Encore.ts is doing something similar for TypeScript backend frameworks, by moving most of the request/response lifecycle into Async Rust: https://encore.dev/blog/event-loops
We sell developer productivity and devops automation, and compared to hiring additional engineers Encore is very cheap.
We’ve tried to align our incentives with the needs of our customers, so there are no usage-based or surprise fees when using Encore. The per-seat price may be higher but it’s transparent and predictable.
While some of the underlying functionality is based on Encore’s static analysis, the approach is quite general and can be adapted to lots of situations and programming languages. The overall code ended up being a couple hundred lines, not more.
Author here, happy to answer any questions. While some of the underlying functionality is based on Encore’s static analysis the approach is quite general and can be adapted to lots of situations.
InfraCopilot is built on Klotho which is designed on top of an adaptive architectures[0] paradigm - meaning every element in the internal representations is interchangeable. However if you think of an architecture as a puzzle, changing one element to another doesn't always just 'click in' - so the Copilot engine propagates the changes into the adjacent puzzle pieces and continues to reshape them until everything clicks again, ensuring that the result is valid. If it doesn't know how, it'll let you know, and why.
Right now the architectural patterns are curated, but algorithmically tested. The next phase is to combine curation with patterns from the community.
This is one of the core use cases where Encore [1] really shines. It helps you get up and running really quickly by natively supporting common cloud infrastructure components (databases, Pub/Sub, caching, cron jobs, secrets management, etc), and a simple low-boilerplate way of defining APIs.
It automatically provides API docs, architecture diagrams, and infrastructure provisioning, based on static analysis of your code base.
I'm starting a subsidiary of a start-up in Germany in Sweden.
It's not my experience that Sweden is a great place for startups, the bureaucracy is extremely hit/miss. Setting up tax information for example is really difficult as a non-Swedish speaker and even tripped up my Swedish speaking friend (who is a project coordinator on the new Skane hospital: so she's somewhat aware of the tax system). How much of your daily work will be administration, how much will be selling services, how much money will you make do you estimate; you must give us an estimation: if it's too far off then we will fine you!
Information in English is... scarce, but gives the illusion of being available.
Hiring is also very complicated, you have to be very explicit in your contracts because anything not spelled out immediately falls in favour of the employed; which is nice, but as a novice employer that's very scary, because I don't know everything obviously.
What in your mind makes you think it's a good place?
We've set up a UK subsidiary so I can relate, but the process in Sweden was approximately 10x simpler: more automated, less bureaucracy, less ongoing admin work when the company is up and running.
As with all countries there are definitely things you need to learn. We relied on our lawyers to draft employment agreements because we were already using them as part of our seed fundraise. There are companies like Pocketlaw (https://pocketlaw.com) that provide solid, standard agreements that you could use.
There is an abundance of experienced engineers who are willing to work for less than an entry-level engineer in the US. Wages are very low even in Stockholm. Great if you want to build a tech startup.
Unfortunately the employment law is written in support of factory workers, not knowledge workers. So many employers are very cautious when hiring because a non-performing employee is very expensive to get rid of, as long as they have been employed for 6 months or more.
But you need a UK bank account, which requires a officer with a registered address in the UK. We were lucky our investors were UK-based otherwise it would have been a nightmare. Then you need to argue HMRC valuation discounts if you want to issue EMI options, which are only valid for 3 months, so you need to do it repeatedly. And then EMI option schemes are 15+ pages long contracts. Sweden has an equivalent stock option scheme that's ~2 pages, in comparison.
Aren't EMI options basically a scam? I never understood why company cannot just give an employee real shares.
I was at a start up a couple of years ago and was promised these. Basically every month CEO had a new excuse that HMRC this or HMRC that. After a year and a half I decided to leave, because I understood I would never get any of that.
Now when I see company offering EMI shares it is a clear red flag for me.
E.g. if you offer £50k in EMI shares just pay a lump sum instead and I can put this on my ISA tracking fund or just give real shares in the company.
EMI gives both tax advantages and means you owe no tax when being offered the option. 50k as a lump sum would be taxed as income (so, fairly heavily). 50k in shares might attract a similar tax bill to be paid directly by the employee far in advance of any chance of recouping the value of the shares.
EMI itself is not a scam. Whether a company follows through on giving you the options in a reasonable timescale is another thing, and whether the shares are eventually worth anything is another again. As with all things startup option/share related, consider it a lottery ticket with an unknown chance of paying out.
So this is a sort of HMRC sanctioned tax avoidance scheme. Given that they are in a business of enacting retrospective taxes, I wouldn't trust that they are not going to change their mind down the line and ask for an extra tax.
That being said, £50k after all the tax is still better than £0 and if the £50k was paid as a one off bonus, you could pay it into SIPP without paying tax.
I remember when I asked them why I cannot get normal shares? They said that EMI will be better for me because I will save on tax. I said, why if I want to pay tax, it pays for our schools, hospitals, why should I be taking the advantage? So they said that the board don't want to do that, because it will create "a legal issue" when they will be looking for next round of investments.
So if any future employee reads that, if a company insist on EMI shares and don't want to give you real shares or money upfront, then jump the ship!
Sure, I assumed this because you need that in any country you operate a legal entity.
> which requires a officer with a registered address in the UK.
This is the same in Sweden too
> Then you need to argue HMRC valuation discounts if you want to issue EMI options, which are only valid for 3 months, so you need to do it repeatedly. And then EMI option schemes are 15+ pages long contracts. Sweden has an equivalent stock option scheme that's ~2 pages, in comparison.
You have more experience than me there, I never had this as a problem to solve so you could be right.
You must have at least one legal representative, usually a director, in Sweden.
You can apply for temporary exemptions, but they are temporary and you are supposed to have good reason.
There’s no explicit requirements that any particular position must be held in Sweden, you can be a VD in the EEA for example, but you still need at least one legal responsible person to be domiciled.
No you don’t, it is very clear. Within EEA, not in Sweden.
I work in accounting and we just solved this for a Spanish client without any initial employees in Sweden.
All of these things are easy if you know how to do them.
But if you have never done them, it takes some time to learn.
My advice is get an external accountant to do this for you, only takes a few hours and they can teach you everything you want to know.
20.6% is lower than Denmark, Austria, Germany, France, Netherlands, Belgium, etc. It's on the lower end, while not being lower than the UK and of course not Ireland (considered a semi tax haven).
Starting 2023 it will be lower than the UK as well for any business above GBP 250,000 when HMRC bumps that rate to 25%. Heck, I would argue that even 20.6% is not that different to the current 19% across the board in the UK.
If you are reinvesting money in the company (especially at a start up stage), Corporation Tax is the least important tax. More important is how much employees cost and UK is up there with the highest taxed countries in the world.
If you want to pay workers more than peanuts, the tax take is more than 50% on a salary (when including Employer's NI).
