> “It’s the Valley-or-bust mentality that breaks the ecosystem and really hurts Canada,” Gomez said.
Canadian pride isn't enough to keep a company in Canada. There are real and significant economic incentives to move elsewhere. That said, it's disappointing that YC no longer supports Canadian companies.
This is extremely misleading. YC still backs Canadian founders (and other international founders). There must have been one too many painful experiences investing in companies based in Canada. Creating or converting to a US-based entity is a standard ask for most international founders who want to participate YC and I suppose something has changed such that Canada is no longer an exception to that.
There could be many factors at play here so it’s not clear what the main issue is. However, from experience, US VC funds typically come from other US institutions and so it’s an easier sell when the corporation is US-based. Rules and regulations are more well understood and less complex for funds. The article states the requirement is to flip the structure to have the parent company based in one of the 3 countries mentioned. Presumably, better business/returns/policies
That's truly saddening. I hope there will be more VC backing in Canada because the talent is definitely there.
Is it politically motivated or does it have to do with Canadian tech not requiring investment because of its stability?
Probably de-risking (or front-running) capital controls (tariff on FDI).
Disappointing.
[dead]
[flagged]
Canada's economy is dominated by a few big companies because the government makes too many rules. It costs too much to start a business here. In politics, only two parties really matter. This creates a closed system where big players stay big and new competition is crushed by red tape. Regulatory frameworks impose prohibitive compliance costs, favoring established incumbents over startups. Key sectors like banking, telecom, and aviation function as protected triopolies. Political power remains centralized between two parties with overlapping establishment interests. These structural barriers effectively suffocate competition and exclude new market entrants.
Whether it's significant or not, YC's basic model of seed funding with ~$100k could be reproduced in Canada with $10MM or less. Unsure how this is a problem.
If Canada wanted to be serious about startups it could make trivial changes to enable it. However it's committed to becoming a dutch diseased resource colony with no value add and a macquiladora for US software companies. Relative to capital and assets, it's the least productive place on earth. The whole thing runs on riding the coattails of like 5 undergrad profs at waterloo, and a certain bank everyone knows launders cartel money and facilitates capital flight out of China.
Judging by its impact, YC is one of the greatest companies of all time. Canada isn't in that game imo.
Wonder if the founders not being US citizens or possibly even residents will hinder their ability to maintain their company. Or, whether this change increases the likelihood of being replaced when the startup shows some success.
Also, being foreign in the US is a concern at the moment. Hell, being native in the US is a concern at the moment...
This whole move is about corporate governance. The US makes it really easy to start or manage corporations and the courts are (mostly) streamlined and predictable, especially the chancery courts in Delaware. Cayman Islands adopted many of Delaware's legal approach to corporations in 2016 to make the island more business friendly rather than just a tax haven, and they've got a foot in the Latin American market. Singapore is the SEA equivalent of Delaware.
Nothing else much to it. In reality they're all going to have to register to do business in Canada/California/whatever and pay their taxes anyway. Structuring the parent in one of those jurisdictions just makes the legal wrangling about ownership and stock classes safer and more predictable to both investor and founder.