This was quite a frustrating experience. Some time after leaving the country I got e-mails saying that SKAT, the local tax authority, had documents/messages for me to read on the secure message platform eBoks.

However, try as I might, I was unable to convince anyone to restore access since I was no longer a resident. I agonized quite a bit over this since I dreaded inadvertently being a fraud.

It would have saved me a lot of grief if the Danish e-gov services would have federated with Belgian and other EU identity services.

Edit: Forgot to say this is something The Netherlands already does pretty well. Dutch e-gov services, or at least those from Belastingdienst federate with many European idenity service providers including Belgium. Great for cross border workers.

As far as I know, the Dutch government has been pretty slow in their EIDAS implementation, even (nearly?) missing some deadlines, maybe the Belgian government has a similar problem?

For some integrations with Wallonia, we are currently forced to use the federal integration, since their implementation hasn't even started yet :(

You are correct about eidas, it seems to be handled by the federal government currently, but there's not much documentation on it ( Belgium) and i have seen some applications integrating that way. So i suppose the issue is documentation and discoverability.

And the partial conflict of interest with itsme

Like is the case with my own government, I don't have very great expectations of Belgium's federal government and their IT projects. I'd wish countries could just share their implementations with other governments. Hell, I believe any code developed with public money should be open source for the benefit of everyone, but governments aren't a fan of that because companies charge more for developing software in the open.

As a Swede, I strongly disagree with this idea. My country is essentially a "democratic oligarchy" with a wealth inequality similar only to Russia.[1]

The current eID system in Sweden is a private oligopoly run by, amongst others, the Wallenberg family and a previous prime minister. This oligopoly is used to stifle competition.[2]

Since the politicians are so deeply involved in the banking sector,[3] the only real hope of change is that a higher power takes more control.

[1] https://www.ft.com/content/747a76dd-f018-4d0d-a9f3-4069bf2f5... [2] https://www.realtid.se/konkurrens-storbankerna-har-nekat-fin... [3] https://www.expressen.se/dinapengar/toppsossarna-som-tjanar-...

This is typical of a certain political mindset: too big of a state ain't working, but surely an even bigger state shall work. This time, believe us!

The answer is not "more of what doesn't work". The answer is less.

Odin?

A more durable solution would be to move. If sovereignty is ceded to that higher power, and that higher power subsequently becomes corrupt, your range of options significantly narrow.

Somalia maybe? But i doubt it.

Currently, moving to another member state would require multiple steps to getting access to eID services in that country. Such as requesting (and pay for) a conventional national ID, in order to set up an eID that can be used for banking and identification in that country alone.

I'll add that my experience is based on moving within EU in the Nordics, which historically promote seamless free movement between those countries that often exceed the goals set by the EU.

In the US, it's normal for people to move to a different state to attend university, and then from there often to a different state again. Something like 1% to 2% move each year to a different state [0], which means in 10 years more than 10% of people will have done that. Some cross state borders multiple times in their lives. This is what we want to achieve, because it fuels economic growth and removes obstacles to happiness. (It's also, in a way, a restoration of what we had pre-Nation-State, when people were basically free to settle anywhere they wanted; but that's beside the point). Making the process of moving across the continent as smooth as possible is a Good Thing.

I would also move a point on terminology:

> working in a different EU country than their own

People don't own countries, they are born into them. (This is not just a pedantic remark - I think it's important that we move on from XIX-century nationalistic terminology if we want to achieve progress.)

[0] https://www.mymovingreviews.com/move/how-often-and-why-ameri...

European Union is not a federal government like the USA but a union of independent countries.

In Europe it’s normal to live your entire life in the country you were born. Of course you can move wherever you want whenever you want but it’s never needed because there is 99% odds that your state have what you need (specific university, companies offices …)

Since Europe have really poor democratic control and power structure as of today, we are far from a federal Europe.

Even European policies like RGPD are always enforced locally at country level, there is no such thing as European government.

I don't agree, partly because I don't share your view that democratic control and structure is "poor". Mainly because trying to flip the tables and redefine the goal and aspirations of the EU is a bit far fetched, as it doesn't even include becoming a federal Europe.

> Even European policies like RGPD are always enforced locally at country level, there is no such thing as European government.

That is by design, not a mistake.

> I don't agree, partly because I don't share your view that democratic control and structure is "poor".

Current democratic control is mostly sufficient for what the EU is today : a union of independent countries. But this control is not enough at all if we wanted the EU to become a government with executive power.

> That is by design, not a mistake.

I never implied it was a mistake, neither that it was a bad thing.

