ET vs EOOD - did anyone here actually regret the choice?

Most (all?) the members here who set up an EOOD did so in order to purchase property. If any of them were misguided/ill advised enough to plump for an ET for this purpose then they will certainly regret their choice, if they don't already.

Apart from that, I doubt there's much relevance to most people's lived experience in the question.  😎

Owning an apartment is fully allowed without a company, and that's exactly why many people open a company unnecessarily — when it comes time to sell, it turns out they've complicated something for themselves that would have been simpler as a private individual. For pure apartment ownership, a company rarely makes sense. Generally, the point of opening a company is missed in your answer, quite naive.

@JimJ

The moment you register an EOOD and list yourself as the managing director, and you have no other insurance basis, you become legally required to self-insure — and you owe a monthly contribution on the minimum insurance base (currently around €620 as of August 2026) — every month, regardless of whether the company ever sells, rents, or trades at all. That's a cost a private individual would never have.

Plus tax — if the property is ever sold through the company, the profit falls under corporate income tax (10%), and for newer buildings potentially VAT on the sale price too, while a private individual gets exemptions (e.g. after 3 years of ownership) and has no contributions or VAT at all on selling a personal apartment.

And here's the key part: if you don't pay that contribution on time, it doesn't disappear — the debt stays on record and can catch up with you later, with late-payment interest, sometimes years afterward. I've seen plenty of cases where someone casually went into setting up a company for a property, thinking a "dormant" company with no turnover creates no obligations, only to later find themselves owing back contributions they didn't even know about.

That's exactly what was behind my earlier comment — not the fact that a company can own a property, but the hidden cost and risk that comes with it, which most people don't see coming in time.

@Daniel Malbasic

In over 20 years living here I've yet to come across anyone who formed an EOOD in order to purchase an apartment. That doesn't mean no one's ever done so but if they have they were singularly ill advised.

Quite a bit of the important part of the information you're kindly sharing with us appears to me to be somewhat incorrect/overstated. I have neither time nor inclination to point out the seeming inaccuracies to you, but I'm sure that as an evident expert in the field you'll anyway already be aware of them.

I would like to congratulate you on your impressive and informative website; sadly I suspect that your services are probably overkill for most members of our group, including myself. Nonetheless I have no doubt that any members who feel in need of your expertise will be happy to contact you.

@JimJ

Here's a concrete example from practice, since you're asking for something tangible instead of theory.

A client, Ukrainian, buys an apartment through a company whose registered activity is real estate sales. We pay corporate tax on the profit margin (sale price minus purchase price) at 10%. Some time later, the NAP recalculates her social security contributions retroactively for the previous two years — the entire activity of the company since its founding, with late-payment interest for every month. Important detail: that recalculation doesn't stop at the minimum base (€620/month as of August 2026) — at year-end an annual reconciliation is done against actual reported income, and NAP can adjust contributions up to the maximum base (€2,300/month), so for the year a sale happens, that recalculation can end up considerably higher than people expect.

Another recurring problem is closing the company — in Bulgaria that's not a matter of a week, it can take months to over a year (liquidation period, mandatory filings/deregistrations, settling with NAP), and costs pile up the whole time.

Buying property through a company when that setup isn't needed at all is a fundamentally wrong approach, and behind that usually sits the question of who's doing the bookkeeping — a lot of it isn't tracked carefully enough. That's why I recommend anyone with a company in Bulgaria track their own contributions regularly, in real time — what's being calculated, what the costs are, what the state is claiming — instead of finding out only at the annual reconciliation.

Cases like this land on our desk literally every month, not once a year. I'm a foreigner with a team of lawyers and accountants in my team, and I came to exchange experience with people who actually run businesses and have companies here.

As for the claim that something I wrote is inaccurate — I won't comment on that part, since nothing specific or why was pointed out, so there's nothing to respond to.

@Daniel Malbasic

"The moment you register an EOOD and list yourself as the managing director, and you have no other insurance basis, you become legally required to self-insure — and you owe a monthly contribution on the minimum insurance base (currently around €620 as of August 2026) — every month"

Not true: Under the Social Security Code, liability to self-insure is triggered by active management or commercial operations, not the physical act of registration. If your company does nothing, and has filed an OKD-5 (official declaration to NAP stating the company has zero activity), you owe nothing thereafter unless the company (or you, acting in the company's name) carries out some commercial activity. It would certainly be wise not to use the company's bank account to pay any bills/taxes, since doing so could be regarded by NAP as "activity" if an audit were ever to take place, and buying a car in the company's name is, at least theoretically, destroying the company's "inactive" status. Practically speaking, whether NAP would ever catch up with someone doing this is debatable but it's certainly possible. We'll see how well the new domestic and international snooping systems work.. 😀

I appreciate that this forum might possibly be the source of a client or two for your company but I suspect that most members lack the wherewithal to use your services, and probably won't need them if they familiarise themselves with the rules and act within them.

I'm rather mystified by your example of "A client buys an apartment through a company whose registered activity is real estate sales." Why would someone do that, unless they really are going to be running the company as a real estate seller, ie an active company.  In that case, then what you say is correct - but it has no real relevance to someone who has a completely inactive company for the sole purpose of holding property, and who is careful not to carry out any activity in the company name. A Ukrainian citizen doesn't need to form a company to simply own an apartment, so why on earth would they be rash enough to open that can of worms in the first place - unless they receive some pretty suspect advice?

@JimJ

You're technically right, and that's exactly why I'm writing about this — a dormant company, buying a car, using the account — the point of this post is to explain to people what's good practice and what isn't, not to tell them the law technically allows something if you follow it down to the last detail.

