For UK founders looking to expand internationally, the choice between Ireland and Luxembourg is key. It’s not just about taxes anymore. It’s about where to base your tech company in Europe, for real work like R&D and leadership.
Deciding between Ireland and Luxembourg depends on what you need from your European base. Do you want a place for engineering and sales teams, or for holding and licensing? The best choice is one that fits your business model, not the other way around.
Company formation in Ireland and Luxembourg differ in important ways. Things like substance, treaty access, and regulatory depth matter. If your company’s value comes from intellectual property, you need a clear path from creation to use, with solid evidence.
We’ll also explore more than just setting up a company. Ireland’s finance scene and Luxembourg’s investment expertise can help your business grow. The aim is to make a choice that supports your business’s future, without any unexpected hurdles.
Why international tech companies compare Ireland and Luxembourg
When UK founders look to set up in the EU, Dublin and Luxembourg City are top choices. They might seem small, but they play big roles in business decisions. The focus is on GDP per capita, but there’s more to the story.
GDP per capita measures output per person, not income. In places with high-value activities, this number can grow quickly. This is why Ireland and Luxembourg are often linked with global businesses and exports.
Small countries, outsised corporate impact and high GDP per capita optics
These countries have a big impact despite their size. They host a lot of high-value activities. We look at where revenue is made and key decisions are made.
For tech leaders, the key question is what drives output. It’s the mix of services, IP, and border coordination that matters.
Economic specialisation: tech hubs, finance ecosystems, and international headquarters
Economic specialisation ties these countries together. Ireland is known for US-linked multinationals in tech and finance. This supports exports and operations.
Luxembourg focuses on finance, with investment funds and foreign exchange. It’s home to big names like Amazon. This mix is great for European tech hubs.
What “regional engines” mean for scaling talent, innovation, and market access
These areas are called “regional engines” because they help businesses grow. They offer fast hiring, deep networks, and clear paths to regulated activities. This is where talent and innovation shine.
In Europe, places like Brussels, Amsterdam, Hamburg, and Munich also play key roles. They offer a mix of industry and HQ functions. This helps teams decide between tech hubs and the drivers of growth.
Where is the operating team likely to sit, and what does that mean for hiring and retention?
Which ecosystem best supports international HQ Europe needs such as governance, banking, and cross-border reporting?
How does economic specialisation shape risk, resilience, and the speed of execution?
Ireland Luxembourg Tech: a snapshot of the two ecosystems
Looking at the Ireland Luxembourg Tech ecosystem, we focus on what matters most. This includes how fast you can hire, the depth of advice, and making decisions quickly. For UK founders, the practical experience on the ground is more important than any numbers.
Both places have a strong professional services ecosystem. This makes setting up entities, payroll, contracts, and governance easier. The main difference is the type of clustering and what it supports.
Ireland’s track record hosting major US tech groups and European HQ functions
Ireland has a history of hosting major US tech groups. Companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Facebook have set the pattern for European HQ roles. These roles include regional leadership, sales, support, and parts of product operations.
This concentration has boosted tech talent in Ireland. It’s seen in experienced hires, networks, and managers who handle cross-border reporting. It also means advisers who know how to navigate complex structures.
Luxembourg’s appeal for international firms, including global platforms and structured operations
Luxembourg attracts firms that need structured coordination across markets. It’s ideal for holding, governance, and managing multiple entities. The setup supports control and consistency, with clear decision trails and corporate administration.
Global platforms like Amazon have shaped the market. Luxembourg’s strength as a financial centre is also key. The corporate services in Luxembourg support boards, filings, and corporate hygiene.
How clustering of institutions and firms supports growth beyond headline tax rates
The concentration effect makes the system faster. You get familiar regulators, predictable processes, and advisers who speak the same language. This is where the professional services ecosystem shines.
In both places, founders value the same practical things:
- Hiring pipelines and salary benchmarks for easier planning, including tech talent in Ireland
- Operational set-up support for smooth running across entities and boards in Luxembourg
- Regulatory and compliance familiarity to keep international operations aligned as the group grows
Corporate tax positioning: how the baseline shapes decisions
When we plan an international setup, we start with the headline numbers. But we don’t just stop there. The baseline rate influences cash-flow forecasts, transfer pricing, and board expectations.
But the real question is what happens when substance, IP income, and cross-border payments come into play. This is key for tax planning in Europe’s tech sector.
