that's about as close an analogy as you're going to get. Now re-evaluate your criticism in that light, and understand that comparing a single state to a collection of 27 states is more or less a non-sequitur.

r3trohack3r 14 hours ago

America does it with 50 states

bryanlarsen 14 hours ago

That analogy would hold only if inter-state commerce was the responsibility of the states rather than the federal government.

deno 14 hours ago

And EU does it with VAT-OSS scheme which was also separate in each country before. There's just no will to do this with EPR because there's too much money and lobbying power in the recycling cartel.

Aerroon 11 hours ago

The funny thing is that when the EU introduced these new VAT rules then it screwed over small and microbusinesses as well. It took them years to implement a minimum threshold for VAT (which every reasonable country has, but somehow EU rules did not).

voakbasda 13 hours ago

In theory, true. In practice, state independence has been dead for the better part of a century.

The 10th amendment has been eviscerated by the courts. By a strict reading of its relatively simple language, most of what the federal government does is unconstitutional.

Today, USA is unabbreviated as the “United States of America”, but the country was founded as the “United States for Anerica”.

As such, I am strongly in favor of returning to our former glory by stripping the federal government of most of its power and transferring it to the states.

I am also wise enough to know that will never happen without a long and bloody revolution, and I am okay with that given the lived reality that has defined my life.

We live in tyranny. You may not feel the rolling boil of the water that surrounds you, my fellow Americans, but make no mistake: your goose is cooked.

nemomarx 13 hours ago

Given what the states use their current power to do, I'm pretty fine with it so long as the party I'm like is in control of the federal government. If the last ten or so years of politics have taught us anything it's good to be on top with the tyrants, I guess.

HWR_14 13 hours ago

> state independence has been dead for the better part of a century.

Can you please put a date on when you think this happened and what were the turning event(s)?

Because you could mean a lot of different points over decades. And what and when you think was the turning point is pretty significant.

WarmWash 11 hours ago

The interstate highway system that is economically critical for most states, and gets repaired/maintained with federal dollars.

Anytime there is a spat, the federal government dangles those highway dollars to get their way.

Exoristos 9 hours ago

An easy to overlook affair called the United States Civil War kicked off the trend.

ericmay 13 hours ago

Add in the function of the senate and the ongoing public perception of it, and as/if the senate is neutered by populist parties (MAGA/DSA) as they intend to also do with the courts, the argument that the states are sovereign (and they are by definition and constitutional agreement) becomes more and more practically useless, unfortunately (in some ways).

I'm not anti-federal government or anything but clearly we can see that there are issues in how the federal government has become so powerful and yet we're beholden to these two big-tent political parties leaving folks across the various states unhappy with decrees from Washington. Don't like Donald Trump's power over you? Maybe the federal government shouldn't have that power then?

hnfong 12 hours ago

> country was founded as the “United States for Anerica”.

Do you have actual sources for that?

(Funny thing, I googled the phrase in quotes, did not realize the misspelling, and was a bit frustrated that the only result was this comment on HN...)

senderista 10 hours ago

LOL just last week I was looking at an original copy of the US Constitution at the National Archives and that is most definitely not what it said.

PLenz 6 hours ago

> but the country was founded as the “United States for Anerica”.

This is simply incorrect, it has been the United States of America since the Declaration itself where it states: > We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled,

akie 13 hours ago

I know that this is a popular point-of-view in the US, but your states and legislative processes are all very homogeneous in comparison. You guys mostly speak the same language, you have the same cultural touch points, you have a shared history, shared media, and mostly centralized power.

Your country looks more like Germany (and if you know your history, that's no coincidence) than it looks like the EU.

Aeolun 10 hours ago

I think, at this point, most people in Europe broadly have the same language as their second language.

> Overall proficiency: According to data from the European Union, over 43% of the total EU population speaks English as a second language, making it the most widely spoken non-native tongue across all 24 non-Anglophone countries in the bloc.

akie 10 hours ago

Bombastic side eye

aleph_minus_one 10 hours ago

> America does it with 50 states

And Germany has 16 federal states.

fsckboy an hour ago

The United States of Mexico has 31 states.

marky1991 14 hours ago

Yeah, obviously we wouldn't try to do that. Our laws, cultures, and priorities are wildly different. By this lens, the main problem seems to be that the eu expanded too much and grew too large to actually have a coherent purpose.

teiferer 13 hours ago

> eu expanded too much and grew too large to actually have a coherent purpose.

Anybody seriously thinking that seems completely oblivious to how central EU is to the economies and every day lives of member states. There is a lot to criticise about EU but without it, the Europeans lives would be much worse and their economies would be nothing to speak of. It is very sad that populists managed to popularize the image of the bloated unnecessary monster. Even otherwise intellectually capable folks.

HWR_14 13 hours ago

How is "single purpose plastic wrapping" a cultural priority? Or how is an agency to collect the fees something that needs recreating?

ericmay 14 hours ago

> Imagine trying to create a single set of laws to apply to all of the countries in North and South America at the same time.

I actually think it would be quite a bit easier than it is to create the EU. There's a lot more broad cultural homogeneity between the countries in the Americas than there is within Europe. Even on the topic of language you've got the vast majority of all peoples speaking some combination of Spanish, English, and Portuguese. And Latin America has a bit more limited geopolitical concerns than Europe does which makes managing some tensions easier than it might otherwise be.

But I'm not sure why you are considering "it's hard to create the EU" to be a defense against complaints or criticism related to the EU itself. Maybe it's hard and it won't work and the criticism is reflecting that and others are pointing out that it's a flawed task to begin with for some number of reasons. For my own part I think it has been a fascinating topic and a remarkable accomplishment of statesmanship to even get the EU to this stage, albeit like anything there are some very valid drawbacks.

raverbashing 13 hours ago

> There's a lot more broad cultural homogeneity between the countries in the Americas than there is within Europe

No, not really. Unless you believe the Hollywood view that everything south of the US border has a Sepia filter

Intra-Canada commerce is a PITA in itself

Do you think Mexico looks in the eyes of half the central American countries? (Mexico being North America, yes I know)

ericmay 13 hours ago

Yes, yes really. No I don't believe there's some color filter south of the border - that's your baggage/perception of Mexico/Central America.

> Do you think Mexico looks in the eyes of half the central American countries?

Did you mean How do I think Mexico looks in the eyes of half the Central American countries? If so I'd say it's nuanced and many people in those countries have their own views and their own various problems to solve, just like folks in France have a different view on immigration than, say, Switzerland, or how Germany and France can't agree on a fighter jet project and are looking at different industrial policies, or how Spain has a lot less interest in Ukraine than Latvia does.

Of course South America is incredibly culturally diverse, but I think it's a lot more homogenous than Europe is not just in terms of policy but culturally too. But hey if you disagree, sure make your case if you'd like. I'm just discussing the topic based on my own perceptions. The EU has something like 27 official languages and an Americas block would likely have 3 or so - that itself is the kind of thing that makes integration a lot easier.

carefulfungi 9 hours ago

It's amusing to see a European cite the linguistic result of European colonialism (assuming your three languages are Spanish, English, French - or maybe Portuguese) - and the destruction of thousands of spoken languages - as an argument for the cultural homogeneity of North and South America that they are unwilling to apply to their own continent.

ericmay 9 hours ago

I'm not European (not that this matters anyway) - and the three languages I mentioned were Spanish, English, and Portuguese just because those are the primary languages spoken across the hemisphere.

In Europe a lot of people speak English as a second language but by and large many member states speak predominantly more languages - Spanish in Spain, Portuguese in Portugal, French in France, Italian in Italy (there's 4 different major language groups right there) and when you add in economy size, prominence on the global stage, geopolitical interests, history, and more it seems to me, in my opinion of course, it's a bit more difficult to wrangle, say, Germany and France together who have collectively killed millions of each others citizens versus, idk, Mexico and Colombia who are certainly distinct and have their own rich national and regional cultures (just like the United States even) but speak the same language and, in my view, get a long a little bit better.

I'm not arguing that there isn't a vibrancy in culture or that these countries are entirely homogenous. I'm arguing it would be easier to wrangle them together in a bloc of sorts than it was to get (and keep) the EU together.

For what it's worth a lot of cultural differences are becoming increasingly (unfortunately) minor differences at best because of globalization and the Internet and other communication technologies.

> and the destruction of thousands of spoken languages

Eh thousands of languages were destroyed by war and destitute and colonialization of various sorts throughout history. I'm not going to put a random assortment of them on a pedestal to get angry about just because they happened to be more recent (400 years ago). But anyway isn't China currently destroying spoken languages in places like Tibet and Xinjiang?

carefulfungi 8 hours ago

Sorry for assuming you were European in expressing what I see as ironic. Perhaps itself ironic as a mistake. My bad.

I think Europe and the Americas are differently heterogeneous and differently homogeneous. Certainly the Europeans have made more practical strides in building a coalition across their members than, say, South America or Central America. The reality is that Europe demonstrates a higher degree of solidarity between states than these other places. So it's strange to me to argue the opposite.

But if I understand, your assertion is that the Mayans, the islanders of the Caribbean, the people of Peru, or the Amazonians are less culturally different from one another than the citizens of, say, Greece and Norway? I'm not sure I buy it personally .. but I can see your argument.

ericmay 4 hours ago

Well, that solidarity I think you are taking for granted and of course a lot of the disagreements don’t quite make global news unlike any time Trump eats a booger someone in the international media is blowing up over it. But the EU was a very large and intentional project born out of the incredibly devastating conflicts of World War I and World War II. For most of history Europeans were violently feuding with each other. My point originally was that the current state of the EU is a remarkable achievement precisely because of the animosity, history, and very broad cultural differences between European nations.

I wouldn’t say my assertion is that the peoples you mention are less culturally different (I’m not sure and not sure how we measure that) my assertion is if you were to attempt to form a bloc that those cultural differences are very small relative to the whole.

Just like how in the US we have cultural influence from the tribal people that lived here but by and large it’s a small cultural aspect and not the predominant one. I’m not minimizing their importance, significance, or heritage. I’m just saying if you had to go and take people who live in these countries they would be easier to organize as a whole into something of a bloc because at the nation state level they are more, of course it’s just my opinion, homogeneous in interests than when the EU was being put together.

I’m interested in hearing what you think here as well. I’m just chit-chatting - sorry if I sound argumentative. I’m working on not sound like that as much.

lazyasciiart 8 hours ago

> prominence on the global stage,

not...really a solid argument for how well they would combine, but clearly a major contributor to how how much you know about them.

And FYI those languages didn't disappear 400 years ago. They are spoken today. Guatemala alone recognizes 25 current spoken languages - Spanish and 24 languages that are completely unrelated to any European language.

> For what it's worth a lot of cultural differences are becoming increasingly (unfortunately) minor differences at best because of globalization and the Internet and other communication technologies.

Good news! Many of these languages are still spoken today because these people still live in societies without the internet and other communication technologies! They don't even speak Spanish, their national official language, because they don't know anyone who speaks Spanish.

You don't have to know history, but try knowing a little bit more about current politics and geography before the sweeping statements?

ericmay 4 hours ago

> not...really a solid argument for how well they would combine,

It makes it easier. As a hypothetical you can imagine a pre-EU European continent for example, empire, colonies, and more. It would be much more difficult to get those countries to form a bloc because of the number of interests and where they conflict across the globe.

Now take a set of countries that do not have broad geopolitical considerations or have fewer - those countries simply have less to argue about and less complex arrangements to worry about. No colony, no overseas empire, no war.

It seems intuitive to me it’s much easier to get those countries to agree to various political arrangements and then we can mix in other considerations.

> And FYI those languages didn't disappear 400 years ago. They are spoken today. Guatemala alone recognizes 25 current spoken languages - Spanish and 24 languages that are completely unrelated to any European language.

I didn’t say they were gone - the person I was replying to said they were destroyed by Spanish and Portuguese colonialism. Separately, yes those languages are spoken, isn’t there some 180 languages spoken in New York? But you would still characterize the United States as an English speaking country. Just like no matter how many languages were spoken in Brazil it’s still a Portuguese speaking country.

  > but clearly a major contributor to how how much you know about them.

  > You don't have to know history, but try knowing a little bit more about current politics and geography before the sweeping statements?
Please stop wasting time with random comments like this. Not only do I generally not care but they are bad practices per the site guidelines.

codethief 4 hours ago

> There's a lot more broad cultural homogeneity between the countries in the Americas than there is within Europe.

That must be the most preposterous thing I've read in while, no offense! :-)

My personal experience has been the exact opposite: That cultural differences (and political differences no less!) in the Americas and also prejudices towards each other are huge, both between countries and often even between individual regions. (And that's even if you exclude the US for a second.) Also, countries in the Americas have had rather different histories (both pre and post Columbus) with only partial overlap. Meanwhile, European countries' history is practically impossible to disentangle, probably thanks in parts to how small the continent is in comparison to the Americas. On top of that, European culture has also had entire millenia to amalgamate and harmonize to the point where, yes, we may still speak different languages but it's very common for people to be able to trace back their ancestors' history across half the continent. It provides us all with the same cultural backdrop and the same roots as to where we come from, whereas in the case of the Americas I would ask: What is the common backdrop here? What are those common roots on a continent that combines both the incredibly rich history of hundreds of different indigenous peoples (all with their individual languages and customs) and the history of Europe, Africa and (in parts) Asia together? The partially shared experience of Spanish colonialism, and English, Spanish and Portuguese as shared languages only get you so far.