You're the one who raised the point that a large number of people here own a company for the purpose of owning an apartment — to which I responded that this is a mistake. And here's the exact moment: the second the property is sold, the company's activity is triggered, the company stays open, and there's your contribution. Plus, the company account is used for the purchase itself — it stays open and active from the start, so someone starts paying rent, utilities, repairs from that same account, because it's right there, it's convenient, it feels harmless. That's exactly the scenario people take too lightly. A company's inactive status holds only as long as the account isn't used for buying and selling — that's the thin line most people don't manage to hold consistently.

The difference between us is where we're each coming from: you're talking about what the law theoretically allows if followed carefully, I'm talking about the situations we see in practice every day. People who are just arriving, or who've only been here a short time, don't have your twenty years of experience to judge that line themselves — concrete examples of what not to do are useful precisely to them.

Our client base is mostly medium and large businesses — people creating jobs here, investing, bringing real business. But I wouldn't want to tell you it's "fine to have a company" for what we've been discussing — that would contradict everything written above. The point of setting up a company is real activity and profit, not owning property, which is why I keep insisting that buying an apartment through a company remains the worst option.

I'm not here to sell a service, I'm here to connect with people who actually run businesses — and the 10% tax still applies regardless of the company's status.

.You're the one who raised the point that a large number of people here own a company for the purpose of owning an apartment

- @Daniel Malbasic

I think that something's been lost in translation here. I said two things:

"Most (all?) the members here who set up an EOOD did so in order to purchase property." I didn't specify what kind of property and I think it would be obvious to any native speaker of English that my meaning was "to purchase property rather than any other purpose".

And

"In over 20 years living here I've yet to come across anyone who formed an EOOD in order to purchase an apartment."

At no time did I say that anyone here had set up an EOOD in order to purchase an apartment - that would be an unnecessary and pointless course of action for someone simply wishing to buy a house with some land.  I think that we've apparently been talking at cross purposes..🙂

Most (all?) the members here who set up an EOOD did so in order to purchase property. If any of them were misguided/ill advised enough to plump for an ET for this purpose then they will certainly regret their choice, if they don't already.
Apart from that, I doubt there's much relevance to most people's lived experience in the question. 😎 - @JimJ

Sorry, but I can’t follow your shifting arguments, because I can see that you say one thing and then switch to another. In one comment, you say that most members actually use this structure, while in another you say, “I haven’t seen a single case.” Essentially, your arguments are seriously inconsistent.

Daniel, I don't see anything inconsistent in @JImJ's replies. You are misquoting him.

I think you might be missing the point that most of us here who are not EU citizens HAD to open companies in order to purchase properties with land. Most of us have had the sense to keep those companies inactive. I doubt anyone here was misguided enough to open a company to buy an apartment when it wasn't necessary.

Your example doesn't relate to almost all of us here. Most of us aren't running active businesses buying and selling real estate, or buying properties to flip in two years for a profit. I would hope that most of us have set up our utilities and other property related bills so we as individuals pay them, not the company. Because for immigration purposes all of us who are EU citizens and bought our property using a company need a notarised document stating that the business gives us as individuals the right to live in the property, that should be straightforward.

It's good to be aware that tax issues may arise when a property purchased via a company is sold. We recently had a discussion about this when a forum member found themselves in just that situation.

But I think you're fishing in the wrong pond. Very few of us here are your target market.

Most (all?) the members here who set up an EOOD did so in order to purchase property. If any of them were misguided/ill advised enough to plump for an ET for this purpose then they will certainly regret their choice, if they don't already.
Apart from that, I doubt there's much relevance to most people's lived experience in the question. 😎 - @JimJ
Sorry, but I can’t follow your shifting arguments, because I can see that you say one thing and then switch to another. In one comment, you say that most members actually use this structure, while in another you say, “I haven’t seen a single case.” Essentially, your arguments are seriously inconsistent. - @Daniel Malbasic

What can I say? There is no shift in my argument; it appears that there's a problem of comprehension. I run an on-line class for Chinese academics who are supposedly teaching English at various universities in their country but actually have a lamentable grasp of the language and want to improve it before their colleagues become aware of the true state of affairs. I can sign you up if you like...

@JimJ

Hehehe, good one 😂

@janemulberry

It's true that many non-EU citizens have to open a company to buy property that includes land — that makes complete sense, and I wasn't disputing that. What I'm pointing at is the pattern of applying that same logic to situations where a company isn't needed at all — like a plain apartment with no land.

One thing people also often misunderstand: as a non-resident buying an apartment as a private individual, you don't automatically get a tax number — you have to register separately, within a short window, and there's a fine if you miss it. It's a personal registration, not a company matter, and it's what lets you open a bank account, pay utilities, etc. — but it's a much lighter set of ongoing obligations than a company carries.

Where residency is achievable, that's usually the better route overall: buy as a private individual, get your own tax number, your own bank account — and skip the corporate structure that adds obligations without adding anything you actually needed.

@JimJ

To be clear, I'm not suggesting you or the other regulars here don't know this — you've been living here for years, you know the system. The point of writing it out isn't for you, it's for whoever googles this thread later — someone who just arrived in Bulgaria and has no one around yet to tell them what's actually a good idea and what isn't. That's who this explanation is really for. 😉

In other words, you don't want a discussion, you want SEO! At least you do seem to be a real person, not a bot. Or if you are a bot, you're quite a good one. I don't think a old-skool bot could have deliberately misquoted someone else's post to bolster their point, but maybe they do now.

@janemulberry

He's definitely a real live person. 🙂

Hehehehe, we dont have such good technology to make such a good bot for now 😂

If you were a bot, you'd be a very good one!