Ireland’s 12.5% standard corporate tax rate and how it anchors planning
Ireland’s corporate tax rate of 12.5% is often seen as a steady anchor for trading profits. For UK founders, it makes early forecasting simpler. This is true when building a European operating company with staff, customers, and contracts in one place.
We still map how profits arise: sales activity, development work, and where key decisions are made. This operational map helps explain the likely effective corporate tax rate, not just the label on the statute.
Luxembourg’s standard corporate tax rate (commonly referenced around 24.94%) and typical structures
Luxembourg’s corporate tax rate of 24.94% is often used for first-pass comparisons. Luxembourg is also known for structured operations, including holding and financing functions. Governance and documentation in these areas tend to be detailed.
For tech groups, the design work is rarely about “low” versus “high” tax alone. It’s about whether the day-to-day model fits: where the leadership sits, how IP is funded, and how returns are split across entities.
Why effective rates can diverge materially once incentives and exemptions apply
Once incentives and exemptions apply, the effective corporate tax rate can move a long way from the baseline in either country. Reduced-rate frameworks for qualifying IP income can bring results into the 5%–10% band in some cases. But this only happens when the underlying activity and records support it.
We stress the wider checklist for tax planning in Europe’s tech sector. This includes substance requirements, qualifying asset definitions, treaty outcomes on royalties and dividends, compliance workload, and how UK or US rules may claw back the benefit. These factors shape the end position as much as Ireland’s corporate tax rate of 12.5% or Luxembourg’s rate of 24.94%.
IP Box and innovation incentives for tech: KDB vs Luxembourg IP regime
When we look at IP income across Europe, we wonder where value is made and how it’s tracked. In comparing IP Box Ireland and Luxembourg, the key details are in the qualifying assets and the R&D link. It’s also about how well you can show the link between spending and income.
For UK founders thinking of moving, it’s not just about the rate. It’s also about the IP you have now and what you plan to create next. You need to think about how you control development, licensing, and transfer pricing.
Ireland’s Knowledge Development Box (KDB) and the 6.25% effective rate on qualifying IP income
Ireland’s Knowledge Development Box was introduced in 2016, following OECD standards. Simply put, Ireland’s KDB 6.25 applies to qualifying IP income. This is where the work and spending can be shown clearly.
The scope is specific. It covers patents, copyrighted software, and certain orphan drug designations. But it excludes trademarks, brands, and marketing intangibles.
Best suited when the core value is in patented technology or product code that can be clearly tied to a development team.
Less aligned if the commercial edge sits mainly in brand, customer data, or marketing-led intangibles.
Luxembourg’s 80% exemption on net qualifying IP income (often modelled as ~5.2% effective)
Luxembourg takes a different approach. The Luxembourg IP regime 80 exemption applies to net qualifying IP income. It’s often modelled at around 5.2% effective, compared to the standard corporate rate of about 24.94%.
Its scope is broader, covering patents, trademarks, designs, models, software copyrights, and domain names. But it still requires a strong nexus between R&D activity and the relief.
Useful fit where IP portfolios include design rights, brand assets, or domain strategies alongside technology.
Key focus is clean evidence for net income calculations, eligible costs, and ownership and exploitation rights.
Where these regimes fit best for software-led vs patent-heavy technology businesses
For digital products, software IP tax relief is crucial. Code is updated often, and revenue streams change quickly. Both jurisdictions recognise copyrighted software, which is key for licensing, SaaS pricing, or embedded software in services.
Patent-heavy models focus on patent income tax Europe outcomes across several markets. We compare how each regime treats patents versus other IP, and how well the business can defend its R&D story.
Software-led groups tend to prioritise clear tracking of development spend, product ownership, and release management.
Patent-led groups tend to focus on invention ownership, prosecution strategy, and royalty policy across countries.
Mixed portfolios often turn on whether the business needs a narrower, code-and-patent focus or a wider set of protected rights.
Qualifying intellectual property: what counts for relief
When we start, we define what “qualifying IP” means in your business. This helps avoid surprises, like finding value in code, design, and customer assets.
Qualifying IP income comes in a few clear streams. Some are easy to spot, while others hide in prices and contracts.
- Licensing returns like royalties from using protected rights, and royalties hidden in product sales with special features
- Disposal gains from selling or transferring IP, leading to capital gains
- Service income where the profit comes from using unique IP, like a platform fee for special tools
Asset eligibility is the next step. Ireland focuses on patents, software, and copyrights. This is important if your value comes from market presence and engineering.