Finally, if your claim is that Europe is culturally much more heterogeneous (which again I don't think it is), I'd argue we must have exported a lot of that to the Americas, too. :-)

deno 14 hours ago

I mean that's what the PPWR directive is already? It's a single set of laws that applies to all member states. They just didn't write any interop so every country has its own system and registration.

If it was just single registration for EU and paying for each kg of plastic or electronics to member states (like you do with VAT already via VAT-OSS) then it wouldn't be such a big deal.

Even if you didn't have any agreement with recycling companies in each member state and you had to pay the highest per-kg fees it would still be manageable for small sellers.

Meanwhile if you want to sell a single circuit board you're looking at several thousand euro in registration fees and several months for processing just to sell legally to 4-5 countries in EU.

arjie 14 hours ago

“It’s hard to do X under conditions C” is a good explanation for why “X is crappy” but it seems like a poor reason to re-evaluate “X is crappy”. For a small business owner, larger markets with lower barriers to entry are better than smaller markets with fragmented standards.

An explanation for why some markets are smaller and fragmented is interesting academically but it doesn’t change that it’s not worth participating in.

veeti 13 hours ago

They weren't asking for a "single set of laws". "Single market" however is a pre-existing concept recognized as "one of the EU's greatest achievements" [1], and lacking regulations in providing said market is what their critique was about.

[1] https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/single-market_en

akie 12 hours ago

> "one of the EU's greatest achievements"

And it is! People here are always complaining about the EU as if it's a single state, even though it's very clearly in the process of becoming one. It's a long road, we're not sure if we're going to make it all the way to the finish line (but I suspect we will), and we're going to have some happy little (and big) mistakes along the way. But for now it's imperfect, and it might be imperfect for a very long time to come. It's still a lot better than not having it, and we're actively working on improving it.

veeti 12 hours ago

Yes, well, the point here was that we are going backwards.

empiricus 12 hours ago

If you dont have a real single market, what is EU? just easier to cross the borders?

fakedang 11 hours ago

Don't forget the two government buildings and sessions, for absolutely no fucking reason, because why not? Let's add even more bureaucracy to the mix!

It's better to be an EU MEP and do absolutely fuck all tbh.

aleph_minus_one 10 hours ago

> People here are always complaining about the EU as if it's a single state, even though it's very clearly in the process of becoming one.

Rather: if you look at what the EU is doing, it is rather a huge advertisement that the EU should not become one.

Aeolun 10 hours ago

Nah, it should either become one, or dissolve, but this half baked shit definitely isn’t it. I’m sure it’s good for the bureaucrats though.

aleph_minus_one 10 hours ago

> Nah, it should either become one, or dissolve, but this half baked shit definitely isn’t it.

Since the current situation is shit, and one EU national state will be shit, too, this only leaves one option. :-) So let's dissolve the EU before even more billions are wasted in this futile project.

breezybottom 8 hours ago

I'm trying to think of a single metric by which the EU hasn't been a massive success.

aleph_minus_one 5 hours ago

> I'm trying to think of a single metric by which the EU hasn't been a massive success.

- Number pages of lunatic regulations

- Money gone into the EU

- Not a metric, but fitting very different philosophies of how to handle the domestic currency under one umbrella (ECU, Euro) has lead to massive tensions between the involved countries and their populations in particular when the Euro crisis hiy (e.g. in German "Pleitegriechen" [bust Greeks], PIIGS (pigs) countries (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain)). If there wasn't a common currency, each country would have solved this problem on its own terms. Now there is hate that continues up to today, and these countries (including their citizens!) can be used as scapegoats.

breezybottom 4 hours ago

Those are terrible metrics. But even by those standards the US is worse.

izacus 7 hours ago

Ok Vladimir, back to Moscow with you.

drnick1 10 hours ago

> People here are always complaining about the EU as if it's a single state, even though it's very clearly in the process of becoming one.

I think that attempts at making the E.U. a state are doomed to fail. There are too many differences between countries, including customs, language, legal systems, etc. The United States of America works because all states largely inherited or adopted the British social contract. You can't replicate this in Europe. The E.U. should have never been more than a free trade agreement. The currency union was a big, fat mistake that amplified the Great Recession in many of the poorer E.U. states.

lyu07282 13 hours ago

This is comical the liberal in their perpetual confused state: "they are doing their very best!", "you couldn't do it better yourself!". The EU primary function is to serve capital interests to protect neoliberalism across the EU at all cost. It's the perpetual shock doctrine, thatcher politics for all, there is no alternative, dead-end, end-of-history, its what you would get when you put the IMF in charge of a continent. Literally everything is falling apart, the fascists scapegoat irrelevant migrants for the mouth breathing median-voter/peasant while the liberals are haplessly groveling at their imperial masters and censure Spain for being an unruly vassal.

wbl 12 hours ago

You would not have the Euro if the IMF was in charge nor the many failures to have a single capital market. The EU, and politics that created it is much more complex than you think.

lyu07282 11 hours ago

Oh please the ECB, EU Commission and the IMF are staffed by the same kinds of people with identical ideology, they are practically the same institution that work together all the time to shiv periphery nations. They never encountered a problem they didn't want to solve with more austerity.

Aeolun 10 hours ago

They manage to do it for 50 states in the US just fine. It isn’t exactly rocket science. It’s just that individual countries in Europe all feel like unique little snowflakes.

r_lee 10 hours ago

I mean you're just looking at this from the wrong lens.

nobody in an EU member state thinks of themselves as a "state" in the EU, they're a country but in the EU

nobody would want the US kind of federalism. not to mention there isn't a single majority language aside from English for those that know it well enough

akie 10 hours ago

That’s the most uninformed view I’ve read about this in a VERY long time.

The US / Trump doesn’t even manage to renegotiate a trade agreement with Canada, although you speak the same language and your cultural proximity is about 95% - so maybe it’s time to get off your high horse buddy

antonvs 5 hours ago

States in the US are little vassals of the federal government. "Freedumb" indeed.

It'd be interesting to see the US try a real federation, but recent evidence suggests that's beyond its capabilities.

Saline9515 6 hours ago

The EU laws apply to every State in the same way and do not have to be rewritten to be transposed, especially for ex-nihilo new taxes like this one.

gpjanik 14 hours ago

"people had 1 year to protest this" this is terminal stage subjugation to bureaucrats

HWR_14 13 hours ago

How long should we have to wait to hear objections to a rule before we can implement it?

Aeolun 10 hours ago

Don’t wait for objections to an obviously dumb rule at all. Save us all the trouble and don’t implement it?

breezybottom 8 hours ago

Who gets the veto over the democratic process? You?

scythe 2 hours ago

You responded to an abbreviation of the original argument. The original was "people had one year to prepare for or protest this". And the impact of a required equipment replacement is dependent on the expected lifetime of the equipment. Practically all equipment lasts more than a year. Disposable items bought in bulk are basically a form of equipment that lasts until you run out. Five years will see about a third of stuff get turned over. I have seen some fluoroscopy equipment still running since the late 90s.

Ultimately "make better rules" is only half the battle. You still need a process for implementation.

ikari_pl 12 hours ago

We did

fakedang 11 hours ago

Simply put, the Eurocrats can't hear us all from up there.

fallingbananna 14 hours ago

>Could EU just ask DHL/Hermes/whatever to charge an additional €1 "for recycling"? Yes, but...

Within EU we already pay ~€3 for packages from China. And in Austria we will soon pay additional ~€2 for every delivered package. And 20% VAT.

Edit:

I am pretty sure at least some part of these already contribute towards recycling.

The goal here is likely not just to get more funding for recycling, but rather to use materials that can be recycled in the first place. Which you cannot achieve simply by charging businesses or consumers more.

deno 14 hours ago

This has nothing to do with EPR. The €3 for packages from China is a fixed processing fee on top of potential tariffs.

They got rid of the de minimis €150 limit for tariffs and added fees on top.

There was also €25 VAT de minimis limit but that’s also no longer the case since some time.

LaurensBER 12 hours ago

Important nuance here is that the €3 for packages from China is a temporary solution and will eventually (2028?) be replaced by a more permanent system which _might_ work out more favourable for electronics.

Having said that, the customs duty will go to the EU budget so there's now a direct incentive for the EU to maintain or perhaps even increase this.

danielovichdk 12 hours ago

It should be much higher.

The amount of shit that gets shipped from China to Europe (world) is fucking ludicrous, and people should be taxed heavily for the stupid shit they often don't need.

trinix912 11 hours ago

Right, so tell me where in Europe can I buy replacement parts for random electronics when I need them? Often very specific ICs, last time it was a cassette deck pinch roller, etc.

Preferably somewhere where it’s cheaper than the value of the thing being repaired.

danielovichdk 10 hours ago

Yes, and that's a whole different problem, which in itself does not equal stupid shit.

The reason the price for parcels from China is going up in Europe is not shipping chips or component, it's from shipping stupid fucking shit people do not need, from e.g Temu and copied goods such as clothing, shoes and what not.

The toll offices in the airports are being drowned in cheap crap. Shut it down by making people pay more for the shit they buy. That will of course hurt everyone else, but that is how it works.

murderfs 5 hours ago

Clothing, famously less important on Maslow's hierarchy of needs than semiconductors.

prmoustache 33 minutes ago

Well, clothing that doesn't last or made of plastic is indeed less important.

gnopgnip 2 hours ago

Reichelt and Conrad in Germany. Digikey has logistics in Netherlands

rwyinuse 10 hours ago

Unfortunately, if you want to fix electronics more often than not China is the only place you can buy spare parts. I don't think buying spare parts to devices counts as "stupid shit".

eptcyka 9 hours ago

If you were to interpret the comment you’re responding to charitably, you’d understand that electronics components are a minuscule minority of all of Chinese exports.

roywashere 8 hours ago

Sure! I understand that everyone buying stuff on Temu and Shein is horrific. At the same time, me paying $$$ for ordering electrical components from China is rough for me. And also, I find it mind-blowing and ridiculous that Ali offered free shipping for small orders for so long whereas if I'd buy local I need to pay up for shipping, and if I'd start a small business in the Netherlands, shipping to the rest of the EU for small parcels is prohibitively expensive, not even taking into account PPWR

wolvoleo 6 hours ago

Yup and those parts often cost literal cents making the €3,60 per item a ridiculously high fee. All while we're protecting the environment by repairing things.

desterothx 5 hours ago

the fee goes per product category, not per item...

wolvoleo 4 hours ago

I know but in practice those categories are very narrow. If I order two different things I'll still pay the fee twice in practice.

wolvoleo 6 hours ago

Not everything is unnecessary and a lot of it will be bought anyway but now through EU resellers that charge a lot more for the same shit.

mstaoru 9 hours ago

> Within EU we already pay ~€3 for packages from China

Yes, the point is, pay +€1 for packages from EU to EU to finance all this PPWR circus.

rvba 9 hours ago

DHL charges 1 eur for recycling, which it pockets since the envelope or box with thr product went to the consumer... who throws it away to the segregated garbage bin - for which every consumer also pays.

thesimon 6 hours ago

> for which every consumer also pays.

Idk, at least in Germany paper and (plastic) recycling is free. I only have to pay for organic trash and trash to be burned.

goobatrooba 13 hours ago

The article ist about a Platform which only facilitates the sale but actual sending is done by the original maker, so that doesn't seem to match.

mstaoru 9 hours ago

Platform is one choke point, logistics companies (e.g. DHL) is another. In EU logistics would be the easier one. Let them handle all the PPWR circus, charge a little more from the seller.

drnick1 10 hours ago

> Could EU just ask DHL/Hermes/whatever to charge an additional €1 "for recycling"? Yes, but...

The biggest problem in Europe is the obsession with taxes. Tax on recycling, tax on AI, tax on this, tax on that. So people who want to make money and keep it without having to fight absurd amounts of regulation and red tape just go elsewhere.

lokar 10 hours ago

Or have the sellers of the packaging pay the fee. So the maker can buy pre-paid packaging.

Danox 9 hours ago

But of course EU/WEST is fundamentally different in a way that the politicians need to please the (lobbying companies), so nothing is really planned ahead…

malloryerik 5 hours ago

Can you imagine an (Android) app store model? You know when you buy packaging that it's verified. Complies with regulations. Companies submit packaging for review that's cheap, fast, tax-supported, and EU-wide. Doesn't have to be like the FDA. So that reusables could become a thing, I'd be fine honestly with extra charges for most branded packaging. This butts up against freedom of expression I suppose but come on the single-use plastics problem is real. But as described what sounds exactly backwards is the EU model. Radiohead sang, "If I were king you'd be backed up against the wall" but I'd sing, "Send your goods in any verified packaging!"

anigbrowl 8 hours ago

Thanks to tomis who posted the EU FAQ on the topic below: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/ad1...

None of this applies to companies that are micro-enterprises or use generic rather than branded packaging. There's a helpful diagram on page 13. The author of this article seems to have imagined a worst-case scenario based on either a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the EU rules; the discussion here seems to have a lot of people who are in a big rush to demonize their perceived political opponents on ideological grounds.

veeti 7 hours ago

Simply not true. The helpful diagram you refer to does not consider the case where company A manufactures the packaging, company B buys the packaging, and then does a B2C delivery to another member state. In that case company B is the producer, even if B is a "micro-enterprise".

