Nothing definitive but it's still early in the exodus
thunspa · 2026-08-25 12:51:16 UTC
I'm sorry, not only is this far from definitive, it's not even a sign of an 'early' exodus.
There is not really any exodus, sadly. The US still is significantly more competitive and offers much higher upsides to talented people willing to take risks. I live in the EU and want us to succeed, but I'm skeptical about our ability to compete with America economically and technologically, because we foster a different type of spirit.
It would be nice if this didn't matter.
cm2012 · 2026-08-24 14:05:31 UTC
In Europe air pollution, while much higher than the United States, is at a hundred year low.
khalic · 2026-08-24 14:18:16 UTC
slightly off topic wouldn't you say?
mrweasel · 2026-08-24 14:06:02 UTC
The idea isn't the issue, the implementation is. The EU did the same with VAT previously, where you'd have to register separate businesses in different countries, once you got large enough (which wasn't very large). Now there's a central system to keep track of what goes where and you can sell internally in the EU with no issues.
Something similar needs to happen here, where business report and pay to a central EU system, that then transfers the funds to each country. The problem is that the EU is smart enough to see the environmental problem, but forgets to think about ramifications and doesn't provide the right tools.
zarzavat · 2026-08-24 13:39:55 UTC
It is possible to ignore laws if it's too much bother to comply with them... it's hard to imagine the authorities will come after someone for mailing out 10 anti-static bags.
caseysoftware · 2026-08-24 13:54:59 UTC
That's a very American mindset. I've worked across both the US and EU at a variety of companies with customers, partners, etc and it's a clear pattern:
- Americans are usually willing to skirt the rules and figure it out later. This comes with risk but is ideal when you're early stage, low stakes, and you couldn't follow the rules anyway.
- Europeans absolutely want to do it by the book and will be shocked if you suggest otherwise. Being process oriented is great for high stakes industries where lives and safety are on the line but destroys startups, likely slowing or even killing innovation.
There is no floor to the level of "petty" that can happen here: the UK - granted, not the EU - goes after individuals who don't pay their TV license and determine the who by triangulating unlicensed TVs via radio trucks and inspectors looking in your windows.
ranger_danger · 2026-08-24 13:57:36 UTC
I find this hard to discuss among others as it often results in heated discussions, but in my experience, Europeans have a completely different understanding of what is considered "rude" so much that I struggle to work with a vast majority of them.
That's not to say that there aren't extremely nice people all other Europe... there are. But I'm still caught off guard when hearing them say some things nonchalantly that would get them fired in the US.
scns · 2026-08-24 14:08:08 UTC
> But I'm still caught off guard when hearing them say some things nonchalantly that would get them fired in the US.
I'm intruiged, can you give an example?
caseysoftware · 2026-08-24 14:29:49 UTC
Not sure if it's a pattern but when I interviewed with an EU company recently, they explicitly asked if I was married and if I had kids. They explained it as they had a "European mindset towards weekends and holidays" and they expected me to NOT be online.
I was fine with the mindset but never expected to get those questions in an interview, as it'd be illegal in the States.
mrguyorama · 2026-08-24 17:41:10 UTC
It had to be made illegal to ask in the states, because so many employers used that information in an adversarial way.
In places that don't have such a history, there's no reason for it to be taboo.
HeyLaughingBoy · 2026-08-24 20:02:31 UTC
To be clear: the question isn't illegal. What is illegal is using it to discriminate against a protected class, so as a result, no interviewer with half a brain will ask those questions.
ranger_danger · 2026-08-24 21:36:55 UTC
"you should lose weight"
Whenever I call out things like this to European friends they just think I am being an overly-sensitive American. But saying that to a colleague can absolutely get you fired in the US.
dragochat · 2026-08-24 14:09:36 UTC
wtf are u talking about? some examples would be in order...
maeln · 2026-08-24 14:09:25 UTC
I don't really have this experience. A lot of business I have worked with followed the "let's just do it and figure out the risk later" approach. In highly regulated environment it was different, but then looking for ways to squirt around the rules was the game. See for example the CumCum (don't blame me, it was called like that) tax-evasion scheme put in place by french banks.