Luxembourg is more open to different assets. It includes trademarks, designs, and domain names, alongside technical rights. But, it’s crucial to know what each asset is and how it relates to your business.
For founders and finance teams, it’s key to list what you own and use. This includes code, patents, designs, brands, and domains. By understanding this, you can check which income is eligible for relief and which isn’t.
OECD BEPS and the modified nexus approach: substance over form
Modern IP incentives in Ireland or Luxembourg follow OECD BEPS Action 5. This rule is clear: tax relief should match real activity, not just paperwork. For tech groups, this means focusing on substance over form in their planning.
The modified nexus approach is key. It ties tax benefits to actual R&D spending. If a tax relief looks good on paper but the R&D is elsewhere, it often falls short.
The nexus fraction is at the heart of this. It limits income eligible for a lower tax rate. We explain it simply using a formula.
Nexus Fraction = Qualifying R&D Expenditure / (Qualifying R&D Expenditure + Acquisition Costs + Outsourced R&D to Unrelated Parties)
Many founders now find it harder to justify buying IP and moving it to a low-tax entity. The risk of being seen as an IP holding company increases. This is true if the company has few people, thin governance, and no real control over the IP’s creation.
To meet the substance over form rule, we focus on evidence. We look at where the development happens, who makes key decisions, and how the IP is used in the market. The modified nexus approach rewards those who can prove their story with solid records, not just words.
In practical terms, we advise tech businesses to keep detailed records of DEMPE and day-to-day work:
- Development and enhancement: project plans, sprint records, test logs, and release notes that map to qualifying R&D expenditure.
- Maintenance and protection: security work, patents or registrations where relevant, and budget approvals that show real oversight.
- Exploitation: licence terms, product pricing logic, and board minutes that evidence control of IP strategy.
With careful handling, OECD BEPS Action 5 can be a useful framework for structuring. The nexus fraction then acts as a management metric. It shows what you build, where, and how well you track R&D expenditure.
Substance requirements and operational reality checks
We start with the real work, not just the structure, when UK founders expand. The substance rules in Ireland and Luxembourg are tested by everyday facts. This includes who does the work, where, and who makes decisions.
This scrutiny has become stricter across Europe. So, plans must be solid and not cause any fuss.
People, premises, and decision-making: what tax authorities look for in practice
Tax teams check if the profit story matches the reality. They look for suitable office space, real work patterns, and skilled staff. It’s also important to have enough local budget for tools and advisers.
- Employees in-country who perform key activities, not just admin support
- Premises that fit the headcount and security needs of the business
- Local authority to sign contracts and approve material spend
Building defensible R&D operations for software and product development teams
For tech teams, R&D is crucial. We focus on employed developers, product leadership, and a clear delivery plan. This includes sprint plans, product roadmaps, and release notes that match payroll and location.
We also look at how IP choices are made. This includes deciding on features, architecture, and whether to build or buy. These decisions should be clear for anyone to follow without needing extra context.
Governance, board control, and audit-ready evidence for cross-border groups
Governance must show who controls the tax jurisdiction you rely on. It’s about strategy, risk oversight, and decision-making. For groups across borders, we ensure clear approval trails for intercompany terms and IP use.
Audit-ready documentation should be easy to gather from normal operations. We expect consistent board minutes, delegated authority schedules, policies, and R&D cost records. This supports positions during reviews and compliance checks.
R&D footprint and talent: hiring, language, and scaling teams
IP incentives now depend on what we do, not just what we claim. So, R&D hiring in Europe must match the work plan, payroll, and decision-making places.
Setting a product development EU base starts with the real work: who designs, builds, tests, and signs off. A solid footprint links people, places, and spending to the R&D record.
Ireland is great for speed. Its tech talent, shaped by major US tech groups, supports hiring in software engineering, data, security, and platform operations.
This talent also helps with support roles like finance operations, legal, and transfer pricing. It makes scaling engineering teams more predictable, as the local market gets international delivery models.
Luxembourg is perfect for firms with cross-border teams and stakeholders from many countries. Its multilingual workforce reduces regional collaboration friction, crucial for product, compliance, and commercial input from various EU markets.
It also supports clear reporting lines and approvals. Language coverage ensures consistent requirements, user feedback, and documentation.
To keep substance aligned with qualifying spend, we plan headcount and facilities before seeking relief. We focus on practical controls that are easy to maintain as the team grows.
Role design that maps engineers and researchers to specific workstreams and deliverables.