> the discussion here seems to have a lot of people who are in a big rush to demonize their perceived political opponents on ideological grounds.

No, it is the opposite. There are a whole lot of people trying to rationalize something crazy. Nevertheless, countless online shops in the EU run by small business have already closed thanks to these regulations. Even if your assertion that this is a giant misunderstanding were true, the damage is already done.

vanviegen 7 hours ago

> Nevertheless, countless online shops in the EU run by small business have already closed thanks to these regulations.

Do you happen to have a source for that?

veeti 7 hours ago

You can start with the TFA or many given in this comment section.

gusgus01 3 hours ago

The article is actually saying they've had record sign ups this year and as far as I can see doesn't make any comment about a decrease in sales in the last 2 weeks since the implementation of this regulation. There is a first hand report of someone stopping their shipping really far down on this post, and then someone on that chain links to a reddit comment from someone as well.

I'm sure there's probably a few comments I missed, but idk if I'd say there's proof of countless here or in the article.

It does seem like it'd have a chilling effect if the article's interpretation is correct, and other comments here also stated that the EU commission wanted to have a central registry to minimize the overhead.

Huppie 6 hours ago

Under definitions (page 9) there's a big section > 6) Who is the ‘manufacturer’ of branded packaging? NEW! And it starts off this blurb: > According to the PPWR (Article 3(1), point (12)), if a packaging does not bear a name or trademark, the manufacturer will be the natural or legal person who manufactures packaging or packaged products. Seems pretty obvious to me the generic bubble envelope example from the blogpost doesn't make sense because that is generic packaging where the manufacturer has to handle this.

anigbrowl 3 hours ago

the case where company A manufactures the packaging, company B buys the packaging, and then does a B2C delivery to another member state

In that case company A is the producer. Also, even if the packaging is branded, company A is the producer if company B is a micro-enterprise. Looking through the document further, I notice that producers aren't even liable for detailed reporting until they put 10 tons of packaging material onto the market.

There are a whole lot of people trying to rationalize something crazy. Nevertheless, countless online shops in the EU run by small business have already closed

I'm sure you can find less emotive ways to make your point, like offering some approximate estimates of how many of these small businesses have closed.

tgsovlerkhgsel 7 hours ago

EU web sites are such an epitome for the EU as a whole: Inscrutably bureaucratic.

Instead of a FAQ page that starts with, you know, the FAQ, the actual information is hidden in a PDF download. Once you click it, there is another popup to confirm. That then leads to a PDF with 9 pages of misc front matter before you can see the first question. And the answers themselves are completely unreadable.

Take for example "3) Are envelopes containing letters, invoices, statements and other correspondence which serve a communication function considered to be packaging under the PPWR? NEW!": Three paragraphs of legalese just to say "no" in the most complicated and hard to understand way.

The whole document is 27847 words. If we ignore the complexity and assume the reading-speed number of 238 wpm that I often see cited, that's two hours of extra compliance overhead just to read the FAQ.

And for extra hilarity, the page is also covered in so many popups and warts that fight each other that on mobile you have to accept all cookies because the decline button is covered.

Edit: Also, I've been unable to find any diagram on either the page numbered 13 on the bottom of it or the page numbered 13 by the PDF reader (not the same thing, in 2026...). There are two diagrams nearby but none of them seem helpful. If you mean the one in "9) Who is the ‘producer’ of transport packaging?", it only covers a subset of cases (company A sells the packaging in the same member state). The text states "If company A sells the cardboard boxes to Company C in another Member State, and Company C fills the boxes to transport packaged products, then Company C would typically be the producer in that Member State." so we're back to square one.

deepsun 7 hours ago

> the decline button is covered

Well, covering the decline button is very illegal according to EU cookies laws.

tgsovlerkhgsel 7 hours ago

Exactly, that's why I think it's hilarious that the EU itself is doing it. Clearly it's just incompetence not malice, but...

veeti 6 hours ago

Complaints may be sent to the European Data Protection Supervisor. Give a GDPR consultant some billable hours, will you?

tverbeure 3 hours ago

You can take that “EU website” broad, as in: any website in the EU.

I just tried to order train tickets in Portugal. Not only do they ask for my passport number, they also ask for your tax id. I will, of course, totally give them my SSN for a train ride… It’s a mandatory field too. People on Reddit say you can just fill in anything, it doesn’t matter, but I hate that kind of uncertainty.

aero_code 7 hours ago

I don't see a diagram on page 13, but I read a few pages around there. I don't see anything about it not applying to micro-enterprises. I see one diagram (PDF page 14/page num 11) that says a farmer selling "under own name or trademark to end user in another Member State" (without saying there's an exception for a micro-enterprise) means that the "Farmer is producer," which sounds like the opposite of what you said.

LelouBil 7 hours ago

There is a diagram on page 12 that says companies that use unbranded packages OR that use branded packages but are micro entreprise are not considered as "producer" of the package

LelouBil 5 hours ago

After re-reading, it only specifies the packaging manufacturer is the producer when they are in the same member state as the seller.

If the seller sells to other member states I don't know

Huppie 6 hours ago

Not a diagram but the section on page 9 regarding who's considered the manufacturer is relevant here. For generic packaging that's the manufacturer of the packaging.

anigbrowl 3 hours ago

Sorry, it's on page 12.

ajnin 6 hours ago

The exact scenario from TFA is listed just before the diagram you're referencing :

"If a farmer packs a few apples in a container (sales packaging) and sells it under its own name or trademark to a retailer or consumer in the same Member State, the farmer is a producer [for the purpose of EPR obligations]"

And :

"If the farmer sells the packed apples under its own name or trademark in another Member State, the farmer is only the producer if the recipient is the end user of the apples."

And :

"If the farmer is a micro-enterprise, which is often the case, and the supplier of the apple container is established in the same Member State, such supplier becomes the producer"

That last exemption is quite restrictive, it can be a problem. I can attest that a French manufacturer of antistatic packaging refused to sell to me as a micro enterprise when I was selling electronics kits a long time ago and I had to buy them from China. Some states might not even have packaging manufacturers. So the concerns from the article are founded.

Huppie 6 hours ago

Under definitions (page 9) there's a big section

> 6) Who is the ‘manufacturer’ of branded packaging? NEW!

And it starts off this blurb:

> According to the PPWR (Article 3(1), point (12)), if a packaging does not bear a name or trademark, the manufacturer will be the natural or legal person who manufactures packaging or packaged products.

Seems pretty obvious to me the generic bubble envelope example from the blogpost doesn't make sense because that is generic packaging where the manufacturer has to handle this.

Edit: The farmer example is a bit bad imho because produce is not like the products in the blogpost and 'under its own trademark' applies to the product packaging (e.g. custom Apple carton frames etc.), best to focus on the more applicable sections imho.

kccqzy 3 hours ago

How does that jibe with the following paragraph then?

> If company A sells the cardboard boxes to Company C in another Member State, and Company C fills the boxes to transport packaged products, then Company C would typically be the producer in that Member State.

This example makes no mention of whether Company C is a micro-enterprise. This is under transport packaging, not branded packaging.

sva_ 6 hours ago

Even if true, I wonder if it really helps if I basically need to hire a lawyer ($$$) to find out which regulations may or may not apply, and if I'll get myself into trouble.

It is not a coincidence that here in Germany there are whole law firms specialized in suing small business owners (Abmahnkanzleien.)

I think for a lot of people the tradeoff might not be worth it.

cm2012 5 hours ago

There are a dozen small business owners in this thread alone, giving specific details of how this legislation is irrationally hurting their business and the economy.

baxtr 18 minutes ago

I don’t know who is right or who is wrong.

The mere fact that people seem to be highly confused (I saw many posts about that the last week) speaks volumes.

Why introduce legislation that is so complex and hard to understand that people seem to be confused wether or not they’re affected. It’s highly irresponsible and arrogant thing to do.

yardie 15 hours ago

One of the biggest problems that I have in the EU is that it's almost federated. EU will pass laws, countries will adopt those laws, but you end up with 20-24 different versions of those laws. With some countries being strict or lenient about the law that everyone agreed to. And a lot it is written from the perspective that large corporations are the only ones who do business throughout the EU. It's completely missed that small entrepreneurs may also want to take part. Modern technology makes it feasible, but old ideas just drags it down.

silon42 15 hours ago

Even medium-sized corporations are not willing to send products across borders to consumers (say, outside Germany), further destroying the single market.

alephnerd 15 hours ago

The bigger issue in OP's case is they are dependent on de minimis.

The de minimis crackdown [0] and EPR [1] are both being rolled out because Chinese conglomerates like Pinduoduo (Temu) and SHEIN took undue advantage of that while ignoring European regulators on issues such as environmental regulations on packaging [2], dark patterns [2], breaching the Digital Services Act [3], and gacha/addictive engagement mechanisms [4].

All of OP's proposals directly conflict with the goal of de minimis taxation and the EPR.

Seems European HNers are fine with European regulations until it hurts their niche interests or pocketbook.

[0] - https://www.ft.com/content/102e18d7-d06b-4405-a347-97bb3c373...

[1] - https://www.vereev.com/news/europe-faces-trade-conflict-is-e...

[2] - https://www.ft.com/content/ef72f186-2a02-4c51-927d-2c01ddece...

[3] - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/eu-says-temu-breach-r...

[4] - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/eu-probes-shein-over-...

rescbr 15 hours ago

The issue is that those marketplaces got too mainstream, and the average consumer is too stupid.

10-15 years ago if you were importing stuff from China you'd know that the trade off for cheaper prices is that you'd lose your consumer laws protection and you'd be on your own. If you wanted those, then you'd go to your local retailer and pay extra.

pjc50 14 hours ago

This got downvoted but is basically correct. We had a great "grey" market, but the tradeoff for that is having to stay small enough to not be visible.

whywhywhywhy 14 hours ago

Means nothing though because no European country can produce the goods an impoverished European can afford to pay for the goods so the local store is just the same Chinese goods shipped to that address other than your home address.

Aerroon 10 hours ago

And 5x the price

Helmut10001 15 hours ago

Living in Europe, I find that with LLMs, it is possible to navigate the federal & law jungle. However, LLMs don't protect you from institutional envy or the resistance of people trying to block progress simply because it is perceived as 'too modern' or disruptive. I find this the hardest challenge. And I have the feeling during times of general decline, like these, it gets worse.

barrenko 15 hours ago

And it's like there's a uno card that's "increase taxes for freelancers". And they sure like to use it.

arjie 13 hours ago

That makes sense given the structure of the society, no? If you were to build an organization whose purpose was a predictable amount paid out to the senior most members committed ahead of time for an indefinite period, you would prioritize predictable income. In the ideal, your contracts would all be long-term contracts that don’t fluctuate very much.

Any entity that seeks to take risks to earn outsize income increases the income variance and makes it hard to organize your committed payouts. So you are forced (by your priorities) to discourage the entrepreneur and freelancer and encourage the 18-60 salaried employee. Fixed fungible production unit can be used as an input to a machine that produces committed output.

Then you import guest-workers etc. to improve throughput. You are forced by your priorities. Probably the expansion of the US welfare state will meet similar constraints soon enough.

It’s a bit just-so so I think there’s an over-claim in there but I think the seed is there.

21asdffdsa12 15 hours ago

I personally hate the "reenact" the old- good times to recreate the prosperity cargo cults. What created those prosperous times, where "characters" that would just do things, and ask for forgiveness by the law later. And that was actually priced into the justice system, by giving the judges a range to verdict from. In a way, the rule of law was much less strict in the 50s and 60s and way more informal.

nradov 14 hours ago

Right, it's a zero-sum mentality versus a growth mentality. When people don't believe that growth is possible then they focus on guarding what they have.

troupo 15 hours ago

Because if the EU tried to force countries into single compliance, there would no end of "EU is trampling national interests" and similar screaming.

It's an unwinnable situation. Again, EU-level politics keep assuming everyone (corporations and states) are adults. Unfortunately, everyone are just a bunch of screaming, scheming petulant children.

philipallstar 15 hours ago

> there would no end of "EU is trampling national interests" and similar screaming

To just call this "screaming" is to completely dismiss a real and huge problem. The EU is the idea that countries should fuse into economic areas, but the countries are also individual still. Of course there's a lot of friction.

For example, because Greece was in the Euro, they couldn't inflate their currency to compensate for the fact that they gradually outsourced more and more work to Germany, until they had nothing left and hit a financial crisis because their government couldn't borrow more money. That's not mindless screaming.

troupo 15 hours ago

So you've described Greece as a bunch of scheming petulant children.

"Our plan to be inaccountable didn't work, so we'll try a different scheme instead".

And yes, it's a huge problem. That's why I called the situation unwinnable.

graemep 15 hours ago

They could neither fix the problem with the policy tools a country with its own currency would have, nor did they have the automatic support from a central budget a region or state of a country would have.

philipallstar 14 hours ago

> So you've described Greece as a bunch of scheming petulant children.

Can you quote where I did that, please?

0x_rs 15 hours ago

>Again, EU-level politics keep assuming everyone (corporations and states) are adults. Unfortunately, everyone are just a bunch of screaming, scheming petulant children.

One in four MEPs are involved in scandals [0] ranging from harassment to organized crime and corruption. The European Parliament also remains a free out-of-jail card through abuse of parliamentary immunity, and they do abuse it [1]. EU politics is a circus.

