The annual State of European Tech report from venture capital firm Atomico shows that investment is trending upwards. This year’s edition goes beyond a typical ecosystem assessment and has become a piece of advocacy. It reflects a broader shift where European startups and investors are increasingly turning to lobbying.
The report’s author, Tom Wehmeier, stated that it is no longer enough to show progress. He believes it is critical to use insights to point the way forward. Wehmeier is also a partner at Atomico and the firm’s head of intelligence. The report includes four policy recommendations with straightforward names: Fix the friction, Fund the future, Empower talent, and Champion risk.
While Atomico uses survey data to advocate for these recommendations, it has some authority to speak for a wider community. The firm was founded in 2006 by Skype co-founder Niklas Zennström. Its portfolio includes high-profile European companies such as Aiven, DeepL, Klarna, Pipedrive, Stripe, and Supercell.
Taking a page from Big Tech and legacy industries, European tech companies are learning to lobby for themselves. This happens at the company level with public affairs hires and collectively through open letters that have gained the attention of European institutions.
Many of Atomico’s recommendations align with topics already being discussed in the startup community and in Brussels policy circles. These include the proposed 28th regime, a pan-European company structure advocated by the group EU-INC. Other topics are calls for less regulation and broader competitiveness considerations that echo the report by former European Central Bank president Mario Draghi.
This high-level buy-in is apparent in the Atomico report. For the first time, the 2025 edition features a quote from the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, who stated she wants the future of AI to be made in Europe. This attention explains why European tech lobbying is becoming more sophisticated.
On the 28th regime, Atomico warns that the choice between a regulation or a directive is highly important. The firm argues this is the difference between having teeth or not. A directive would represent a continuation of the status quo where rules are interpreted differently in each country, rather than providing the uniformity tech companies need to thrive. In EU law, regulations are directly binding across all member states, while directives allow each country to implement rules differently.
This level of detail is not unprecedented. Other groups, like the French startup association France Digitale and the Europe Startup Nations Alliance, produce similar publications. However, Atomico’s take is packaged as a video and a stage talk at the Slush tech conference, designed to reach both the tech ecosystem and policymakers.
Paradoxically, the report may lack a sense of the various forces that could oppose efforts like EU-INC. More broadly, some recommendations may feel out of touch to most people, as few Europeans wake up concerned about the lack of new homegrown trillion-dollar companies. The counterargument is that society as a whole is affected by lackluster growth. Yet, there is arguably more that European tech’s emerging lobbying could do to win hearts.
According to Alexandru Voica, head of corporate affairs at London-based AI unicorn Synthesia, this is one reason large startups are becoming more vocal. He wrote that communications and policy are more important than ten years ago because there is a deep distrust of the tech industry in Europe. A decade ago, communications was seen as a function of marketing for product growth. Today, the work is much more focused on risk mitigation and reputation management.
European tech’s lobbying push also carries risks. If the movement becomes too closely tied to particular political parties, it could trigger a backlash and undermine broader support. Still, regardless of politics, many will likely agree with Atomico’s central point that Europe effectively stands at a crossroads.