2) I think you overestimate the involvement of the US federal government in law-enforcement across the country. A lot of (most?) laws are actually passed and enforced at state level, with the FBI only getting involved in the worst situations or where cross-state cooperation is necessary. California alone has tons of gdpr-like laws that it sets and enforces independently. There is an entire US political culture based around "state rights" that constantly pushes for having a looser federal structure that looks very much like what the EU is today.

3) it's not like they don't have universities in Minnesota or Nebraska, a lot of people sticks around where they were born. The difference is that the ones who don't, find it easy enough to relocate. This helps creating world-beating industrial districts like Hollywood, SF, Houston, New York, etc etc - because they can attract the best of the best among 400m people.

100 years ago people rarely moved from a village. 50 years ago they rarely moved from a city. Now they rarely move from a country. See where it's going?

Maybe, and I'm not even against the idea. But it would have nothing to do with European Union (the current entity)

> 2) [...]

I'm not an US expert, and I mostly have the same picture as you. I don't see what you are trying to prove ?

> 3) [...]

I never said that one system was better than the other, just that they are different with different strengths and different weakness but that migrating from one to the other is extremely difficult and probably require creating new entities. I totally can imagine an European Federation but I don't see it being the same entity as the European Union.

We are going into hypotheticals here. I am pretty convinced you are wrong, but only time will tell.

> I don't see what you are trying to prove ?

It was mentioned that the EU "cannot even enforce <some law>", but the reality is that the US federal government, that model of global cohesive superpower, more often than not cannot do that either. Do we go around saying the US government cannot do anything right, because coordinating 50 states is impossible? No, of course they can do some stuff right. Same for the EU. Already the fact that there is one "supreme tribunal" across the continent is quite remarkable, as well as a single currency for most of the Union, or a single arrest warrant, etc etc. Things move slowly but they do move, and if enough people keep pushing for a united Europe, sooner or later we'll get there.

It doesn't really succeed as a pedantic remark, because 'their own' doesn't denote ownership. For example, here is a sentence in a BBC news article that I found by googling:

"Even his own boss said Andrew Gilligan, the BBC reporter at the heart of the Hutton Inquiry, 'paints in primary colours rather than something more subtle'".

This sentence does not suggest that Andrew Gilligan owns his boss.

Or it's always the same people who move a lot.

On the other hand, people are forced to uproot and discard their entire social support network - family, friends and others - multiple times in their lives. This does not only negatively impact happiness, but also has severe side effects and associated costs!

This can range from not having a place to crash (or a source to borrow money from) when getting priced out of a home or losing your job, but also having to waste money on childcare, family meetings / events being more expensive because people are spread all over the country and similar problems. And for the elderly, they are dumped in care homes with substandard but expensive care instead of being around their families in their final days. Call me old-fashioned but I find this disgusting.

And I didn't even touch the topic if this uprooting of people is detrimental to their mental health, especially for children - I would not be surprised if the rise of depression and other MH disorders can be linked to being constantly on the move in childhood!

The worst net negative for society as a whole is that enforcing mobility creates a massive concentration of people in urban areas (where rents explode and traffic becomes untenable) on one side and "left behind" rural areas on the other side where population erosion only leads to bitterness and erosion of trust in democracy itself, and any investment in infrastructure or life quality becomes prohibitively expensive.

We have seen the culmination of decades of neoliberalism in the rise of nationalist demagogues across democracies worldwide. We as humanity need to take a step back, cool down and ask ourselves if what we are doing is actually positive for society.

Obviously nobody should be forced to move. Nobody is "enforcing mobility" in Europe; they did in the past though, when Mussolini literally sold Italian labourers to half the planet and the UK shipped convicts to the colonies. The good ol' times often weren't that good. What we need is to provide all the freedom we can, and let people look for happiness wherever they see fit.

I'm simply going to assume on a stretch you're either on the LGBT+ spectrum or socially progressive, please forgive me if I'm wrong.

I disagree with you on the "not left behind" part: the "rural flight" aka all young people fleeing to urban areas as soon as they possibly can has made rural areas "left behind" socially, because the ones who stay behind objectively see that the young people are fleeing, but instead of placing the blame on politicians who did jack shit to keep rural areas liveable (e.g. by providing high speed internet and public transport), many of them resort to blaming "the gays" for "corrupting their children" and similar - which in turn is even more incentive for those few youth that remain to flee. It's a vicious circle.

Something like 40% of my high-school classmates have moved to another city or country, for one reason or another, and the ones who've remained seem to have become somewhat hyper-localistic, almost as a reflex or justification for not doing the same.

I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think forcing me or others to stick around would have made much of a difference beyond generating even more social resentment.

Besides, it's not only for intra-EU Digital Nomads but also for business operations beyond national borders; reducing the overhead improves accessibility from the less developed countries to richer markets.