0. https://archive.is/neTOG

1. https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-parliament-accused-overre...

sajithdilshan 14 hours ago

One of the best example is Ursula Von der Leyen. She was sent from Berlin to EU by Angela Merkle because when she was the defence minister of Germany under Merkle’s government there was a huge scandal of offering contracts (https://www.euractiv.com/news/von-der-leyen-admits-mistakes-...)

She was sent to EU so she can do less harm in the future, but the irony is that she became the head of EU.

greenraven 15 hours ago

> It's completely missed that small entrepreneurs may also want to take part

This is by design. It’s the same all over the world. The wealthy are not going to just let you compete

bpodgursky 15 hours ago

The US is wealthier, has more billionaires and has fewer of these barriers for small entrepreneurs. So no, this is not the monocausal explanation that applies equally everywhere.

(YES, the US has regulatory capture, YES the wealthy attempt to use it, YES we should try to eliminate it here too, but it remains true that it is easier to run a small business in the US, while having more billionaires. There are other explanations to the differential here).

21asdffdsa12 15 hours ago

Agreed, europe has a culture of "stability" first. The fear of disruption and chaos is larger after two WW and it outsourced the risks of disruption to the US. Basically, use the us as a test-mouse for new ideas and innovations, then when proven safe introduce them and ride those coat-tails to infinity.

petcat 15 hours ago

> use the us as a test-mouse for new ideas and innovations, then when proven safe introduce them and ride those coat-tails to infinity

What actually happened, and continues to happen, is that Europe and the EU became entirely dependent on US tech and other foreign industry. It wasn't just a matter of "see what works and then copy it domestically". It oursourced basically everything.

trinix912 11 hours ago

To be fair, it was mostly outsourced to China, at least in Slovenia with our electronics development and manufacturing (Iskra and Gorenje). US stuff has also always been more expensive in every category except software.

watwut 14 hours ago

Is fetishizing disruption good for USA? It did helped to create a billionaire oligarch class, but that class is literally intentionally destroying it. I mean, it may end up destroying Europe and the rest of the world too, but the US democracy seem to be their first target.

argentinian 15 hours ago

Laws are voted by politicians. Do you mean that most EU politicians are puppets of EU corporations?

yturijea 15 hours ago

That might be one reason they refuse to be open about their financial supports in their various organizations yes. it is very well known unfortunately..

Lutger 15 hours ago

Its not as bad as in the US I think, but yeah, most of the laws are actually (literally) written by corporations. I wouldn't call them puppets, but EU corps have an outsized influence on the outcome of the process.

runarberg 14 hours ago

I don‘t know about EU laws specifically, but national law in Europe is often written by lobby firms in favor of their corporate sponsors. In Iceland for example the main corporate lobby is called Viðskiptaráð, and they brag about the high percentage of laws they write passing at the parliament (in 2007 it was like 90%). I don‘t think things are much different in the rest of Europe (maybe just less obvious due to size differences).

Eddy_Viscosity2 14 hours ago

EU politicians seemed to be fairly captured by corporations generally. Less so than politicians from the countries themselves. Voting turnout for EU representatives is very low compared with voting for local officials. I think its because people know that who they vote for as their chancellor or prime minister can make a big impact on their lives. They see the EU parliament as this distant thing and don't follow it so much. EU representatives therefore don't have as much accountability and can more easily be swayed by lobbying. How else can you explain the whole chat control thing which everyone hates but still keeps getting pushed through. Like who is voting for this a-holes.

nico_h 14 hours ago

It passed on a technicality of present reps voted against in majority but not enough total votes because the president had triggered a special vote for the last session before recess when less reps are present.

Eddy_Viscosity2 14 hours ago

Was even one representative that voted for this from a region where the people that they represent wanted it by even the slimmest of majorities? I don't think so. These votes were in full defiance of their constituents.

kingleopold 14 hours ago

Yes and mostly European elite and royal families. Royal families and their friends have strong power across Europe but they are well hidden via media.

techpression 14 hours ago

The entire purpose of EU is trade (trading nations don't go to war etc), trade is more or less defined by large corporations, it's through that lens every decision is made and measured.

yardie 14 hours ago

The one thing EU politicians hate is disruption. Entrepreneurs are fresh entrants trying to disrupt an existing market. The politicians don't even need to be puppets. The fact that these small startups exist and may even succeed is reason enough.

throw-the-towel 10 hours ago

I'd say this is not limited to the politicians.

psychoslave 13 hours ago

Nothing specific to EU here except the specific point is about EU this time. Otherwise just copy paste "most EU politicians are puppets of EU corporations" in some search engine and enjoy, here are the top result of such a search:

https://rednetwork.net/articles/2026/06/how-corporations-set...

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/eu-leaders-puppets-of-financia...

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_reasons_behin...

https://edwardshepherd.substack.com/p/the-puppets-and-their-...

https://www.lobbycontrol.de/wp-content/uploads/EU-Lobbyrepor...

Now looking up for "EU politicians are prised for their probity and strong attachment to defend their people" here are the top results:

https://www.transparency.org/en/news/political-corruption-in...

https://www.ftm.eu/articles/european-parliamentarians-involv...

https://www.eupublicintegrity.com/what-is-public-integrity-i...

https://www.politico.eu/article/european-union-corruption-pf...

https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/04/29/europes-unpopula...

So even searching specifically for praising information, one will have to dig deep apparently, or maybe go straight to the official propaganda of what the politicians say about themselves (but probably less so about others).

Everyone is free to go as deep as they want (and can afford) and draw their own conclusions.

HeyLaughingBoy 15 hours ago

Dunno about that. I live in the US. I can start a small business today and the only thing I'd have to do differently is file an additional form on my taxes next year. Yes, that's a simplification that doesn't apply to every situation, but it is still completely accurate.

tengwar2 14 hours ago

That's pretty much the situation in the UK if you are a sole trader. If you set up a limited liability company, that's a separate entity and has its own tax reporting requirement, but nothing onerous. I am a sole trader, and manage a small company separately from that.

One thing I have heard of in the USA is the need for a "business licence". I'm not sure what that is or whether it applies to all businesses, so I'm not sure what it would correspond to in the UK. Neither of my businesses needed any licences or permissions to start trading.

Gormo 14 hours ago

There's no standard concept of a "business license" in the US either. Generally, the corporate registration / LLC filing is all you need to start doing business as a limited liability company, and you don't need to do anything special as a sole proprietor. Sometimes state and local governments have special requirements for particular types of activity, and require registration to begin operating in a regulated field. City and county governments sometimes have a business tax that you have to pay if you're operating a facility open to the public, and may require the tax receipt to be on display on your premises.

dudul 13 hours ago

> One thing I have heard of in the USA is the need for a "business licence"

Where have you heard about that? Because there is no concept of universal business license.

senderista 10 hours ago

And you'd need to line up your own health insurance.

HeyLaughingBoy 10 hours ago

Usually not if you already have a day job. But that's completely orthogonal to the original statement.

polski-g 15 hours ago

Oh no. It's the mysterious "they"!

sleepyguy 14 hours ago

That is the issue across the entire world. Large corporations can easily bear the cost of regulatory laws, environmental requirements, rules, and regulations. They can also go to great lengths to promote an environment that is almost nightmarish for a smaller company or entrepreneur trying to enter the game.

They create barrier after barrier through their lobbying efforts. A good example is having to pay $50,000 for an inspector to come and determine whether your automatic door opens and closes properly, or to verify that your facility does not have a chimney. A friend of mine who owns a business in Niagara Falls, Canada, had to pay around $10,000 for a wind assessment to determine where chimney exhaust would go once released. He didn’t even have a chimney. They ended up having to have another inspection to verify they didn't have a chimney.

Many of these environmental laws are intentionally created and applied to small businesses as well, even when the cost of meeting the requirements is greater than what the business could realistically generate in sales.

The result is that large corporations can absorb these costs, while small businesses and entrepreneurs are often priced out before they even have a chance to compete.

Aurornis 14 hours ago

It is not the same all over the world. Starting a small company in the US is a breeze compared to what I’ve watched peers in the EU fight against.

formerly_proven 14 hours ago

Interstate commerce also seems to be vastly easier inside the US in comparison to the alleged single market of the EU. The most companies seem to deal with is California-specific regulations. Meanwhile, most companies in the EU eventually opt to create a ton of subsidiaries, basically one per state, to handle all the localized duties that the EU requires.

kccqzy 3 hours ago

Yup the Constitution here has rightly prevented each State from adding regulations that burden interstate commerce. Sometimes that has resulted in overly broad federal oversight (CFTC versus state gaming boards) but most of the time that’s a good thing.

skylurk 11 hours ago

Back in college (USA) friends would spin up LLCs for the summer just to buy mowers or vans to do yard work. They would hire all the students who didn't get summer jobs. Those hired students would make about 3x a STEM intern makes in western europe today.

kccqzy 3 hours ago

It was also in the context of Europe that I heard of the concept of an unpaid internship. I was like, what??

Xelbair 15 hours ago

>One of the biggest problems that I have in the EU is that it's almost federated

I would argue it's even worse, because with properly designed federated system you get checks and balances to some extent.

There are parts of EU that have almost zero oversight.

ajmurmann 15 hours ago

Can you elaborate more? When you say "checks and balances" do you mean explicit legal mechanisms or implicit mechanisms like Tiebout-style foot voting? For the latter areas with "almost zero oversight" seem advantages. Also, can you give an example of these low-oversight places and how it manifests? I'm thankful even for some pointers in what to search for.

asdfadsfgfdda 14 hours ago

One example is the effective prohibition on spraying pesticides by air, including drone. Drones allow lower pesticide use than current, legal practices

ajmurmann 13 hours ago

Oh, so "parts of the EU" wasn't about geographic areas but policy areas? But this sounds like more regulation, not checks and balances either. Are you replying to the right comment?

dgellow 15 hours ago

Yeah, this in between state is really frustrating. I hope we will see a push towards more federalization, but that’s unlikely

trinix912 10 hours ago

It’s unlikely because smaller member states wouldn’t want that as they’d be outvoted by bigger members and thus forced to implement laws that might not even make sense in those (smaller) countries.

dgellow 10 hours ago

It’s unlikely for a lot of reasons, but that’s not one of them given we don’t know what a federalized EU would look like.

trinix912 7 hours ago

We had a federation around here called Yugoslavia and we saw how it played out. Forcing different nations to agree on everything down to things that are basically cultural preferences never worked well. Regulations, bureaucracy and laws are often based on cultural preferences. The EU tries to find a common baseline but still leaves a lot to each member state to avoid this problem.

throw-the-towel 10 hours ago

That's why federations have a Senate where all states get equal representation.

trinix912 7 hours ago

Then the bigger member states will say that they’re contributing so much more but get very little voting power etc. It’s not an easy problem to solve, hence the current indirect system.

chermi 15 hours ago

I think this is a big factor. While I would prefer a more federated US, the US as is is a great market to start in. It's 350M fairly wealthy people under mostly the same tech restrictions. That's a great place to grow.

It's important to remember that even without the fact that big companies basically write the regulations, regulations naturally tend to being effectively regressive wrt company stage/size. Every new one is a hurdle that a bigger company has more resources to overcome.

ryukoposting 14 hours ago

> It's 350M fairly wealthy people under mostly the same tech restrictions

and, on a case-by-case basis, those people are generally happy to adopt other states' standards in the name of convenience and efficiency (California notwithstanding). Look at E-ZPass/I-Pass as a great example of harmonization across states.

It's funny. Ask any Illinoisan how they feel about adopting Ohio's policies and they'd bristle. But say "hey we're gonna make your highway transponder work in every state east of the Rockies" and they're all for it.

I have to wonder if Europe has the same thing going on.

chermi 12 hours ago

Your example of adoption is interesting. I think California has actually influenced other states on efficiency. I wanted to say disproportionately, but perhaps in exact accordance with their economic and political power.

I don't know the details well enough, but I do know that there is an effective anti-fedaralist force in the US wherever federal funding is concerned, as it comes with rules conditions (rules) attached. I would be interested to what extent this acts as a bias toward cooperation in the case of ez pass, given the interstate system.

ryukoposting 11 hours ago

> I think California has actually influenced other states on efficiency.

California has a frustrating tendency invent its own systems that are neither better nor worse, but nonetheless incompatible with more widely accepted standards. The highway transponder example actually applies again - Fastrak.

CA has some great ideas too, don't get me wrong (ubiquitous painted curbs: great!) but a lot of the time it's just different for the sake of being different.

kccqzy 3 hours ago

Yeah and the best example is California vehicle emission standards.

n4r9 15 hours ago

> It's completely missed that small entrepreneurs may also want to take part

There's truth to this but it's an overstatement as it stands. For example, GDPR rules are less strict for small companies.

tjwebbnorfolk 15 hours ago

> old ideas just drags it down.

Are these old ideas? The broad regulatory apparatus in the EU appears very modern and intentional.

cloudie78 14 hours ago

Ah yes, let’s give the EU and its undemocratic system in which policy formation is heavily filtered through a relatively narrow professional political class, ordinary voters have weak or almost no direct control over major policy choices, dissent encounters administrative/economic punishment, and central institutions possess and use powerful financial means to discipline peripheral governments should have even more centralised power?

And no, just because voting for MEPs is bolted on there as a pressure valve doesn’t suddenly make it all okay when most of the real decisions happen behind closed doors and adherence to the passed laws, no matter how damaging is ensured through financial coercion.

