142
US tech giants warn Europe that ditching US tech giants could cost €115B
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2026
142 points (95.5% liked)
Technology
88854 readers
4074 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
“Luxembourg would apparently take the biggest hit, with the study putting the cost at €1,711 per worker over ten years. Denmark (€905), Austria (€900), and Finland (€864) also face hefty bills, as does Ireland (€856)”
Those are the costs but aren't there also earnings? The study seems to ignore the fact that money not spend in the US will be spend in the EU.
Yeah, that's half of a cost-benefit analysis, and it's being promoted by the source of most of the cost.
So… the countries where hyperscalers avoid tax will no longer have hyperscalers avoiding tax in it. And somehow that’s framed as a bad thing?
~70% of it just to move to another hosting provider? hmmmm
Depends on how deeply the firms have gotten locked into specific cloud provider services. It's possible to do things in a cloud-agnostic way (for example, Terraform-- ugh), but those implementations are suboptimal, and just as they used to say about Java's much-touted OS independence, it's "write once, debug everywhere."
I'm convinced that it's better to optimize for the cloud service you're running on, and take the one-time hit if you move somewhere else. And I don't believe there's much rearchitecting involved: it'll be lower-level stuff, mainly IaC and other config. If you have to recode, you probably did it wrong the first time.
From my software development standpoint that could actually be. AWS and azure have a hefty user lock in that could cost a lot to migrate out of
Yeah, going from AWS to Hetzner will require doubling your SRE/platform/infra/whatever-you-call-them staff, clearly.
We're on AWS at work. I use Hetzner personally.
The main issue with switching is the services. On AWS we use KMS, SQS, DynamoDB. On hertzner we'd have to run an instance with software for that ourselves and then rewrite systems and do migrations etc. That's the expense.
Also KMS has no alternate because it's not just software. It's a HSM. So where do we store the master keys on Hetzner?
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to do it, not up to me unfortunately.
If people are migrating to a platform, usually development takes place to add features to fill gaps and make the platform more attractive. 10-15 years ago we didn’t have well developed cloud computing but it was built by adding features that sucked people in. That can be done again if there is demand.
Translation: Luxembourg workers, who are some of the highest paid people in the entire world, would have to pay 171 euros per year to build out a European tech force that would benefit themselves.
That sounds... awesome?
Yeah, it’s a pretty small amount for digital sovereignty
That is over 10 years. 90€ per worker per year is really nothing.