Time and cost tracking that ties payroll and supplier invoices to R&D activities.
Evidence packs: architecture notes, sprint records, test results, and release approvals.
Local decision trails for product roadmaps, risk sign-off, and IP stewardship.
Scaling engineering teams strengthens the file, not weakens it. Whether using tech talent in Ireland or a Luxembourg multilingual workforce, the goal is a real operating model. This supports R&D hiring in Europe and a solid product development EU base.
Holding company and treaty network advantages for international tech groups
When planning a cross-border setup, the headline tax rate is just the start. Cash moves through licence fees, intra-group charges, and profit distributions. The outcome can be greatly influenced by treaty access.
The tax treaty network in Luxembourg is often discussed in boardrooms. Ireland’s reach is also key for groups selling across Europe.
Why treaty access and withholding tax outcomes matter for royalties, dividends, and licensing
Withholding tax on royalties and dividends can reduce IP income value before it reaches the parent. This issue also affects dividend flows from subsidiaries, when several countries are involved.
We focus on treaty relief, local exemptions, and the steps to claim them. Weak paperwork, substance, or beneficial ownership can undermine model numbers.
- IP licensing routes and where royalty withholding can arise
- Dividend pathways and how treaty rates can vary by jurisdiction
- Documentation and governance that supports treaty claims in practice
Luxembourg’s reputation for sophisticated holding structures and international coordination
Many groups use a holding company in Luxembourg for coordination. It has a wide treaty footprint, with over 80 double taxation agreements. This is often referenced, and 92 countries are covered in fund contexts.
This breadth is crucial for subsidiaries in different regions. Efficient cash repatriation is key. Teams value Luxembourg’s administrators, legal support, and multi-country reporting experience.
Ireland’s strategic appeal for groups with strong US links and European operating bases
For groups trading and hiring in-market, Ireland is a familiar model. It suits businesses wanting leadership, sales, customer success, and product teams near EU customers. This is in an English-speaking environment.
Ireland’s treaty profile is also a planning factor. Revenue notes double taxation treaties with 75 countries in effect. Agreements with three more countries are signed (Jan 2025). The Ireland US treaty is often discussed for US-parented structures and cash movements.
Funding, fintech, and cross-border fund expertise that can support tech scale-ups
When we help UK tech founders scale into Europe, funding and compliance often move together. This is most visible in fintech, payments, marketplaces, and platforms that sit close to regulated money flows. In that context, UCITS expertise is not just a fund story; it shapes service providers, governance habits, and reporting discipline.
It also explains why Luxembourg and Ireland keep coming up in investor conversations. The Luxembourg Ireland cross-border funds 91 AUM concentration signals depth in administration, depositary oversight, and distribution at pace.
Luxembourg and Ireland as the leading domiciles for cross-border funds (combined 91% of global AUM)
Using ALFI April 2025 figures, Luxembourg and Ireland together account for 91% of global cross-border fund AUM. Luxembourg is at 48%, and Ireland is at 43%. This scale attracts strong transfer agency, audit, and legal capability.
This capability is crucial for tech firms building products that must satisfy institutional due diligence.
We often see the knock-on effect in speed and predictability. Both centres have long operational memory from early UCITS adoption in 1988. This UCITS expertise still shows up in how teams handle prospectus changes, risk frameworks, and cross-border marketing.
Luxembourg’s strength in alternatives and private assets, including ELTIF leadership
For founders looking at tokenisation, private credit tooling, or infrastructure-style marketplaces, private asset funds Luxembourg is a practical reference point. From 2010 to 2022, Luxembourg grew its share of European alternative assets from 15.6% to 61.8%. Nearly two-thirds of ELTIFs are based there.
ELTIF 2.0 January 2024 widened the playbook by easing marketing rules and broadening “real assets” to include immovable property and infrastructure projects. Luxembourg vehicles used in this space include UCI Part II, SIF, RAIF, SICAR, SCA, SCS, and SCSp.
Regulatory operational detail: Luxembourg has worked on CSSF fast-track approval processes for ETFs, with portfolio transparency adjustments allowing a one-month lag (December 2024).
Tax and product detail: subscription tax changes for active ETFs are set to apply from January 2025.
Ireland’s ETF dominance in Europe (78% of European ETFs domiciled in Ireland)
If your roadmap includes liquid, listed exposure, Ireland’s ETF ecosystem is hard to ignore. Ireland ETF domicile 78% reflects how often promoters choose Ireland for European ETF ranges, with Luxembourg at 16% as the region’s number two.