I see. Here in Finland electronic services has been widely implemented and very successfully so. I haven't been required to show up in person for anything in quite some time (altough I sometimes have). Government bodies are also very keen to inform about and push for the e-services available. Especially in these pandemic times, which I believe further incented the long tail - if there was one - to catch up and offer self-service online.

I belive Sweden is as far if not further than Finland, but I wouldn't know(!) because the ID and eID was a hassle I didn't cope with the last time I lived there ;) Thing were fine anyway, "because EU, Nordics".

I agree, at first glance it seems like the global approach is an overkill.

I think it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem though.

Is the global eID/eWallet an overkill, because we're already at the peak of the within-EU movement of people?

Or, is the burden of switching countries too big and this prevents people from freely moving within the Union when looking for opportunities?

IMO it's the latter.

In the Netherlands you can change your address in every municipality, using our DigiD system. Nowadays you can also use the European system to log in.

And don't forget, while 3% may sound insignificant, it is still over 13 million people.

As anecdata if I had to get VISA and only temporary right to remain I would probably have not moved to Netherlands, and it has genuinely stopped me considering moving to America.

As a British / Irish citizen I'm acutely aware that there are now new barriers to non-eu British citizens, and that'll impact how many people move around Europe from UK. Especially people who cannot afford to navigate the additional costs and bureaucracy, or who are scared of risking family security with temporary stays etc.

I don't see why this should be done online. The registration/change of address requires a proof. Many services like bank accounts, pensions, tv tax etc. are linked to one's registration address. A one time physical presence (or a similar variant) is a reasonable tradeoff between verification and convenience. You create a meaningful hurdle and make people liable for their statements. Convenience is not the only metric to decide what should be done online.

1. You notify your new local council of the change of address.

2. A police officer visits your new home to check whether you actually live there.

3. Your official address is updated in the government's records and on the ID card.

Step 2 takes place in your home; step 3 requires you to physically go to the town hall because the information on the eID card needs to be updated. But step 1 should be doable online but isn't in every municipality. However, I think this is more a problem of every municipality doing this on their own rather than using a shared system. Also, the frustrating part is not that you need to go to the town hall, but that it has very limited and inconvenient opening hours and (in larger places) often long waiting times.

Because we can is not a reason. This is the same reason we have global warming. We can build gas burning cars, so we should, without thinking of the consequences.

Of what use is eID, when no one can secure anything network connected? When all eID will be subverted, stolen, misused, making the same useless? And meanwhile, causing endless misery for those experiencing the loss of privacy, the consequences of identity theft, abuse by foreign powers, and more.

On top of this, I absolutely don't need it easier for a state to track me. Now every time I show my eID, the state gets pinged to validate it?

No thanks!

Thats escalated quickly...

"he loss of privacy, the consequences of identity theft, abuse"

You are like 15 years late to the party, you can easilly buy/scrape/find enough information to get credutcards in sone poor sucker's name from the facebook and experian data leaks.

Burgerprofiel has recently gone live ( because of Covid) after a long beta.

It was used for your "vaccinatie aanvraag".

Wallonia and Brussels are long from ready.

Ever.

If you have not been hacked when specifically targeted, it only means your data is not worth the cost/profit. Pre-zero days abound, firewalls will be bypassed, and worst?

People will be bribed, coerced, scammed, tricked.

There are only two options:

1.. Absolutely zero Internet access for anyone working on said computers. No mobile phones allowed in the building, no machine with internet access in the building, faraday cage around the entire building, etc...

Yes, no email.

Nothing.

2. Paper

And of course, the above with physical access controls, and scans / searches.

The real fix for all identity theft, is to make it a crime, and a serious one, including mandatory jail time for all CxO level execs (on the premise of gross negligence) for obtaining any data on individuals via illicit means.

And that has to be world wide.

Such a service would be useful for me for example: a french living in Belgium with relatives in Greece.

[1] https://www.thelocal.se/20210510/my-first-visit-to-the-swedi...

But really this just makes me sad that cash is going away. It provided some ways to work around the system, but with so few people accepting it, you're just kind of the mercy of the bureaucracy. And good luck ever convincing common Swedes it's an issue when they've always lived in the system. They only see it as something that works so well, when it is basically broken for all newcomers.

I would prefer if it worked the way "my id" works in Poland. When someone wants to confirm my identity, I am getting redirected to a "my id" provider (typically a bank I have account in), I log in, I see what data are required (for instance my age) by the data requestor and I am done.

Everything is recorder who was checking which data, when and why. If there is some leak, it is easy to find who should be blamed.

I am not a big fan of EU in its present shape, but if EU would make all countries to agree for some sane standard of identification in a secure, privacy preserving way, it would be definitely beneficial.