Lumaestro · 2026-08-24 14:35:54 UTC
Depends on what Europe you mean. Europe can be quite different depending on where you are. I wouldn't say northern Europe wants to do it by the book all the time like the Germans.
Quite common to view Europe as all the same, but Europe varies much more than what US does.
pjc50 · 2026-08-24 14:42:39 UTC
The TV license is silly but the detector van situation is bogus, at least in the present day; really they just blanket mail demand letters to every address in the database on the assumption that everyone watches TV.
> Europeans absolutely want to do it by the book
Again on HN, I don't think conflating Europe and all Europeans into a uniform culture works. This might be true of Germany but as you get further from Berlin it is .. less so.
(Famous story from the Greek debt crisis of using satellite photos to find swimming pools and therefore people who were probably underpaying income tax, which was at such poor compliance levels the state was struggling)
Most people are under the impression that those triangulating trucks can't detect anything and they're just an obvious looking enforcement truck used as a scare tactic, is that not the case?
gib444 · 2026-08-25 07:10:47 UTC
> Europeans absolutely want to do it by the book and will be shocked if you suggest otherwise.
My experience working for small European companies is the opposite. Mostly companies run by kids of old money who truly believe rules apply to them
gib444 · 2026-08-25 15:04:11 UTC
Don't apply* !
matt-p · 2026-08-24 13:59:48 UTC
Maybe it's super convenient for you in the moment, but the aggregate effect is pretty bad. If everyone just ignores laws because they're too much hassle and they don't expect to get caught, enforcement becomes incredibly difficult. You end up with loads of laws that technically exist but are only selectively enforced, which is a pretty serious problem.
anonzzzies · 2026-08-24 14:03:10 UTC
Yeah, I always ignore them, first in my own country (NL) and after that in EU. Even if they fine (which they don't for small companies/persons), they will not spend money/efforts to cash the fine anyway, especially across borders. I had a few useless fines in the 35 years of my company, never will pay them.
the__alchemist · 2026-08-24 13:40:17 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 13:59:36 UTC
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)
dom96 · 2026-08-24 14:42:32 UTC
Huh. I thought that is actually the EU that allows self declared conformance, rather than the FCC. But looking into this it seems both do?
I recall trying to build some hardware in 2020 and getting discouraged because of the CE/FCC silliness. Even though I could self declare for the EU it seemed like a big risk to do so.
ac29 · 2026-08-24 14:51:14 UTC
> 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.
ranger_danger · 2026-08-24 14:45:13 UTC
Adafruit sells boards as subassemblies, which don't need individual certification.
Putting that board into an enclosure and then selling it now makes you the manufacturer, and you must certify that new product.
WarmWash · 2026-08-24 14:45:44 UTC
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".
rcxdude · 2026-08-25 07:47:05 UTC
That's, uh, a wildly overestimated cost of certification. Most products you can self-certify, even off the back of your own testing.
sajithdilshan · 2026-08-24 13:40:34 UTC
Sometimes I wonder if the lawmakers in EU are brain dead. The whole point of economic union is that free movement of goods without custom tax and this new rule is practically a custom tax for each country.
a34729t · 2026-08-24 16:00:55 UTC
The practical purpose of the EU is exactly what it appears to be: Jobs for bureaucrats and politicians.
gerikson · 2026-08-24 13:41:05 UTC
Unfortunate choice of words, implies these people are being literally murdered...
Robin_f · 2026-08-24 13:41:41 UTC
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.
dgellow · 2026-08-24 14:08:18 UTC
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.
I’m as pro-EU as one can get but that’s a mistake we should solve asap
contravariant · 2026-08-24 15:47:24 UTC
The main reason I'm not particularly pro EU is the following.
How would we even sack the leadership?
RandomLensman · 2026-08-24 16:29:39 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 21:10:51 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 14:37:51 UTC
Some people did the same when VATMOSS was introduced.
jeltz · 2026-08-24 15:27:05 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 17:33:08 UTC
Not far small businesses with very small numbers of cross border sales.
criddell · 2026-08-24 15:18:30 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 23:30:05 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 21:14:29 UTC
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.