In day-to-day structuring, teams also watch costs and frictions. Irish ETFs with US equity exposure may benefit from 15% withholding tax on US dividend income, and Ireland does not levy a subscription tax on ETFs. On the supplier side, Ireland’s corporate tax context is often referenced as 12.5% on average, versus 25% in Luxembourg.
Product structure: the Central Bank of Ireland has clarified that listed ETF share classes can sit within mutual funds without the UCITS ETF label at sub-fund level.
Risk and disclosure trends: November 2024 reporting noted CBI permitting UCITS ETFs with 100% CLO exposure, and an April 2025 update enabled semi-transparent ETFs with quarterly disclosure.
Regulatory environment for scaling across Europe
Scaling a tech business across Europe means dealing with regulation every day. EU rules affect how quickly we can launch new features and onboard customers. They also guide us in hiring the right people without slowing down.
Ireland and Luxembourg have an edge thanks to the UCITS Directive 1988. This early experience helped them develop strong governance and oversight. This maturity makes it easier to handle complex products.
EU rules are more than just a checklist. They set the order of work. We plan hiring alongside delivery to avoid rework later. This means mapping controls to launch milestones, not adding them at the end.
How regulation shapes rollouts, hiring, and planning
A good compliance roadmap starts with knowing what your platform does. Are you handling payments, offering investment access, or distributing funds? These choices determine the rules, approvals, and teams needed.
Product sequencing: we align core features to the least disruptive approval path, then expand the scope once governance is stable.
Hiring priorities: compliance, MLRO support, risk, and operations tend to unlock faster delivery than adding sales headcount first.
Evidence and controls: policies, incident logs, and decision records should be set up early so audits do not derail timelines.
Regulators and approval signals that affect platforms
In Luxembourg, the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier sets the rules for funds and market infrastructure. Founders watch the CSSF approval process closely. It can affect launch timing and change-control planning.
In Ireland, getting authorisation from the Central Bank of Ireland is crucial. The Central Bank has made it easier to develop and authorise products. This includes updates to support ELTIF regulations, which can impact resource planning.
Operational depth from UCITS and modern transparency
Transparency rules influence product design and investor communications. In December 2024, the CSSF allowed active ETF holdings publication with a one-month lag. This affects data workflows and disclosure controls.
In April 2025, the Central Bank of Ireland enabled semi-transparent ETFs with quarterly disclosure. This suits different portfolio strategies and reporting cadences.
By incorporating these signals into our compliance roadmap, we can avoid surprises. The goal is to keep EU rules steady while product, risk, and operations move together. Ireland and Luxembourg’s UCITS Directive 1988 heritage is very practical here.
UK-focused considerations: structuring from the United Kingdom into Ireland or Luxembourg
For UK tech groups, growing into the EU is now a big task. They need good governance, clear goals, and paperwork that fits their work. A well-planned move to Ireland or Luxembourg can help with hiring, sales, and product delivery in Europe without tax problems.
Post-Brexit structural considerations for UK-headquartered tech companies expanding into the EU
We first figure out where value is made: product choices, engineering, customer deals, and support. This guides our choice of entities, board members, and team setup. It also helps keep tax rules clear when profits move across borders.
The structure should match how you sell. Selling to EU customers from the UK is different from having a local EU trading company. A simple and consistent model is easier to defend.
UK CFC rules, commercial rationale, and maintaining defensible substance abroad
IP and licensing plans face UK CFC rules. We examine who controls and funds development, and who takes risks. Thin overseas companies can lead to tax issues back in the UK.
Transfer pricing OECD rules are key. Intercompany deals need fair prices, backed by DEMPE analysis and board minutes. Clear records are crucial for quick answers when needed.
Managing permanent establishment risk when teams, leadership, or sales functions span borders
Permanent establishment risk can sneak up, like when leaders are in the UK but revenue is elsewhere. Sales teams, management, or UK staff can pull profits back to the UK. We align work practices with legal rules from the start.
Set clear signing authority and contract workflows, and stick to them in real life.
Keep evidence of where decisions are made: meeting cadence, minutes, and approval trails.
Document how customer-facing teams operate, including who negotiates, who prices, and who accepts risk.
Maintain consistent transfer pricing OECD files so trading, IP, and services align across entities.
Expanding to Luxembourg or Ireland is not just about tax rates. It’s about building a strong EU presence that supports growth and keeps tax rules in line with business operations.
