Edit: DPO Network says this which I think is a pretty good summary (though it's not part of the explicit legal policy, it's someone's opinion)
> CAN WE ASSIGN ONE OF OUR EMPLOYEES AS OUR DPO?
> Yes. However, you must ensure that other professional duties of this employee must be compatible with his/her new duties as DPO and do not result in a conflict of interests.
Being the sole owner and manager and being the DPO is clearly a conflict of interest.
I imagine when running a business one faces many stupid bureaucrats, this could be another one (or they could be competent and understand and accept the technical explanation of how my imaginary company complies with GDPR).
But yeah, why quit because of the n + 1th bureaucrat, when you've dealt with n of them while starting and running of your business?
No, like Google, Microsoft and Intel before the European Commission.
Could you clarify why you think this is so? As an owner, my interests would align with the DPO's interests so it's hard to me to find where the conflict of interest would reside in the case of being the sole employee _and_ DPO.
Now if it's a large company where they make money per GDPR policy workaround then I could see it being required another person than the owner, but it could still certainly be an employee.