Not a single person voted or agreed to this law, and yet here we are.

PeterHolzwarth 14 hours ago

Yeah, that's always been my concern with the EU (I'm American, for context): the long worrying practice where the legal concept of the EU is assembled by a small group who very much want EU citizens to go back to sleep and only wake up once all the laws and regulation has been created.

A federation makes sense to me: I live in one. But how the EU has assembled itself in a way that seems to unrepresentative has been worrying to watch over the last couple decades.

tchalla 14 hours ago

It seems you have an issue with representative democracy.

cloudie78 13 hours ago

Quite the contrary actually. I take issue with systems LARPing democracy.

psychoslave 13 hours ago

There is no such a thing as "representative democracy", that’s antinomic bullshit throw at people to lower it down to powerless populace.

Either citizens have the power, exercise it continuously in practice and are supplied with everything it takes to assume that role properly with all the duties it implies, or there is no democracy beyond empty words.

RandomLensman 13 hours ago

Has such a system ever existed anywhere? How would citizens even have the time?

cloudie78 12 hours ago

Switzerland

RandomLensman 12 hours ago

Continuously exercised and on everything as a matter of course? Not all is done via direct democracy there (even though it is the ultimate backstop in a way), it also has representative democracy.

gls2ro 11 hours ago

You cannot compare 10 million people with 450 million people when talking about direct democracy. It cannot be done I think. But if you know a way propose it here.

Just saying lets vote directly on everything will put everything on hold until all goes down.

rescbr 5 hours ago

Direct democracy doesn't mean everyone votes on everything.

At the extreme you could do something like localized e-voting: citizens vote on issues that affect a given geographic radius of where they live. Because the boundaries are purely distance-based, gerrymandering is impossible.

Maybe we could have a decaying distance boundary by some measurement like population density or something like it?

tchalla 10 hours ago

Switzerland is also a representative democracy

iknowstuff 13 hours ago

US House term is 2 years, European Parliament is 5 years. The latter is actually proportional at least but you can see how they’d only feel pressure every so often

petra 11 hours ago

But it seems relative immune to the current rise of populism.

Not a bad tradeoff, all included.

pjc50 14 hours ago

> It's completely missed that small entrepreneurs may also want to take part

This was traditionally something that the UK was better than the rest of Europe, having carve-outs for small businesses.

bambax 14 hours ago

Yes. I used to sell objects on Amazon in Europe. You can sell from just one country, but then each sale outside of that country is an "export" that triggers high fees.

For sales to be "local", products need to be stored in warehouses in each country. But that in turn means the owner of said products (the seller) has to be registered for VAT in that country, and submitting annual reports in each country's language.

I went to the trouble of registering in 6 different countries; in some countries, Amazon more or less helps sellers submit reports; in others, they offer to partner with local lawyers.

The result is a mess of reports, injunctions, penalties for late filing, etc. coming to you in Polish, German, Spanish, Hungarian. I eventually gave up.

Europe is not actually a "single market". It's a federated bureaucracy entirely indifferent (or hostile) to small businesses.

radicalbyte 14 hours ago

Having worked on the inside: this is by design. You know for 100% that Pepsico and Coca Cola unleashed an army of lobbyists to make sure the laws were written in a way where the single market only worked for large business.

philipallstar 14 hours ago

Lobbyists don't do this. Regulators/lawmakers need to be corrupt and/or incompetent for lobbying to do this.

teiferer 13 hours ago

You need lobbyists to pull on one side and the general population to be too uninformed or too non-caring to not pull enough in the other direction.

philipallstar 12 hours ago

That removes the culpability again from the people being lobbied, who are for paid by mandatory taxes, so they don't have to win work - their only job is expertise and honesty.

radicalbyte 13 hours ago

The lawmakers are: in the EU you have a block of right-wing parties. The large part are funded by large companies and make laws which favour them. Same thing as in the US.

There are other right-wing (and left-wing) blocks who are funded by the Kremlin and Kremlin-supporters who just try to break things.

At the EC they're not corrupt, they try their best, but they're often given bad advice and are themselves not experts. And their power is limited (they can nudge but not push).

philipallstar 11 hours ago

> a block of right-wing parties. The large part are funded by large companies and make laws which favour them. Same thing as in the US.

You need to be mad to think it's the right wing parties in the US who get the most funding. E.g. [0]

> The Biden—now Harris—campaign committee raised $997.2 million and Trump’s campaign committee raised $388 million in total between Jan. 2023 and Oct. 16, 2024, the most recent date for which Federal Election Commission filings are available

[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/04/trump-v...

worik 8 hours ago

> lawmakers need to be corrupt and/or incompetent for lobbying to do this.

Not really

Lobbyists get to talk into the ears of the powerful. It is literally their job. They make very sensible arguments for their point of view. So it seems very sensible, for the legislators, to make laws that aid the powerful and impede the weak.

The legislators are very busy with pressures from all sides. The cognitive load of considering views that you do not hear is enormous. It is not "incompetent or corrupt" to fail.

The system has the corruption baked in. It is one of the mechanisms, of many, that wealth and power concentrate in "democracies "

I have seen this process from the inside, good people making terrible decisions

cm2012 14 hours ago

It's comforting to believe that large corporations with the greed of the rich and powerful is what makes these inefficiencies but really it's about a million little political negotiations, primarily driven by voters dislike of change.

schubidubiduba 12 hours ago

It's comforting to believe that actual voters have that kind of political influence over these things, but really it's about a million little talls, primarily driven by lobbyists commanded by big companies

danlugo92 12 hours ago

People still in bubbles in the big 2026

cm2012 12 hours ago

You are about 20 years out of date. Modern politicians get almost all of their funding from small donations, in other words, from passionate partisans who care about culture war issues.

worik 9 hours ago

I find that difficult to believe, having been involved in political campaigning (not in EU or USA).

Have you evidence?

cm2012 8 hours ago

Sure. Here is us politician finances from 2024. Note that the vast majority is from individual contributors.

Only 6-8% of us political funding in 2024 came from business-PAC contributions.

https://www.fec.gov/resources/campaign-finance-statistics/20...

Further splits here: https://www.fec.gov/resources/campaign-finance-statistics/20...

There are exceptions to this of course but most politicians answer to voters much much much more than big business.

jollyllama 12 hours ago

How is that comforting? The phenomenon is entirely negative.

cm2012 12 hours ago

Because if it's just a few evil people making the world bad then that's fixable. The truth that it is it's an extraordinarily complex stew of incentives means its harder to fix.

jollyllama 12 hours ago

> Because if it's just a few evil people making the world bad then that's fixable

The conclusion does not necessarily follow the premises

eptcyka 9 hours ago

Sure, cynically, you can use the argument that we can’t just limit the influence of megacorps because the problem is more complex than that. Sure, but limiting them will still help.

Why not do the obvious thing that can still help? There are some simple things we as a people or a conglomeration of peoples can do to curb the enthusiasm for state level corruption. It is doable. It will not solve everything - but surely we can still do it.

tgsovlerkhgsel 6 hours ago

I'm surprised that was necessary. A single look at the EU website leaves no doubt that the EU is perfectly capable to create a bureaucratic nightmare all by itself (and incapable not to even if it tried).

luke5441 14 hours ago

Is that with the One-Stop-Shop regulation or was that before that?

If it was before than, then the EU recognized the problem and implemented a fix for it.

AnssiH 14 hours ago

I don't think any EU One-stop-shop scheme covers "local" goods sales in other EU member states yet, i.e. an EU company has to register in all EU countries they hold stock in.

That is changing with the Single VAT Registration (SVR) legislation, effective in 2028.

bambax 12 hours ago

This was 2017-2021. Not sure if One-Stop-Shop covers this as it mentions "cross-border sales" and the problem with Amazon fulfillment and storage was to make all sales local (not cross-border). But maybe it does cover it. I don't know.

Aerroon 11 hours ago

Yeah, it only took 4 years for them to fix an obvious screw up. Only 4 years. Surely every business can survive that.

teiferer 13 hours ago

Indeed, and that's why we need more EU, not less of it.

petra 13 hours ago

Let's say I'm a German small business owner.

Tomorrow Europe becomes a single market. How do I compete with a similar business but from a country where business costs are significantly lower ?

nemomarx 13 hours ago

How does a Californian company compete with a company in Missouri that has lower labor costs and less overhead/ regulation?

They seem to manage this just fine, but it's a pretty similar scenario. You could also push for standardized business costs and regulations eu wide ofc to help.

petra 12 hours ago

The Californian company probably opens their new plant in Missouri, so now it's not exactly a Californian company.

fakedang 11 hours ago

That's the entire point - the Californian company leaves the higher-value R&D jobs in California, while it outsources the lower-value but still necessary manufacturing jobs/data warehousing jobs to Missouri. Both places benefit, because ultimately the union benefits as a whole from the distribution of productivity.

If you concentrated all manufacturing around just a few spots, you end up in a situation like India - inland states with resources get stripped of their resources while all the companies are based in coastal metropolises with port facilities.

One could also go the other way, like China, and let the states compete between themselves for manufacturing prowess, but you need a central planning committee to ensure that the competing provinces still coordinate and work to complement each other. Easier in China, not so much in the EU.

The EU single market is a sorry joke.

trinix912 11 hours ago

Standardized costs would just hurt the poorer members more. You’re underestimating the economical difference between EU member states. It’s more like if Californian businesses had to compete with Mexican in a single market, and Mexicans would be paying Californian prices with Mexican wages in the end.

Muromec 13 hours ago

You don't and that's by design.

anigbrowl 9 hours ago

You boast about the superior quality of german manufacturing. Or move your manufacturing to eastern Germany where costs are lower.

bluecalm 8 hours ago

You specialize in things that are more difficult to make in poorer countries - you use your advantages they use theirs. Afterall this is what happened to a lot of Polish industry after we got our EU membership - it died under pressure of already developed competition from countries like Germany.

andai 11 hours ago

Kinda sounds like it would have been cheaper, more profitable, and less of a PITA for you (a European!) to sell in the US?

PinguTS 14 hours ago

In the EU you have to distinguish between "Directives" and "Regulations".

A "Regulation" becomes "law" in any member state without modification. No member state has to adopt anything. Examples are the GDPR and the new Machine Regulation.

A "Directive" does not become "law" in any member state. A member state has to enact their own national laws to implement the directive until a given date. It does not have to be single law. It could spread many laws. An example is the Machine Directive before it was re-released as Machine Regulation.

More on the different types can be found here from the EU itself: https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-making-process/types-eu...

labcomputer 14 hours ago

> And a lot it is written from the perspective that large corporations are the only ones who do business throughout the EU. It's completely missed that small entrepreneurs may also want to take part.

I'm not convinced that's an accident. I think politicians in Europe are just better than those in the US at hiding who they really work for.

There are numerous examples of regulations in many European countries that create a glass ceiling for anyone who strives to be more than just middle-middle-class, while creating effective loopholes for the wealthy to continue multiplying their wealth.

For example, the total (State + Federal) top tax rate for someone living in California or New York is not too different (maybe 2-3%) from someone living in France or Sweden. But the difference is that in California the top rate does not kick in until you earn north of $1M per year, while in Sweden or France the middle class is already paying those rates.

Likewise, in the US you cannot (legally) shelter your income by declaring it to be foreign income, as you can in most European countries. That is a tax dodge not applicable to the middle class.

And then we have the present discussion: The compliance costs are of course too high for any small business, so these regulations are just another form of regulatory capture to prevent anyone new from breaking into the upper class, while allowing those already there to have it easy.

teiferer 13 hours ago

It's a success of the upper class to pit the middle class against the lower class and the immigrants. As long as people on one "side" complain that there is too much foreign culture and they'll all be replaced and/raped and the other "side" sees the racists as their main enemy, the rich have an easy time.

alexanderchr 4 hours ago

> Likewise, in the US you cannot (legally) shelter your income by declaring it to be foreign income, as you can in most European countries.

Not sure what you mean, most European countries tax residents on worldwide income. You certainly can’t just declare income as foreign and be done with it. Some countries (notably UK) had loopholes for non-domiciled residents but they are being closed now.

jabart 14 hours ago

US Sales tax is the exact same way. Each state has a different rate, Texas has multiple rates inside a zip code you have to manage. Each state also has a nexus requirement that is either money, or number of transactions based. Then the filings you have to do and have a Foreign LLC registration, a registered agent in that state, and a yearly annual report to file to tell them you are still in business and here is my $40-200.

HWR_14 13 hours ago

Except you can sell through Amazon (or other online store) and they will manage all that for you as a single fee. Exactly the solution that the article proposed for the EU rules.

deno 11 hours ago

Except you don’t have min threshold requirements for neither PPWR nor WEEE, it's before you can sell anything. And you need to register, hire an authorized agent and get contract (which always has minimal amount rather than per-kg pricing) with local recycling company in each member state.

Also you have Streamlined Sales Tax Registration System (SSTRS) for actual registration in US which covers 24 states.

deepsun 28 minutes ago

In US laws are also different between states, for example some products are compostable in Arkansas but are not compostable in California.

mpweiher 14 hours ago

A couple of things to note:

1. The EU commission wanted a single central registry

2. It was the member states, via the Council of Ministers, that torpedoed this.

3. The EU now advises its member states to not implement/enforce this

4. Until the correction, which is on its way, can be fully enacted.

So the same old same old: member states do shitty stuff and blame the EU.

