
Choice of legal form when founding a startup: FlexCo or GmbH?
2/20/25, 11:00 AM
When choosing between a GmbH and a FlexCo, founders should consider tax and structural differences such as capital increases, share transfers, supervisory board duties and employee participation, although a later change is generally possible on a tax-neutral basis.
Tax risks in cross-border startup structures – a rough overview
Before founding a startup, founders should also consider choosing a legal form. For a long time, the GmbH (limited liability company) was the dominant legal form in the startup sector and was also clearly favored by investors. Since 2024, the flexible corporation (FlexCo) has also been available, which is in direct competition with the GmbH when it comes to choosing a legal form. For this reason, the following provides a rough overview of relevant aspects when deciding on the choice of legal form.
Extract of non-decision-relevant aspects in the choice of legal form
First, we would like to briefly summarize which aspects are not relevant when choosing between a GmbH and a FlexCo:
taxation | Any corporate profits (which generally do not occur in the initial phase of start-ups) are taxed at 23% corporate tax, and distributions to the shareholder (natural person) are subject to the special tax rate of 27.5%. |
Minimum tax | In loss-making years, a minimum tax is imposed, which can be offset against the actual corporate income tax in subsequent years if the annual results are positive. The minimum tax is EUR 500 for the entire calendar year. |
Reorganizations | Reorganization measures (e.g. merger, conversion, contribution, division) can be carried out in a tax-neutral manner under certain conditions. |
Minimum share capital | There is a minimum share capital of EUR 10,000, of which at least half (EUR 5,000) must be paid in cash. Aside from this, a non-cash foundation is possible. |
Employee participation | Shares can be granted free of charge or at a discount without taxable dry income (e.g., granting of shares by means of a negative liquidation preference, granting of shares under the application of Section 67a of the Income Tax Act [new start-up employee participation]). |
Compliance costs | The costs for the processing of ongoing accounting tax compliance (e.g. preparation/publication of annual financial statements, preparation/submission of tax returns, WiEReG reporting obligations) are identical. |
Differences between GmbH and FlexCo
GmbH | FlexCo | |
granting non-voting shares | Granting of substance usufruct rights:
| Granting of:
|
Share transfers | Notarial deed for GmbH shares In the case of usufruct rights, compliance with the written form is sufficient | For FlexCo shares, a notarial deed or a private legal document (by a lawyer or notary) is possible For company shares, compliance with the written form is sufficient (in principle neither a notary nor a lawyer is required) |
Supervisory board duty | if share capital > EUR 70 thousand and
or
| as with GmbH and if the company is a medium-sized company (as defined in Section 221 Paragraph 2 and 4 of the Austrian Commercial Code ), i.e. it exceeds 2 out of 3 of the following criteria:
|
Capital increase | Ordinary capital increase permitted. No conditional or authorized capital increase possible. | ordinary capital increase as well as
|
Own shares | only possible to a limited extent (e.g. free of charge, by way of universal succession, to compensate minority shareholders) | Acquisition of own shares is permissible under certain conditions under company law (e.g. redemption, sale within a certain period, by way of universal succession, to compensate minority shareholders) |
Circulating resolutions | All shareholders must agree to the circular vote. Voting requires a signature. | The articles of association may stipulate that the consent of all members is not required for a written vote. Voting may be conducted in text form (e.g., by email). |
Conclusion
Against this backdrop, it is important to consider which aspects are essential for the future start-up during the founding process in order to select the appropriate legal form. Should a subsequent change in legal form from a GmbH to a FlexCo or vice versa be desired, this would generally be feasible without negative tax consequences.
This article was written by David Gloser (Partner, Tax Advisor and Auditor) and Christoph Puchner (Partner and Tax Advisor) of ECOVIS Austria. ECOVIS Austria is one of Austria's leading tax consulting firms in the startup sector. www.ecovis.at