Does Europe fully enough understand the opportunity?

The first step in the trust infrastructure is the shift from exchanging documents to information exchange with European Business Wallets - interacting with interoperable personal wallets.

The next step is to use these as control panels for AI-agents.  Together becoming the New Execution Layer for the Single Market.

Here comments about the first step - based on post by Mikael after Hällström (lead for Semantics Group in WeBuild)  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mikaelafhallstrom_webuild-ebw-verifiablecredentials-activity-7438627776536023040-nXEL?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAABPj1oB9_D7YNYACmHvY9HioUqpuULqZCo:

1. The key conceptual shift: documents → attestations → facts

“the real shift is not about digitising forms — it is about moving from document exchange to fact-based information exchange.”

That is exactly the transition from the “document paradigm” to the “data/claim paradigm.”

Traditional model

Process → form → document → transmission → manual interpretation

Characteristics:

• static snapshots
• duplicated data
• each form self-contained
• trust tied to the whole document

Example:
PD A1 includes employer details, worker details, status, dates, identifiers, etc.

Fact/attestation model

Authoritative source → attestation → verifiable claim → selective presentation

Characteristics:

• modular
• reusable
• machine-interpretable
• trust tied to specific claims

Example:

Instead of sending a PD A1 document:

• Claim: worker covered by social security of country X
• Claim: employer identifier
• Claim: posting period

Each can come from the authoritative issuer.

2. Why the old system duplicated everything

Mikael explains the root cause well:

each form must stand on its own.

That is the paper inheritance problem.

A paper document must include all context, because the receiver cannot assume anything else.

So every form repeats:

• identity
• address
• organisation details
• dates
• identifiers

This leads to:

same fact
→ copied into 10 documents
→ slightly modified
→ becomes inconsistent

That is the core administrative friction in cross-border processes.

3. What wallets + verifiable credentials actually enable

The real change is separation of facts from context.

Instead of one big document:

PD A1 document
└─ employer
└─ worker
└─ address
└─ insurance status
└─ dates

You get modular attestations:

Credential: Employer identity
Credential: Worker identity
Credential: Social security coverage
Credential: Posting period

And the verifier asks for only what is needed.

Example:

A labour inspector may only need:

social_security_coverage = true
country = FI
valid_until = date

Not the whole PD A1 document.

4. Where Mikael’s post is particularly strong

Three points are very well positioned.

1️⃣ Once-Only Principle becomes technically real

For years it was a policy slogan.

VC + wallet finally provides the mechanism:

• issue once
• reuse many times
• verify cryptographically

2️⃣ Continuous compliance becomes possible

This is a very important implication he hints at.

Today:

compliance = submit document

Future:

compliance = verify current state

For example:

• Is worker still insured?
• Is employer still registered?
• Is permit still valid?

That moves systems from snapshots → live trust checks.

3️⃣ Administrative friction reduction

Cross-border processes are slow mainly because:

• information cannot be trusted
• documents must be interpreted
• manual checks dominate

Fact-based attestations allow:

• automatic verification
• less interpretation
• less resubmission

5. What Mikael diplomatically avoids saying

There is an implicit but important point.

Even many “digital” systems today are still document systems.

Examples:

• PDFs in portals
• XML forms
• EESSI structured forms

They are digitised documents, not shared facts.

So the architecture is still:

form → send → interpret

Instead of:

claim → verify

6. Where the real difficulty lies (not mentioned in the post)

The hardest problems are not technical.

They are:

Governance

Who is allowed to issue a claim?

Example:

“employer_of_worker”

Possible issuers:

• employer
• labour authority
• social security authority

Semantic interoperability

What exactly does a claim mean?

Example:

“employed”

Different definitions in:

• tax law
• labour law
• social security law

This is why his Semantics Group work is critical.

Liability and trust

If a credential is wrong:

Who is responsible?

• issuer
• holder
• verifier
• wallet provider

7. How this fits the bigger architectural change

The real transformation is this:

The wallet is not the revolution itself.

It is the transport layer for trusted claims.

**8.  **The EU digital wallet will not simply digitise documents — it will gradually replace them with portable, verifiable facts issued by authoritative sources.

And EBWs enable AI-agentics: https://www.webuildconsortium.eu/trusted-identities-for-ai-agents-an-opportunity-for-europe