Turneyboy 14 hours ago

Why would the implementation of this not simply be a fee that the mail carriers have to impose?

Isn't that by far the simplest solution that removes any and all bureaucracy for almost everyone and still catches 99% of the cases?

Yizahi 14 hours ago

It's all about PR. If EU formulates the new law like they are fighting against pollution and plastic garbage, it sounds nice enough to the electorate who are content with greenwashing and won't investigate much. And 99% of population won't ever a hear a word about real issues by the sellers, to them sellers would quietly and imperceptibly start disappearing. But a direct fee sounds more like a tax hike and the same electorate ordering packages from foreign shops would definitely remember that.

codingbot3000 14 hours ago

Good point.

If I were a small seller I would just ignore this, like many sellers on Temu do. Before you get into trouble, someone must take notice that you did not register for the recipient fiefdom's protectionism racket. And if that happens, it is not sure that you really are in trouble. As with the GDPR, this kind of regulation is almost unenforcable in practice.

deno 7 hours ago

It is enforceable and the financial punishment is severe. There's no US’s LLC equivalent in EU, you basically only have C-Corp/Inc. equivalents (much more expensive to start and operate, both because of accounting and corporation income tax), so most small sellers in EU end up fully liable with their own wealth for the ridiculous up to 200,000€ penalties.

Chinese sellers don’t care, sure, but if you live in EU you do care.

That said while the financial penalties are in practice still not common they are chilling nevertheless.

However, EU is also now starting marketplace level enforcement, so in practice even those Chinese sellers will not be able to sell anything without registration.

mrtksn 14 hours ago

It's always like this, EU is in urgent need of becoming a country in some form and local government deal with local stuff only.

It shows up in the stats, citizens almost always trust EU more than their governments and want EU to have more power but all this means those local governments becoming less important and therefore no one is really pushing for it.

Fingers crossed Trump invades Greenland so things can start moving.

antiloper 14 hours ago

> It's always like this, EU is in urgent need of becoming a country in some form and local government deal with local stuff only.

The lesson is the opposite: The EU needs LESS power, not more. If the member states didn't have a cartel to tyrannize their collective population, this regulation could never have happened. Any single country that would try to enforce this would be on its own.

mrtksn 13 hours ago

Nope, less power means the current situation will be the default as each country by default will have their own body and rules to govern instead of one rule and one body that handles the whole continent.

Unlike what you appear to believe Europeans are not some libertarian captured by the EU socialist, most europeans do want less wasteful and less harmful packaging.

antiloper 13 hours ago

Do most Europeans want all of their E-commerce to be only handled by American and Chinese megacorporations without local players? Because that is the effect of this regulation. Instead of a SME shipping a cardboard box, it will be Amazon or Temu.

mrtksn 13 hours ago

You are not arguing in good faith, such a loaded question. I will leave it here, too much BS in one comment to deal with it

antiloper 13 hours ago

And "do you want less wasteful" packaging isn't? Because of this question businesses got priced out of shipping from the EU to the EU.

mrtksn 12 hours ago

nope, irrelevant

nickff 12 hours ago

This also negatively affects smaller trading partners, and makes (bi-lateral) trade with the EU much less appealing to them. This means that countries like Canada are less likely to maintain trade agreements which open their market to all sorts of EU goods.

A_D_E_P_T 10 hours ago

> Any single country that would try to enforce this would be on its own.

Actually they'd have no retroactive way to enforce it at all, and the most they'd be able to do would be to charge an import duty on a per-parcel basis, which would ultimately be borne by the importer.

This would be a huge improvement over the utter nonsense they're implementing!

cute_boi 10 hours ago

Trump couldn't invade Iran, forget Greenland.

EU will be in mess forever because it is problem of power and greed.

antiloper 14 hours ago

> member states do shitty stuff and blame the EU.

The crooked MEPs also voted in favor of this law. They are just as culpable.

amarcheschi 14 hours ago

I haven't followed the legislative process, where can I find that the eu wanted a single registry but the country pushed for national ones? Because i have never read it.

I'm not saying it's not true, it's just that it's so hard to follow these things when one is supposed to have a life as well

Avamander 13 hours ago

You have to use the FOIA-equivalent of your member state to get access to the documents submitted to the EU by your country.

mpweiher 9 hours ago

There has been reporting on this in many places. Here is one:

https://packaging-journal.de/en/eu-commission-wants-to-scrap...

"According to the Händlerbund, the European Commission's proposal to abolish the requirement has been on the table since December 2025. However, discussions in the Council of the EU were suspended a few weeks ago after a majority of member states spoke out against it."

"A restricted version is currently being discussed in the European Parliament. According to this, an exemption is only to apply to micro-enterprises with up to 49 employees and an annual turnover of a maximum of 10 million euros. A first reading is scheduled for October 2026 at the earliest."

amarcheschi 8 hours ago

Ok ty

pembrook 2 hours ago

If you need to both:

a) exempt companies with under 50 employees to not kill small business

AND

b) are okay with doing so, ie. there's little consequences from exempting companies from this

Then this is the mark of a terrible piece of legislation. What problem are we actually addressing here by creating another fee collecting, headache inducing registration regime and the 684th enforcement bureaucracy in the EU over yet another trivial consumer issue?

Yes, single use plastics aren't great. Incentivize companies to move away from them by creating positive market incentives instead of creating an anti-productive, full time packaging Stasi.

It's almost as if the people attracted to a career in government can only imagine their subjects responding to the stick, even though the carrot is often far more persuasive. This is the classic downfall of all economic central planning.

The problem with this particular topic is it's a religious one for many in the urban monoculture. They don't ultimately care about packaging waste, they care about punishment and repentance for humanity's existence. We've angered the gods and must repent via punitive measures! To incentivize good behavior is antithetical to that, even if it is more effective at actually doing the thing.

Jskewel 15 hours ago

PPWR is an EU catastrophe.

Firstly for the reasons outlined in the article: it essentially makes being a micro/small business in the EU impossible, if your market is other EU countries.

Secondly because it validates insidious populist views that the EU institution is useless and incompetent at a fundamental level.

The legislation is so ABSURDIST that the EU have actually asked companies to ignore the law that they just implemented. I can assure you it is difficult to ignore a law that comes with a €200000 fine for non-compliance.

carlosjobim 14 hours ago

Gosh I hate it when politicians are useless and incompetent, since it just validates the false populist propaganda that politicians can be useless and incompetent, which is clearly not true (even in cases when politicians actually are useless and incompetent, which they of course cannot be, since that is evil propaganda).

gmueckl 14 hours ago

Politicians can be quite evil, but in a functioning democracy they need to be at least competent at gathering support and navigating the occasional backstabbing plots to make it to the highest ranks of government. So I'm hesitant to call them totally incompetent.

zigman1 14 hours ago

Exactly. Competent at getting votes (and taking them away from competition) and incompetent at leading and being in power.

ab5tract 9 hours ago

What is the alternative that you are proposing? When I read something like this all that comes across is a strident desire for totalitarianism.

easytiger 14 hours ago

> Secondly because it validates insidious populist views that the EU institution is useless and incompetent at a fundamental level.

- resentment that bad policy damages the institution’s reputation - annoyed it proves people i hate like correct

alerighi 14 hours ago

Really the chances that someone will ask a small company to be compliant are just very low. Of course if you sell something in an envelope nobody will ask you anything, the deal and the reason for this law (that I consider correct) is to address packaging waste from big companies.

Of course this law it's complex for nothing, to me, they could have just added the cost of the recycling of the packaging material into the cost of the packaging material itself, making it that only the companies producing the packaging would need to comply (so that if you buy a box to ship something the cost of recycling of the box is already embedded in the cost of the box, like they did with plastic bags at the supermarket).

nonethewiser 12 hours ago

If this view is validated:

>EU institution is useless and incompetent at a fundamental level

Then aren't the people who hold it simply correct? Why brand this valid view as "insidious populists?"

>The legislation is so ABSURDIST that the EU have actually asked companies to ignore the law that they just implemented.

This is probably the best way to emphasize it. It is completely absurd, useless, non-functional, etc.

kilpikaarna 11 hours ago

> The legislation is so ABSURDIST that the EU have actually asked companies to ignore the law that they just implemented. I can assure you it is difficult to ignore a law that comes with a €200000 fine for non-compliance.

That's the commission telling small businesses that please don't stop selling in the EU and suggesting member states should use common sense. Unfortunately, as with all EU directives the implementation and enforcement is up to the member states, and especially certain northern countries really love their bureaucrats leaving common sense at home in the morning and sticking to the exact letter of the law. The 200000 EUR fine is Germany specific I think, obviously a prime candidate here.

jansan 10 hours ago

Germany does an extra gold plating on every single EU regulation.

fh973 9 hours ago

Or just ignores them, if it doesn't serve the lobby groups, like for example the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD).

lofaszvanitt 11 hours ago

The legislation doesnt apply to small joes..... stop disseminating total hogwash, especially if you don't have any idea what you are talking about.

germandiago 10 hours ago

My first decision when building my company was to leave Spain.

They smash you very quickly. They do not care if they ruin you via prosecurion or you have to shut down. The tax agency is extremely agressive. The laws favor the agents to extents that are illegal and weven criminal (check the bonus of inspectors).

Check Robert Amsterdam work on this, something we all spanish know for a long time.

ken666 9 hours ago

Where did you move to, if I can ask?

TacticalCoder 9 hours ago

Spain also smashes foreigners owning a property in Spain.

They see tourists and foreigners (even if they're from the EU) as a gigantic target to squeeze and screw as hard as they can. That's what you get when your economy is based on tourism and rich foreigners owning property there: you have to squeeze those hard for it's basically all you have. Officially tourism is "only" about 15% of the GDP but Spain is a service economy and so many of those services revolve around tourism and foreigner owning properties there. Same for the construction sector: they love it when rich tourists have fancy villas built there.

My wife used to own a house there. So did her mom. They sold it all and kissed Spain goodbye once and for all: too disgusted by how the fiscal authorities were treating them.

I won't go on vacation there anymore. Both my wife and my daughter speak spanish and yet we don't plan to go there anymore: she's done giving money to Spain to be seen, in return, as a lemon out of which more juice can be squeezed.

Vote with your feet and you wallet: when a country tries to fuck you, give it the middle finger.

marc 9 hours ago

> “Spain also smashes foreigners owning a property in Spain.”

In which way?

Grombobulous 9 hours ago

Usually when people say stuff like this it translates to “the tax rate is slightly higher than [insert less desirable location here]” or "my marginal tax rate seems really high since I have a very high income"

x0x0 5 hours ago

Spain charges you tax if you rent the property out. If you don't rent the property out, it imputes a rent and you are charged tax on the imputed rent.

The cadastral value is (finger in the air) 40% of the value of the property; you pay (non-eu resident) 24% of between 1.1% and 2% of the cadastral value.

So 0.1%-0.2% of property value annually.

thfuran 3 hours ago

0.2% is significantly lower than the property tax rate I pay on my house, and taxing vacant property seems like a good idea to try to disincentivize inefficient use of limited urban real estate.

iamniels 11 hours ago

PPWR is not the only one. Don't forget WEEE and the battery regulation. Only for VAT we have a single entrypoint, for all other regulations, businesses have to submit for each country. Its simply impossible.

On the other hand I estimate that between 50% and 200% of the taxes collected like this are wasted and not applied to their ultimate goals. The average collected amount per submission is so small that you cannot pay the bureaucrats managing the complex submissions from these sums.

An entrepreneur told me that they were being audited regarding the battery regulation. Two consultants came over from EY and audited all submissions in depth. They found out that the business overpaid by €10. The entrepreneur of course didn't mind and told them to keep the €10. The EY consultants told the entrepreneur to resubmit, otherwise the business would be fined. I think the government spent more on that audit by EY than the business will ever bring in on fees.

On top of this we have the regulations like Intrastat and in the future near-real-time submission of digital invoices to our tax authorities.

armcat 15 hours ago

This is a great read and I can extend this argument really to any small business. Tax filing, VAT, bookkeeping, privacy, consumer, workplace and sectoral requirements frequently impose a disproportionately large cost on microbusinesses. EU is more and more split along the enterprise and VC backed line, and everyone in between has disproportionate costs. My barber in Stockholm often complains about this - the amount of money they would need to earn to overcome all these costs is staggering. So they often do lots of gigs on the side.

varispeed 14 hours ago

General view of EU politicians is that working class should be working for big corporations. Running own business is a sin.

The big corporations also don't want people to run small business, because they remove themselves from the job market and cannot be hired / exploited. So they lobby EU FOR regulations that ensure people cannot run business.

merek 13 hours ago

> Running own business is a sin

Shouldn't any wealth creation viewed positively due to tax, not to mention value to consumers/society?

Or is the view that people on average produce more value when employed by a large corporation?

lnsru 12 hours ago

A self employed person can deduct many things used personally from the taxes in Germany as a business expense. An employed person pays shit ton of taxes and the value added tax. So from pre-tax salary you get only 30% for spending. Lol. It’s slavery.

varispeed 10 hours ago

Corporations also deduct things as expenses. Small business or self-employed person don't have any special privileges - au contraire - in many jurisdictions big corporations are not audited at all and have special tax arrangements where they agree with the tax man to pay certain amount of tax. The idea that small business somehow avoids tax is a myth. If you have limited company, your personal spending wont fly past accountant.