US-parented tech groups: GILTI, Subpart F and modelling the true benefit
When a UK team builds a structure in Ireland or Luxembourg for US investors, the headline rate is just the start. We often see plans based on a GILTI Europe IP Box assumption. But, the US outcome can change once the full income chain is modelled.
For many US-parented groups, GILTI can pull foreign profits into current US tax. This is true for software and other intangible returns. The US C-corp effective rate is often modelled between 10.5 and 13.125, influenced by foreign tax credits and the Section 250 deduction.
That’s why we focus on scenarios, not just soundbites. The GILTI high-tax exclusion 18.9 only applies if the foreign tax rate is high enough. This might not match an IP-led structure aiming for a low local rate.
- We map where IP profit lands and whether it risks being treated as Subpart F IP income rather than GILTI.
- We stress-test cash repatriation and intercompany pricing, including whether deductible royalty flows could trigger BEAT royalties exposure in the US.
- We line up the facts with transfer pricing support, so IP transfers or licensing terms match real functions, people, and control.
For UK founders, this detailed view is crucial during fundraising and exits. Buyers and US tax teams will ask about the model’s audit performance. They’ll want to know if the GILTI Europe IP Box benefit is lasting. They’ll also ask about Subpart F IP income, BEAT royalties, and the Section 250 deduction in real numbers.
Implementation roadmap: timeline, costs, and what to set up first
Founders often ask what “good” looks like. We start with getting things in order from the beginning. This means aligning structure, contracts, and evidence to match real operations. It helps keep decisions clear and avoids costly rework later.
Typical implementation timelines
For many tech groups, setting up an IP Box in 3-6 months is possible. This timeframe covers planning, getting board approvals, and drafting key contracts. It’s a realistic goal when the facts are clear and IP income flows smoothly.
But, complex multinational setups can take 12-18 months. This is due to needing regulatory approvals, detailed IP valuations, or APA processes for certainty. Costs vary, with basic Irish setups around €25,000-€50,000. More complex Luxembourg projects can cost over €150,000.
Entity formation, agreements, and transfer pricing essentials
Early decisions are crucial. They shape everything that follows. When setting up in Ireland or Luxembourg, we focus on where people work, where decisions are made, and which company owns or licences the IP. This keeps governance practical, not just theoretical.
Next, we ensure intercompany agreements are right. This includes scope, territory, term, and payment mechanics. These details then inform transfer pricing documentation. This way, royalty rates or service charges can be shown as fair and consistent with the group’s operations.
- Entity build: Irish Limited Company or Luxembourg SARL, with capitalisation, directors, and board routines
- IP transfer or licensing pack: valuation inputs, approvals, and execution steps
- Substance plan: premises, hiring, and decision-making evidence that stands up to review
Ongoing compliance and maintaining R&D evidence
Once set up, the focus shifts to staying consistent. Ongoing compliance includes annual filings like corporate tax returns and statutory accounts. It also involves governance actions that show control and risk management are in place. Annual costs can range from €15,000 to €50,000, depending on substance and complexity.
Keeping R&D records is also key. We help teams track qualifying expenditure and link it to development milestones. This supports the modified nexus approach. Clean logs, time tracking, and project notes help later, when the business grows or changes.
- Set a monthly cadence for finance, legal, and product teams to capture evidence while it is fresh
- Reconcile contract terms to invoices and ledger postings, so reporting matches the agreements
- Review the file annually to keep transfer pricing documentation aligned with headcount, functions, and IP use
How Start Company Formations can help UK founders expand into Ireland or Luxembourg
Choosing between Ireland and Luxembourg isn’t just about tax rates. It’s about setting up a structure that fits your business model. At Start Company Formations, we help UK founders expand into Ireland and Luxembourg. We offer practical steps, clear timelines, and decisions you can defend.
Our services cover setting up your company and managing its needs. This includes group entities, director roles, and day-one governance. We support your cross-border structure, whether for R&D, IP, sales hubs, or licensing revenue. We ensure you have the right evidence from the start, avoiding costly rework later.
For founders needing to move across borders, we work with business immigration advisers. We discuss your case and plan your next steps. If your platform needs regulation, we help you get the necessary authorisation. This includes support for gaming and FX crypto licensing companies.
Our aim is simple: a clean set-up, strong documentation, and a plan your team can follow. To talk to our team, call Start Company Formations on 0204 504 1544.