Robin_f · 2026-08-26 06:50:59 UTC
It's clear you didn't read the article. As its not about registration, but rather the absurd costs of doing all this for small businesses.
uxhacker · 2026-08-24 13:43:20 UTC
What is amazing is that this goes so much against the concept of the EU. The EU was founded on the principles of four freedoms, Free movement of goods, Free movement of persons, Freedom to provide services, and Free movement of capital.
The EU even have a SME Test to maker sure small business are not overburdened by regulations.
Also there are thousands of lobbyists fighting for small businesses. Yes, this law will probably eventually be thrown out for small businesses but after how many years is a big question, and how many small businesses have lost there businesses.
And the law was devised by Ripa di Meana, who had been a member of the Italian Communist Party and the green party.
sajithdilshan · 2026-08-24 13:45:17 UTC
> And the law was devised by Ripa di Meana, who had been a member of the Italian Communist Party and the green party.
how ironical
cobbzilla · 2026-08-24 13:53:54 UTC
It’s hard to overthrow actual free markets. Small business is too sympathetic.
But if you pass enough well-meaning regulations and strangle all the small businesses with good intentions, it’s much easier to overthrow a crony-capitalist oligopoly of megacorps, which is exactly the end game.
sajithdilshan · 2026-08-24 13:59:55 UTC
yes, and go back to communism 2.0. because that worked so well the last time it was tried.
KellyCriterion · 2026-08-24 15:46:03 UTC
Not quite exactly:
--
The EU was founded on the principles of four freedoms, Free movement of goods, Free movement of persons, Freedom to provide services, and Free movement of capital.
--
If you take a look at first paragraphs of the EU contracts, they sate above all these:
-----------
Article 3
(ex Article 2 TEU)
1. The Union's aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples.
2. The Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime.
3. The Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance.
It shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child.
It shall promote economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States.
It shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe's cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced.
4. The Union shall establish an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro.
...
----
So its only about free movement of people in the beginning, goods and services are much later in the docs
zoobab · 2026-08-25 09:13:03 UTC
"Also there are thousands of lobbyists fighting for small businesses."
I don't know on which world you live, but it's the opposite.
Big business buys influence, including buying the opinion of small companies.
And big business is all around Brussels, small companies simply don't have a 'lobbyist'.
yardie · 2026-08-24 13:46:10 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 13:55:25 UTC
Even medium-sized corporations are not willing to send products across borders to consumers (say, outside Germany), further destroying the single market.
alephnerd · 2026-08-24 13:57:51 UTC
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.
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 · 2026-08-24 14:52:30 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 15:06:58 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 18:44:07 UTC
And 5x the price
Helmut10001 · 2026-08-24 13:58:47 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 14:12:34 UTC
And it's like there's a uno card that's "increase taxes for freelancers". And they sure like to use it.
arjie · 2026-08-24 15:46:48 UTC
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.
barrenko · 2026-08-25 16:11:51 UTC
Appreciate this input.
21asdffdsa12 · 2026-08-24 14:36:59 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 14:58:46 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 14:02:52 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 14:06:15 UTC
> 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 · 2026-08-24 14:10:36 UTC
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 · 2026-08-24 14:16:41 UTC
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.
nradov · 2026-08-24 15:14:27 UTC
Greece could have fixed their problems by cutting spending and collecting more taxes (not necessarily higher taxes, but actually collecting the taxes that were owed). Currency inflation was never necessary.
iknowstuff · 2026-08-24 16:09:22 UTC
I think they did? At the cost of very slow recovery, which I think is the problem with austerity measures.
nradov · 2026-08-24 17:11:51 UTC
Austerity is not a "problem", it's simply the only remaining option when you run out of other people's money.
iknowstuff · 2026-08-24 18:17:19 UTC
Countries can inflate their debt away at the cost of eroding savings and new borrowing becoming more expensive, no?