WarmWash 11 hours ago

>General view of EU politicians is that working class should be working for big corporations

The politicians are protecting the working class from corporations destroying society for profit. Lets not kid ourselves that the EU isn't endlessly praised for "having a backbone". Universal chargers, removable batteries, open app stores, AI data protections...

The thing is that people generally don't understand that everything in the world is tradeoffs rather than the media/internet portrayal of the world being good vs evil.

drnick1 10 hours ago

> Universal chargers, removable batteries, open app stores, AI data protections...

The same "protections" also means that the E.U. has no major AI player at all. It seems like all the E.U. can do is tax and regulate what is invented and produced elsewhere.

flaunf221 9 hours ago

> has no major AI player at all

So? Will major AI players introduce universal healthcare in US? Or is it coming along with AGI which is why it should be the most important to every citizen? Or maybe EU citizens should all band together and stop being lazy and go to having 0 mandatory vacation days?

Reminds of me very old USSR joke which was basically "we have rockets in space, and don't have sausages in stores".

drnick1 5 hours ago

> So? Will major AI players introduce universal healthcare in US?

We don't want universal healthcare, 6-month to one-year waits for routine operations, having to beg doctors for prescriptions, massive tax hikes to pay for all of that while disincentivizing people from working and keeping jobs.

dmix 3 hours ago

If you want to talk about terrible regulation, the US health insurance system is a great example.

A single payer insurance system would be more rational vs choosing the worst of both worlds, which the US built through layers and layers of political compromise. The private alternative is a no-go politically in the western world so why not just commit to doing it properly?

Although of course that would require US states (more so than federal) to be more fiscally conservative, so the tax increase wouldn't be as burdensome... which might also be a no-go.

alerighi 13 hours ago

My barber in Italy just doesn't make me a receipt in exchange for a discount if I pay him cash so he doesn't have to pay taxes. Come on... the cost to operating a small business are usually low/there are tax exceptions, and they most of the time are even not payed at all.

Of course if you are a person that ships 20 packages you don't register a company to do so, nobody will, you just sell them privately (and the exception to sell things privately is quite high, in my country you can do it up to 5000 euros AT YEAR, after that you need to declare the income in your tax declaration but still you don't need to register a company if it's not your main income).

veeti 13 hours ago

The barber in Stockholm probably wouldn't take cash if you tried ;) Single union, different rules.

thinking_cactus 9 hours ago

I think in the future we should think less about fine-based regulation, and more about easy access to education, and assistance in compliance. It's much better for the environment (and the economy) that someone doesn't pollute, for example, than that someone pollutes than pays (a potentially large) fine.

So if you want to make a product, there should be readily available, easy to read and follow, guides to make your product compliant. For products with large sales volumes or higher risk, the procedures of course should be more thorough, allowing some more complexity. I think even free consults offered by governments could be a great idea, much better to have consultants before violating a law, than waste money with a lot of inspectors. Also stimulating people to solve problems (many times using technology) is another benefit.

dmix 3 hours ago

So basically the "pyramids of support" in the responsive regulation idea https://johnbraithwaite.com/responsive-regulation/

Robin_f 15 hours ago

This is actively preventing me from sending packages to other countries as a maker. No matter how small the risk is, I don't want to risk a 5000 euro fine for sending a small amount of packages to other EU countries.

catigula 15 hours ago

Do you not cross the street given the risk of being hit by a bus?

sokoloff 15 hours ago

Fortunately, buses are not invisible and you can look for a bus before crossing a street to gauge and control your risk of being struck by one.

Hizonner 15 hours ago

... but you can still fail to notice one, and you can gauge and to some degree control your risk of being fined.

In fact, if you sell 10 hobby prototype boards to other hobbyists, you probably have a higher risk of getting hit by a bus on the way to the post office than you do of being fined.

tygon 8 hours ago

Schrodinger's Bus: You do not know if you will be hit until you are already in the street. I feel like there is some promise in naming a band this, but it is unfortunate it so often is what people have to deal with when bringing an item to market.

throw-the-towel 15 hours ago

Umm akchully, not crossing a highway to avoid being hit is a perfectly sane course of action.

fitsumbelay 15 hours ago

except he said "street" not "highway"

dgellow 15 hours ago

Really sorry you’re experiencing this, that whole regulation rollout is a complete mess. The leadership should be sacked for such an incompetent regulation, it’s insane how much troubles they are creating for small businesses.

Another small business owner reported their experience in this Reddit thread, looks really bad: https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1vrz88a/comment/p4i...

I’m as pro-EU as one can get but that’s a mistake we should solve asap

contravariant 13 hours ago

The main reason I'm not particularly pro EU is the following.

How would we even sack the leadership?

RandomLensman 13 hours ago

Who is the leadership? The Council - then it would be national elections etc for the individual national representatives; the Commission - then it would be the European Parliament.

contravariant 8 hours ago

Requiring a 2/3 majority from the European Parliament seems a bit like a theoretical option more than anything. Even if it did (almost) happen once.

graemep 15 hours ago

Some people did the same when VATMOSS was introduced.

jeltz 14 hours ago

And those people were idiots. MOSS was trivial to implement and an improvement of what was there before. I implemented it myself for our company.

graemep 12 hours ago

Not far small businesses with very small numbers of cross border sales.

criddell 14 hours ago

Do you send them as your business or as yourself? If it's the latter, then I would consider forming a business to take on the risk. That's not free either, but think of it as insurance.

thesimon 6 hours ago

Can't comment on all European jurisdictions obviously, but a 1 person LLC/Ltd. is not a great shield in Germany. Usually they'll still consider the owner/director liable because they were making those executive decisions.

anigbrowl 8 hours ago

No matter how small the risk is

That's just an excuse then. Register with whatever local authority in your country handles these things and in the unlikely event you get a grumpy letter just send them a copy of your registration documents.

the__alchemist 16 hours ago

This echos the FCC rules in the US, which I believe are gotten around by not complying.

Even if you are not making an intentional radiator, and/or are using datasheet-specified layouts or modules, you still must comply, which makes these businesses non-viable if complying.

I believe Adafruit gets around certifying every device by declaring themselves a cellphone company and being on good terms with regulators. This isn't viable for the sort of businesses and people described by this article.

I'm not sure about the Ali/Amazon products. I'm assuming they just are not complying.

stephen_g 15 hours ago

FCC allows suppliers to self-declare conformance with EMI/EMC rules. You’re obviously taking a risk selling stuff if you haven’t had it properly tested so don’t really know if it passes but it’s unlikely to really be an issue for a small maker selling low quantities, especially if any intentional radiators (Bluetooth, WiFi etc.) are already-certified modules.

Your device tends to need to be causing problems, that the FCC then go and track down, and then come back to you. That is (hopefully, depending on the kind of device) extremely unlikely.

As for Ali stuff, probably lots of it is not tested but still comes with a FCC label - but if it is shipped from overseas, who is going to take responsibility for it? Nobody… So there is nothing they can do except fine the person who bought it if it’s really causing problems (and usually I doubt they’d even do that if the user wasn’t intentionally doing something they shouldn’t have been, they are just told to stop and maybe the device would be seized/ destroyed)

ac29 14 hours ago

> FCC allows suppliers to self-declare conformance with EMI/EMC rules

Yes, though they can also ask for your lab results or to inspect your testing facility and hit you with massive fines if it turns out you falsified your compliance documents. As you mentioned this is very rare though - even enforcement actions against non-certified intentional radiators are uncommon.

WarmWash 14 hours ago

As a hardware guy it totally kills me, to get a fun or needed small time product off the ground and legally onto the market can require ~$250k of lab certifications.

Imagine making a mod for a video game, and to legally cover your ass, go through months of testing that cost $250,000.

Talk about killing a project in the cradle.

On the flip side, there are engineers who absolutely do not give a fuck, and will design their product with zero regard for emissions. To them the world is "If it's not illegal, then I cannot comprehend why I cannot take it to the extreme".

podocarp 22 minutes ago

Being responsible for collection is such a dumb way to do it. Collection doesn't even occur. Can someone explain to an outsider what these laws are motivated by? They seem so far removed from reality. Isn't a flat tax on all packaging like plastic bags in supermarkets going to be more efficient?

svobodamartin 10 hours ago

History will see last years as EU that turned Europe

-suicidal for own energy industry and economy via green deal without real impact for the world (see EU vs World/ China CO2 emisions chart)

-demographically/socially suicidal via open borders and stupidly generous social benefits for immigrants instead of supporting own families

-going back in time via overregulation of every aspect of our lives

-becoming police state/s via overcontrol

-hypocritical via outsourcing industries and making carbon footprint in other parts of the world

-internally weak via not protecting european values over immigrants "rights" and terror mongering (p.e. Xmas markets canceled on many places)

-supresing democracy via online censorship (DSA)

-juicing own people via over-taxation (exit taxes and unrealized gains taxes)

-being stowaway in terms of own external security (majority of states didn't fulfill NATO requirements in terms of GDP's percentage spent on military...well this actually is one thing that improves over the years, but Europe needed a kick from east and west to becoming adult here after years of underspending)

All in all, EU controlling Europe is committing civilizational suicide, living off past merits which results/capacity are running low while morally lecturing the rest. At the same time also destroying the very foundations that made Europe prosperous. History will likely look back at us as we/Europe voluntarily chose decline.

ps. the fact that I had to check if any claim made is not illegal, shows how far with censorship we already are. Freedom of speech cant be regulated without being lost.

reillyse 10 hours ago

Little hysterical no?

Everywhere has their problems, I think Europe is doing fine.

Where do you think is a model society ?

Razengan 9 hours ago

Uranus, where I have announced myself as undisputed leader.

reillyse 9 hours ago

In light of your unilateral pronouncement, I’d like to deliver my own message to all the loyal residents of Anuses everywhere… this too shall pass.

fakedang 9 hours ago

As Supreme overlord of Saturn, I soundly dispute your assertion.

svobodamartin 9 hours ago

Its a frustration and seeing things, that cant be unseen, speaking..

I don't know where model is, but what would be ideal: valuing own history, values, societies over not own, being strong outwardly and soft inwardly/on own people (not vice versa as is now), being practical and forward thinking over posing as a "leader in regulation" with suppressing everything meaningful hangover.

There are tons of examples of strategically bad political decisions with long term broad consequences.

Reminds me of "everything is fine" meme.

reillyse 9 hours ago

What country in Europe are you referring to? Your objections seem to be quite broad and lack focus but seem to be alluding to the specific. Give me an example of what you mean?

I think leadership is hard. I’m not sure I buy the idea that a group of countries should be “hard” on anyone.

svobodamartin 8 hours ago

Political decision to close modern nuclear powerplants without replacement - Germany. Experts made a petition to reopen them.

Migration - EU failed for many years to protect its border against illegal imigration - millions came, half a mil now legalized in Spain.

Overregulation - EU institutions themselves now acknowledge that regulatory and administrative burdens are hurting EU competitivenes

"Integration"/security - imigrants choose rich countries with good social benefits while in some areas inner security drops (car attacks, knife attacks, ra*es)

Greendeal-carbon pricing paid by industries to meet strict quotas, soon also paid by households, very expensive for europeans while having near zero effect on global emmisions in commparisson to China/rest of the world aka too much pain/costs for "nothing".

Digital regulation - via DSA, fight against so called "hate speech" and "disinformation"

Unrealized gains taxes - Netherlands

Exit taxes - France, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium (conditions vary in each coountry).

Demographical colapse - all EU countries have born rate below replacement level 2.1 (average 1.34 for EU in 2024)

Strategic dependency - Europe made itself super dependent on Russia for energy and from military POV on USA, both of these dependencies are now being painfully corrected

Digital ID/CBDC: EU is building digital ID and digital euro, tools with obvious future potential for surveillance and control.

Concerning being "hard" I meant mainly protecting our borders, being hard on enforcing them and our own laws equally on everybody, being strong independent just Europe in general

Obviously I am no expert in (geo)politics, just an average Joe observing concerning tendencies and not liking direction EU is heading.

reillyse 6 hours ago

I don't really see these as problems. I think the world needs someone to lead on the environment and Europe is more than rich enough that they can handle some short term pain. The countries aren't trying to maximize for short term gains like some other countries and thinking more long term and I think that is a great thing.

From the top. Nuclear - many people in Europe are anti nuclear

Migration - Europe is going to need migrants and I think most Europeans are in favor of a kinder Migration system

I like European regulation, particularly food regulation - I think it makes for high quality food. Besides, companies always complain about regulation.

Crime has decreased substantially in Europe since 2000 - lots of people are stoking tensions though for their own political ends

Carbon tax is good, the world should adopt one, Europe can lead on this.

Digital Regulation, more problematic for me but people are beginning to see the issues are social media and online porn, something has been needed here for a while

Taxes, lots of countries have taxes. Many countries have exit taxes - seems to be a problem for richer people.

Birth rate - as countries get richer they have less kids... not going to be forcing people to have kids so I'm not sure what the solution is there but I think Migration will play a role. ....

basically all of these sound like a bunch of Fox news soundbites rather than real world issues that Europeans have and I feel most Europeans are in favor of these things so this is how Democracy works.

I like that they are thinking longer term and not doing stupid shit like invading countries and killing people. I think thats a win in and of itself. Also, Europe has been peaceful for several generations now which is also a huge win.

svobodamartin 5 hours ago

I think that main difference is, that you look at Europe from outside, I live here and talk to people from mentioned European countries living with these consequences and problems.