The german eID (and bank cards) already contain a way to sign whether or not the holder of the card is >16 or >18 without revealing anything else (e.g. for cash-payment at cigarette dispenser machines)

Similar functionality being available in a unified way across the whole bloc is something few other countries have done yet and would drive innovation

So you'd have support for France, Germany, maybe Netherlands, and that's it.

With an EU-wide ID, the smaller countries profit significantly, and startups can integrate and use the functionality easier.

To facilitate freedom of movement within the bloc.

Spottify advertised itself in EU for half a decade or more, but has been available in my country for less than a year.

I currently need to maintain digital IDs for Italy, Spain, the UK and Sweden, plus different implementations of those depending on banks/services. Add the complexity of phone numbers that are no longer valid and / or services that do not allow foreign numbers / addresses (more than you think, especially with companies).

I would LOVE to have one single ID system to rule them all (supposing it's VERY secure).

Is there reason why this isn't used because noone needs it or because it's too inconvenient to use because we don't have such a system?

EU also didn't do a lot of commerce cross-borders until Schengen, Euro and other agreements made such commerce significantly easier and more viable.

You can sign up directly through the service if you are a permanent resident of either of those countries. Although I was an EU citizen, I was not a citizen of these countries, so to be able to sign up I had to open a bank account - which I don't use, as I already have one in my home country. Opening a bank account was also harder than it should be, if you are a permanent resident you can do it online, but as I was a temporary resident - even though I had a Lithuanian issued ID card and personal code - I had to go to a bank to do it in person.

So is such a system really needed? Not really, but there are many arbitrary barriers in place that make freedom of movement harder than it should be. Systems like this should make it fair, and stop countries from discriminating (purposely or not) against citizens of other EU countries.

yes, but it's so common to expatriate nowadays, also for short periods. so it would be nice to have a digital ID thing to deal with different administrative stuff, in different countries...

However, ~1M goes back every year, so the affected people are more than the ones _currently_ living abroad.

Moreover, there are services that also intra-EU tourists can benefit from: - buying products >18 y.o. at automatic machines - simplifying buying drugs at pharmacies (we have EHIC, but it doesn't cover not-urgent care) - having fast track at airports without having an EU passport (in many countries people have an ID but not a passport) - easier lookup for police during random checks

[0]: https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pub...

(1) people think cooperation is a good idea

(2) and they also want to keep their own countries and identities

Once we start moving towards a single country, the inevitable question becomes, which rules and values should people follow? Which country gets to assert its way of life on the others? Or perhaps the virtual state known as the "EU" should assert its own values (whatever they may be)?

Now imagine expanding the EU to Turkey. Can we change their legislation to be more liberal? Or should the EU countries follow the hard line authoritarian islam that Erdogan pushes? No one is willing to change. And no one has to as long as the EU stays as a form of cooperation between nations.

If the EU pushes towards a single country, power struggles over values will follow.

The procedure to obtain a eID is solid enough that the states should really leverage all the work done by another state to verify who you are etc, and allow you to interact with institution in a safe way.

IMHO it is one of the best things which could really define us as Europeans.

According to [2] the Austria eID is already valid EU-wide.

[1] https://www.buergerkarte.at/en/

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_electronic_signatu...

There will always be irreconcilable language differences and people do have a preference for staying in their birthplace, but that is no reason to not improve things.

I'm more worried about the EU actually implementing this well, but time will tell.

Itsme is really expensive to use ( private for profit company that is being pushed)

Okish is the right word ;), but progress is on the way.

The "itsme" SSO app is even worse. You can't use it without using an iOS or Android smartphone (and even then it probably won't work if it's rooted). And it's got this really weird requirements of being secured by a 5-digit pin (no more, no less last I checked..).

The itsme app works totally fine for me, and my less tech-literate family members. It strikes a good balance in UX and security.

All in all, I think that the Belgian government is doing a good job in this. It needs to work well for the average user, which it does! I don't expect my government to spend time and money to support all fringe cases like smartphones that don't run iOS or Android.

I expect my government to create solutions that work for everyone. Including "fringe cases". Including people in poverty. The marginalised. The contrarians. The smartphoneless. Everyone.

Edit: and I especially expect them not to further the de-facto duopoly of Google & Apple.

The software stack is pretty much standardized. I am a bit worried about aarch64 platforms, but hopefully they will also be supported.

OTOH, the itsme application is a huge security issue aside of being a serious vendor lock-in over passwords, 2FA and OTP. It is tivoising logins like OKTA, except that here, it is mandated by the state.

Being a Swede who now lives in Germany, I can tell you that the lack of system level integration or even compatibility is a real hassle.