Delayed AI access could push Europe’s future tech jobs abroad, Brickken CEO warns

Brickken CEO Edwin Mata has warned that uneven access to three AI products, Dots, Muse, and Siri AI, could steer European companies' future hiring and investment abroad.

• Mata says delayed AI access could influence where founders hire, launch products, and raise capital.
• Earlier access lets competitors build skills and win customers while European businesses wait, he argues.
• Austria proposed EU participation in Anthropic in June to reduce dependence on foreign technology decisions.
• European reforms have extended AI compliance deadlines and expanded support for smaller businesses.

Edwin Mata, CEO and co-founder of Barcelona-based tokenization company Brickken, told crypto.news that Europe could retain companies founded in the region while losing the jobs, investment and business expansion they generate later.

In his assessment, founders do not need to move an entire company for Europe to lose future growth. Hiring engineers overseas, opening a sales operation near investors or choosing another country for a product launch could gradually draw more activity outside the region.

Delayed AI access could influence where founders hire

For founders deciding where to expand, Mata said access to leading AI tools increasingly sits alongside funding, taxation, customers and recruitment conditions.

A team able to test products earlier and automate more work in another market could direct its next investment there, he explained. Investors then support businesses with credible growth prospects, while skilled workers follow companies with the resources to develop ambitious products.

"Europe can therefore retain the original company while losing much of its future hiring, investment and value creation," he said.

Rather than treating access as the sole reason for an overseas expansion, the Brickken executive described it as one factor that Europe should avoid turning into a disadvantage.

His warning also concerned the ownership of the technology European businesses use. Purchasing foreign products is normal, he said, but lasting dependence becomes a weakness when domestic companies struggle to build and expand competing services.

Under that scenario, Mata argued, European customers would pay for tools whose profits, ownership and major business decisions remain elsewhere. Successful technology companies can then attract more funding, workers and customers in the markets where they operate, he added.

A June 29 report covered Austria's proposal involving Anthropic, in which State Secretary for Digitalization Alexander Proell urged the EU to consider taking a strategic stake in the AI company. According to the Austrian government's letter, Proell wanted Europe to avoid losing access to important AI advances because of decisions made outside the region.

In the same letter, the Austrian official said Europe could offer legal certainty, investment and access to its market, while acknowledging practical challenges and likely skepticism toward the proposal.

Earlier AI use could build advantages before rivals gain access

Beyond the location of future jobs, Mata said delayed access carries a cost that accumulates as competitors gain experience.

Businesses using tools sooner can change their working methods, test ideas, train employees and acquire customers while others wait, he explained. By the time access reaches another market, the early users may already have developed advantages that extend beyond completing individual tasks faster.

"The cost is cumulative," he said.

For small teams, Mata pointed to agents that handle research, coding and administrative work between instructions. In his view, access to such systems could affect profit margins, customer retention and whether a company remains competitive.

The executive cited differences in the availability of Meta's Muse and OpenAI's dots. In his account, Muse is available in the United States and Canada, while European Pro subscribers cannot access dots even though the service remains available through Business Premium.

Mata cautioned against interpreting those differences as proof that regulators had banned the products.

"Those differences do not establish that regulators prohibited the products, but they illustrate why access needs to be examined carefully," he said.

For American businesses using the services he described, his argument centers on the extra time available to experiment before European competitors receive equivalent access. Mata tied the potential advantage to learning, operational changes and customer acquisition rather than claiming a measured increase in revenue or productivity.

AI agents could support factories, farms and software teams

Outside technology companies, Mata described potential uses for agents connected to ordinary business records and operating systems.

In manufacturing, he said, software linked to orders, inventory and supplier updates could detect a component shortage and prepare alternative purchasing options before production stops. The example depends on access to relevant information and suitable connections between the agent and the company's systems, he noted.

For software businesses, his example involved investigating customer complaints, preparing code changes and running tests for a person to review. On farms, he said agents could combine weather forecasts, buyer orders and delivery schedules to help plan purchases and harvest logistics.

Although Mata described commercial value in those uses, he said they require human oversight as well as appropriate integrations.

His earlier comments on AI agent liability, published Aug. 14, addressed how businesses should define that oversight when software receives permission to transact. He argued that responsibility follows the authority given to an agent, with the person or company granting permission ordinarily bearing the consequences of actions within that authority.

In that interview, the lawyer called for permitted actions, eligible assets, spending limits, expiry dates, revocation rights and records of each action. He also distinguished an authorized transaction that loses money from one that exceeds the agent's instructions.

Europe's AI reforms extend deadlines and simplify compliance

To make Europe more attractive for business expansion, Mata called for fewer overlapping obligations, consistent interpretation between countries and predictable decision times.

Small companies should be able to understand their duties without building a large compliance department before establishing a viable business, he said. His recommendations also included growth funding, competitive employee equity arrangements, easier recruitment, computing resources and affordable energy.

For privacy, security and accountability, the executive advocated rules proportionate to the risks involved. Protecting those rights should remain compatible with timely access to useful technology, he argued.

The European Commission has announced that the AI Omnibus entered into force on July 27, introducing longer implementation periods, administrative changes and expanded opportunities to test AI under regulatory supervision. According to the Commission, the amendments preserve safeguards for safety and fundamental rights while easing compliance for smaller businesses.

Under the Commission's published timetable, rules for high-risk systems in specified areas will apply from Dec. 2, 2027. Requirements for high-risk AI embedded in regulated physical products will apply from Aug. 2, 2028.

The Commission also said the amendments extend some support previously reserved for small and medium-sized businesses to small mid-cap companies, expand access to regulatory sandboxes, and introduce an EU-level sandbox for supervised testing.