One more typical example: we have no big AI company in the EU, because EU was busy being "world first AI regulator" before the industry even started here.

And no, EU is not that rich that it can sustainably pay for policies which make its own energy and industry significantly less competitive with little to no effect on CO2: https://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_widt...

Btw would you be so optimistic about Green Deal and regulation if you too had to pay EU price for petrol of about $8/gal ?

Yes peace since WW2 is great, but we have one war on EU borders and other in Middle East.

Freedom of speech is a bedrock of democracy. I dont thinkt we can bent it for different "noble" reasons or because regulators label smth as hate speech or misinfo. https://prostasia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/image_2022-...

I think we can agree that we disagree, I wish you well.

reillyse 5 hours ago

I’m actually European and live in the US so I have plenty of perspective.

For what it’s worth I think the US should increase petroleum tax to limit usage - not going to fly here but I’m all for Europe doing it. Especially without domestic oil sources - bring on the EV revolution, makes tons of sense for everywhere in the world especially Europe.

brazukadev 9 hours ago

> All in all, EU controlling Europe is committing civilizational suicide, living off past merits

The excessive prosperity ended together with the end of the colonization era (there are still a lot of european colonies but they aren't enough to make Europe rich).

Losing access to shamelessly cheap resources naturally and forced customers impoverished Europe and this process is still going. Same thing would be happening with the US thus the aggressiveness now.

matt-p 15 hours ago

UK has similar rules but, as with pretty much all other similar regulations, there are de minimis carve-outs:

≤ £1m turnover: no packaging EPR obligation, regardless of packaging volume.

£1m turnover + >25 tonnes of packaging: small producer obligations.

£2m turnover + >50 tonnes: large producer obligations.

The EU has been removing de minimis thresholds because 'China' can easily 'exploit' them. They're kind of right, but it's obviously an insanely stupid situation when someone selling something as a hobby, or just starting up on their own gets dragged into this.

mytailorisrich 15 hours ago

The UK tends to be much more sensible than the EU and the main EU countries (France, Germany, Italy).

matt-p 15 hours ago

I agree, though it's not a very difficult challenge. There's still some nonsense here too like for example the TV License

bogdan 13 hours ago

The tv license is a bad example and it's in many ways better than in Germany or France. In the UK you can declare you do not watch any national tv and you forego the tax. No such luxury in Germany where as far as I know you can't avoid it. In France it's funded through vat and of course it's priced in so everyone pays anyway.

nottorp 15 hours ago

This is not new though. "We do not sell to EU end users."

https://pcengines.ch/recycle.htm

"... there are separate registration and recycling schemes for each of the 28+ EU member jurisdictions (and even a few of their provinces). What part of COMMON MARKET was so hard to understand for EU lawmakers ?

Since there is no single registration available, and separate registration would involve mindboggling complexity, bureaucracy and costs, we do not sell to EU end users until the EU gets their act together. Please order from EU based distributors, or as a business customer.

Business customers are expected to meet their obligations by registering in the EU countries they sell in. "

That was already ages ago when I did some sofware for them. 2007 ish if I'm to trust my Linkedin.

blueSky1989 14 hours ago

I initially learned about this from a luthier and plectrum designer, Hufschmidt Guitars, a one man shop in Switzerland. Some quotes from the update he sent to his customers:

""" For a one-person workshop, the result has been pretty brutal.

[...]

The numbers simply do not work for a micro-business like mine. Even in France and Germany, I send only around 1 to 2 kg of cardboard per year. In some other EU countries, I may send less than 100 g in an entire year. Paying annual compliance costs for one or two parcels makes no economic sense.

[...]

I have therefore decided to maintain EU shipping only to: FRANCE GERMANY """

AndroTux 15 hours ago

As someone living in the tiny country of Estonia with just about 1.2 million residents, this worries me. No one but the biggest online shops in the EU will bother with the paperwork for such a small market. I'm expecting my import options to drop sharply in the coming years because of this.

drchickensalad 13 hours ago

Sorry for the off topic but I absolutely love the Estonian House in NYC. Wonderful people, events, and food

herbst 11 hours ago

I ran an online shop from Switzerland. Some years ago packages suddenly returned with the info I need to register with a packaging something company now. I had no idea what's going on, I didn't understand the concept and what they wanted. Apparently there were several companies I could register at pay a fee and it somehow became legal again, none of them looked real it looked like a lot of weird broken fake websites.

Germany was just a small market for us so we stopped shipping there.

I assume it's better and more clear these days and this probably makes it kinda easier in the long run. However it's a perfect example on how such things don't work if not done properly.

lccerina 15 hours ago

The complaint is totally understandable, BUT the examples do not make sense. Arduino did not start as some dude selling less than 10 boards a year, but as an educational tool, which THEN ramped up to 100s of boards produced every day.

If your perspective is "I may sell 10 boards this year, maybe", your target is some local/national maker-faire, not a EU marketplace.

I think makers with such limited productions will just fly under the radar (if you sell so little, it's likely you probably won't need to incorporate or declare taxes in a lot of EU countries). If they sell 100s of products across EU, they probably have at least one over-worked accountant taking care of existing compliance stuff.

varjag 14 hours ago

It sounds like a pain for any small company, not just individual makers. There are many small manufacturers of boutique equipment that could be sold at dozens units per year, and this would add massive bureaucratic overhead.

kazinator 2 hours ago

> Introduce an EU-wide de minimis threshold.

You would think there de facto already is one?

A small time operator shipping a few boards here and there can do it completely under the radar, not even aware that these rules exist.

If it pops into my head to make a circuit board, put it into bubble wrap and mail it to someone, I'm just gonna wake up, take a shower, have a coffee and then proceed to do that, and not think about anything else.

ionwake 15 hours ago

as the whole world crushes small entities one has to wonder whether the EU would be the saviour or not. Apparently not. With its rules, they merely help crush small business as per usual.

I heard in the 50s an american could just startup a business installing septic tanks. But now the same person would need a myriad of regulations to be met, heavy equipment use mandated, all of which raise overhead to a level where its impossible to get off the ground.

I always felt the EU were the "good guys", IE not allowing corps to steam roll everyone, what with their rules fining poor behvaiour such as privacy violations, chargers being non standard etc.

However the same problem exists in weird ways you wouldnt even imagine.

For example if someone walks into a small "mom and pops" coffee shop and accuse the owner of "ejecting them due to harrasment reasons", that results in a court case, which can bankrupt the whole margin thin enterprise.

You might say, wait how on earth would a random troublemaker get funding to take a cafe to court, and for what benefit? For one its easier for a settlement to be reached regardless of fault that benefits the claimant than a long court process.

Now how could claimants have the resources? Unbelievably it turns out there are free national non profit corporations that will take any claim for free to court for situation mentioned above.

So what happens in the end? The small coffee shops cant survive but the larger corps who can afford the random payouts are fine, the competition seems to go away on its own and the claimants are happy with what amounts to random payouts for little work.

Please look it up it, and correct me if im wrong, I only know this from some little research into the forays of why small coffee shops find it hard to survive in western landscapes and risks, as I wanted to open my own coffee shop!

In summary, as always the road to ruin is paved with good intentions. So the EU trying to help a little guy in a specific context, ends up creating a situation that makes all small coffee shops non profitable.

I have no solutions.

latexr 15 hours ago

> Please look it up

You’re the one making the claim, so please provide sources for your fantastical scenario. By your logic there should be no small coffee shops across the EU, yet this is verifiably and patently untrue.

ionwake 15 hours ago

You should do your own research and I don’t want to take up space on HN but I’m happy to take a look can you name what exactly you found hard to believe? It’s been known for decades small business can’t survive legal landscape as easily as large corps.

If you are confused by the statement there are no small coffee shops - are you living in Europe? From first hand experience coffee shops survive less than a couple years on any high street , yet there is a Starbucks on every street corner and it’s a well known fact small coffee shops operate on almost non existent margins.

latexr 15 hours ago

> You should do your own research

Sure, but you should also understand that “look it up” is the escape words of every inane claim. “The Earth is flat, look it up”; “Reptilians are controlling the world, do your own research”; “Bill Gates is injecting you with mind-control chips, google it”.

You can “do your own research” and “confirm” anything. Which is why the person making the original claim should provide sources, so we can all discuss the same thing and not talk past each other. If your sources are flawed, it’s much easier to reach that conclusion if we’re all looking at the same thing.

> I don’t want to take up space on HN

Don’t worry, a few characters won’t make a difference.

> I’m happy to take a look

Thank you.

> can you name what exactly you found hard to believe?

Certainly. It’s paragraphs 5–8 in your original post. The claim that there are random troublemakers regularly employing free national non-profit corporations in the EU to extort and bankrupt local coffee shops by lying about having been ejected for racial reasons.

ionwake 10 hours ago

Thanks for your reply, you are right, its always helpful to have sources but you cant expect everyone to constantly source their statements, especially when they can just be googled.

Personally, and this could just be me, I think if I read something of interest I always do my own research, as I dont believe most of what I read, so I expect others to do the same.

I also think its rude to write alot of text instead of a concise expression of an idea.

Bro 5-8 paragraphs is like saying, prove every single point in half of what you wrote.

First of all I didnt "Make a claim" I said "For example". Bear in mind everyone infers differently. My point was there are setups that allow claimants to take small entities to court, without them having to foot the bill.

Law Centres Network: ~120,000 citizens/year (free solicitor casework & representation) LawWorks: ~70,000 citizens/year (free pro bono legal advice & casework)

shimman 15 hours ago

uhh no, if you're the one making an argument the burden is on you to provide actual sources and not say "trust me bro, look it up."

You're trying to argue how school children argue, aim a little higher if you want to convince people that know how to read.

ionwake 10 hours ago

You are insulting me which is an odd way to have a discussion on this forum, and no I disagree with you. Stop being lazy and do your own research. To help you along I gave some more info above. Thanks for the bump.

shimman 7 hours ago

Imagine thinking asking someone for sources as "insulting."

ionwake 6 hours ago

No this comment is insulting as its calling me a child "You're trying to argue how school children argue, aim a little higher if you want to convince people that know how to read."

imagine if you will.... the trolling you are serving

nonethewiser 12 hours ago

Small coffee shops prove the point. It's not worth it to invest for growth.

latexr 12 hours ago

There is a big difference between being unable to grow and being uninterested in it. I sincerely doubt most people open a small coffee shop dreaming of expansion. Small coffee shop owners don’t want to be Starbucks. Being small and wanting to stay small is not a failure.

nonethewiser 11 hours ago

Desire is irrelevant. Small European coffee shops can’t become starbucks.

ilamont 15 hours ago

> I heard in the 50s an american could just startup a business installing septic tanks. But now the same person would need a myriad of regulations to be met, heavy equipment use mandated, all of which raise overhead to a level where its impossible to get off the ground.

You can still do such businesses, but the red tape and other requirements are enourmous: health department and construction applications, soil tests, inspections, manufacturing requirements, and so on. The additional costs and delays are passed on to customers.

It's not just septic tanks, it's all areas of construction and one of the reasons why in many states (like New York and California) it's impossible to make low-cost housing anymore, or (like in Florida) new regulations governing old construction are leading to sky-high reserve requirements and condo fees.

There's also the phenomenon of people just ignoring the laws or bypassing them. For your septic tank example, in Alabama out in the countryside people with low cost prefab houses ("double wides") don't want to pay $10,000 to dig a trench for a septic tank, so they just run sewer hoses deep into the woods or ditches. https://www.epa.gov/septic/surface-discharge-raw-wastewater-...

nonethewiser 12 hours ago

>as the whole world crushes small entities one has to wonder whether the EU would be the saviour or not.

Who was wondering this? The EU has been hostile to small businesses and entrepreneurs from the beginning.

cucumber3732842 4 hours ago

>I heard in the 50s an american could just startup a business installing septic tanks. But now the same person would need a myriad of regulations to be met, heavy equipment use mandated, all of which raise overhead to a level where its impossible to get off the ground.

Worse. You can't even install septics in wide swaths of the country. Well, the evil people in the internet comments will say you can, but they're omitting the nonstarter costs, discretionary permits, etc, etc, that make it simply not worth it vs paying for city sewer or whatever mound system the compliance people want to make you buy.

So that sliver or industry that has 100x the compliance burden it used to has 1/100th the activity to amortize it over. Further shrinking it.

vlyan 10 hours ago

>The main idea of EPR is sensible: businesses that place packaging on the market should help finance its collection and recycling.

it is not sensible at all because businesses and individuals who dispose of that packaging already pay for the privilege.

theonejvo 23 minutes ago

Australia is doing the same thing x100

mkl95 12 hours ago

EU states do an excellent job at tolerating each other, with the odd hiccup. They are also gerontocracies fronted by middle aged leaders focused on pleasing older wealthy people, who last cared about entrepreneurship in the 70s. When you combine it with extremely low birth rates, you get a rotting economy.

kakoni 15 hours ago

And then there is Temu (as a platform). They've done all the necessary EPR/PPWR agreements with various European countries/vendors. It handles all the fees and reporting for Chinese sellers.

Urahandystar 14 hours ago

Yup, soon they will offer to handle the compliance for EU sellers for no risk and low and behold the idiots have given away a tax on selling in the single market to another country before they know it.