Countries can't push that approach very far before new borrowing doesn't just become more expensive, it becomes effectively impossible.
realityking · 2026-08-25 08:19:52 UTC
Countries with poor credit struggle to issue debt in their own currency. Being able to inflate your debts away is a privilege of the rich.
imtringued · 2026-08-25 08:42:07 UTC
This is a very strange perspective when the simplest solution is to introduce a demurrage euro for automatic equilibrium in the Eurozone.
I know you permanent money people are keen on a dog eat dog world where you trust no one and see everyone around you as a competitor to defeat.
izacus · 2026-08-25 09:24:20 UTC
They couldn't fix the problem because they were a corrupt country refusing to face their reality and which leadership decided to blame EU for not pumping more money into their pockets instead of fixing the structural problems of their rotting country.
Destroying their peoples lives with inflation so they could continue the parade would be even worse for both Greece and EU as a whole.
carlosjobim · 2026-08-24 14:36:10 UTC
No, the Greeks were cool and calculating, turning an inflating fake fiat currency into hard assets like real estate, while not working or producing anything.
The introduction of the Euro was the start signal for each country to try to inflate as much as they can for their own benefit - since the first inflator gets the best value out of the currency. Idiots are left holding paper currency worth less and less each day. Having to work harder and harder in a never ending spiral.
pjc50 · 2026-08-24 14:47:40 UTC
The Euro had a much better set of inflation controls than most of the previous European currencies. Especially the lire.
carlosjobim · 2026-08-24 19:33:58 UTC
Absolutely. But when you inflate your own currency, it is you who have to deal with the consequences. If you inflate everyone's currency you reap all the benefits and leave everybody else with the burden of the consequences.
pjc50 · 2026-08-25 00:04:45 UTC
But part of the setup was that inflation was controlled centrally by the ECB? How are you declaring that national governments inflated it?
carlosjobim · 2026-08-25 10:49:41 UTC
Inflation isn't controlled by the ECB. Money is created when banks loan out money. Whether that be to people, companies, or governments (municipalities and so on). That's where all money comes from and how the currency is inflated.
The country which by legislation or by other means makes it easier for banks to lend out money will benefit their own citizens and companies, since they get to be the first spenders of newly created money before it reduces in value. That's how national governments can use inflation for their own benefit within a common currency system. But no government involvement is necessary. If a group of people (in this case the Greeks) are willing to take on extraordinary amounts of debts compared to other groups, then we have the same results.
Remember that all money which was borrowed in the European "debt crisis" went somewhere before the loans couldn't be paid. Somebody benefitted, and the idiots were left to pay.
philipallstar · 2026-08-24 15:13:11 UTC
> So you've described Greece as a bunch of scheming petulant children.
Can you quote where I did that, please?
Yizahi · 2026-08-24 15:17:58 UTC
Do you realize that your example actually counters your point? The Greece's example illustrates that a misbehaving minority shouldn't have an outsized influence on the majority, which is a correct thing to aim for, I completely agree with you on that. But the current EU arrangement actually allows minority entities to veto majority's initiatives and improvements, exactly because EU is not fully federated. 1 member country can screech and blackmail 26 other members for any arbitrary reason, and they all must comply with this minority's ultimatum. If EU was a federation, majority would simply outvote any obstructionists.
iknowstuff · 2026-08-24 16:07:32 UTC
This is too simplistic. Most eu laws pass by simple or qualified majority.
Comments
Europe's smart people are going to have to move to another country to be entrepreneurs. That's going to kill Europe faster.
Watch the stats please, the contrary is happening right now, plenty of American talents coming to Europe.
Nothing definitive but it's still early in the exodus
There is not really any exodus, sadly. The US still is significantly more competitive and offers much higher upsides to talented people willing to take risks. I live in the EU and want us to succeed, but I'm skeptical about our ability to compete with America economically and technologically, because we foster a different type of spirit.
It would be nice if this didn't matter.
Something similar needs to happen here, where business report and pay to a central EU system, that then transfers the funds to each country. The problem is that the EU is smart enough to see the environmental problem, but forgets to think about ramifications and doesn't provide the right tools.
- Americans are usually willing to skirt the rules and figure it out later. This comes with risk but is ideal when you're early stage, low stakes, and you couldn't follow the rules anyway.
