In the case of family companies, it\’s not that much a global fight, but in my eyes these are actually the same as other companies, but somewhat strange as far as employees are concerned, but our politicians are also interested in these.

Politicians who solve problems associated with such family business more than once.

As is notorious, none of us grow young, and all of us are old, so sooner or later the moment comes when we need to pass an imaginary scepter to a young person. And for family companies associated with this, the problem is caused by the fact that the next generation does not want to take over simultaneously from their predecessors and, in our case, from the founders.

The descendants of the founders of the family business are often not interested in the field in which they conduct business, they do not want to take responsibility for them, and with the departure of their parents, the twilight of such a business often occurs, which eventually leads to the demise of the company.

And various business conferences are said to address how such companies can and should be protected. By law as well. Some countries in Europe already have laws on this, but here it is not.

Some of our Ministers for regional Development have already promised in the past that this will also be solved by law, it is said that family businesses were not given enough attention and support after the Velvet Revolution, so intergenerational exchanges are a problem that oppresses them.

So whether there are more such family-run companies is a dilemma.

” Support, or not support, that\’s what\’s running here,” I\’d like to say in Hamlet\’s words. Just as some politicians want to protect such companies, opponents also ask themselves, “Why should these companies be preferred over others, non-family members?”

In my opinion, they clearly have logic. What makes such a family business special is that they should enjoy special protection. Why should you give preference to a family-owned company owned by an absolute majority of members of the same family, or a family-owned company owned by at least 1 family member of a statutory authority? Why is it necessary to protect a family business in which at least 2 members of the same family participate in work or property, and at least 1 person is the owner of a trade certificate? A family-run business in agricultural production involves at least 2 families working or 1 of them is also the owner of the relevant certificate, but why are they somehow privileged?

Why should the existence of such companies be supported in some way? In particular, as it has already been said, this emerging generation is not interested, and “continuing the family tradition” will be a miracle for them, who are not forced labor.

.