The EU does not have an equivalent of US commerce clause jurisprudence (which descends from Hamilton's original economic design to prevent exactly the kinds of problems that this author is complaining about). The EU does have an equivalent to the supremacy clause, but due to cultural and political forces it cannot have the same effect that it has in the US.

Another major factor that makes the US more competitive is our different approach to intellectual property law that favors competition in comparison to the EU equivalents. Another big thing is less the Delaware effect that he attributes US simplicity to and more the existence of uniform model laws that transformed state business law through the 20th century. Then you have the fact that almost all (except parts of trademark) of the relevant IP laws to large scale enterprises are exclusively federal laws. This is not the case in the EU despite all the normalizing treaties. The EU does not and cannot perform the same role that the federal government does.

I have a better proposal: incorporate the European states as self-governing US territories under the supervision of the federal government. They could have some carve-outs and immunities using an administrative structure similar to that of Native American law. This would also resolve the NATO controversies by just absorbing all of the individual ex-EU member state country militaries under the DoD. It would also eliminate a lot of the weird Article V ambiguity by just making it all American territory.