- Europeans absolutely want to do it by the book and will be shocked if you suggest otherwise. Being process oriented is great for high stakes industries where lives and safety are on the line but destroys startups, likely slowing or even killing innovation.
There is no floor to the level of "petty" that can happen here: the UK - granted, not the EU - goes after individuals who don't pay their TV license and determine the who by triangulating unlicensed TVs via radio trucks and inspectors looking in your windows.
That's not to say that there aren't extremely nice people all other Europe... there are. But I'm still caught off guard when hearing them say some things nonchalantly that would get them fired in the US.
I'm intruiged, can you give an example?
I was fine with the mindset but never expected to get those questions in an interview, as it'd be illegal in the States.
In places that don't have such a history, there's no reason for it to be taboo.
Whenever I call out things like this to European friends they just think I am being an overly-sensitive American. But saying that to a colleague can absolutely get you fired in the US.
Quite common to view Europe as all the same, but Europe varies much more than what US does.
> Europeans absolutely want to do it by the book
Again on HN, I don't think conflating Europe and all Europeans into a uniform culture works. This might be true of Germany but as you get further from Berlin it is .. less so.
(Famous story from the Greek debt crisis of using satellite photos to find swimming pools and therefore people who were probably underpaying income tax, which was at such poor compliance levels the state was struggling)
My experience working for small European companies is the opposite. Mostly companies run by kids of old money who truly believe rules apply to them
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.
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)
I recall trying to build some hardware in 2020 and getting discouraged because of the CE/FCC silliness. Even though I could self declare for the EU it seemed like a big risk to do so.
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.
https://emcfastpass.com/fcc-rules-kits-subassemblies/
Putting that board into an enclosure and then selling it now makes you the manufacturer, and you must certify that new product.
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".
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
How would we even sack the leadership?
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 EU even have a SME Test to maker sure small business are not overburdened by regulations.
Also there are thousands of lobbyists fighting for small businesses. Yes, this law will probably eventually be thrown out for small businesses but after how many years is a big question, and how many small businesses have lost there businesses.
And the law was devised by Ripa di Meana, who had been a member of the Italian Communist Party and the green party.
how ironical
But if you pass enough well-meaning regulations and strangle all the small businesses with good intentions, it’s much easier to overthrow a crony-capitalist oligopoly of megacorps, which is exactly the end game.
-- The EU was founded on the principles of four freedoms, Free movement of goods, Free movement of persons, Freedom to provide services, and Free movement of capital. --
If you take a look at first paragraphs of the EU contracts, they sate above all these:
-----------
Article 3
(ex Article 2 TEU)
1. The Union's aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples.
2. The Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime.
3. The Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance.
It shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child.
It shall promote economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States.
It shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe's cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced.
4. The Union shall establish an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro. ... ----
So its only about free movement of people in the beginning, goods and services are much later in the docs
I don't know on which world you live, but it's the opposite.
Big business buys influence, including buying the opinion of small companies.
And big business is all around Brussels, small companies simply don't have a 'lobbyist'.
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-...
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
https://www.statbureau.org/en/greece/inflation-charts-yearly
I know you permanent money people are keen on a dog eat dog world where you trust no one and see everyone around you as a competitor to defeat.
Destroying their peoples lives with inflation so they could continue the parade would be even worse for both Greece and EU as a whole.
The introduction of the Euro was the start signal for each country to try to inflate as much as they can for their own benefit - since the first inflator gets the best value out of the currency. Idiots are left holding paper currency worth less and less each day. Having to work harder and harder in a never ending spiral.
The country which by legislation or by other means makes it easier for banks to lend out money will benefit their own citizens and companies, since they get to be the first spenders of newly created money before it reduces in value. That's how national governments can use inflation for their own benefit within a common currency system. But no government involvement is necessary. If a group of people (in this case the Greeks) are willing to take on extraordinary amounts of debts compared to other groups, then we have the same results.
Remember that all money which was borrowed in the European "debt crisis" went somewhere before the loans couldn't be paid. Somebody benefitted, and the idiots were left to pay.
Can you quote where I did that, please?