To add context to the article: The EU "doing good work" as you say is not the news here. The real news here is that one of the EU's core but minor member states is attempting to refuse that "good work".
It shows how fragile the EU has become. Pushing the envelope for their own gains at the cost of delegitimizing EU institutions has become a sport among EU nations. But Luxemburg best exemplifies those countries that seemed immune to this, because Luxemburg best exemplifies a nation that would lose everything if the EU disintegrates. Even they are now doing it
"Pushing the envelope for their own gains at the cost of delegitimizing EU institutions"
Why does the EU exist, if not 'for the gain of the member states'?
Do you see the psychological paradox of Federalization?
A better argument is that if there is such contention, then maybe some of those EU level institutions should not exist.
And remember, the head of the commission is JC Junker, the very architect of Luxembourgs special tax schemes.
The job of the EU+Lux is to make the tax laws clear, not screw things up for business who by and large - just pay the taxes they are owed, but at the minimum possible rate.
"Do you see the psychological paradox of Federalization?"
No, it is exactly what I am talking about ;-)
I just wanted to point out, that for Luxemburg to join the rounds EU-de-legitimizers is a whole new ball game. Just an example: LUX politicians were pushing for the EU to make "Letzebuergisch" an official language of its own, while linguistically its just a variety of German (not even a dialect). Although that attempt failed (because science), the audacity gives a hint of how much Luxemburg gained from the EU so far.
It shows how much incompetence and disarray is present in the European political leadership at the moment, if even Luxemburg is starting to delegitimizing EU institutions.
It's perfectly reasonable for nation states to challenge the EU institutions, because the 'legitimacy' of EU institutions is not arbitrary - it depends on the support of member states!
If an EU institution is challenged by most members - it should absolutely be 'de-legitimized' and closed down!
This is the problem with the pro-Federalist psychology - added to the reality of 'bureaucracies that can only grow' - we 'assume' that a given EU entity should have supremacy, and not be 'undermined'? Why not? Who gave that EU organ power in the first place, and why does it have it?
I don't really support Lux's attempts to continue their low-tax status, but maybe they have a point.
As far as the Lux language - I think your argument is a stretch. Surely you know there are a zillion languages in the EU, each close to some other language. Having Luxembourgish 'recognized' doesn't necessarily carry them any favour or economic advantage, so I don't see how it's super relevant. I see what you are trying to get at - I just don't think that specific case is a good example.
It shows how fragile the EU has become. Pushing the envelope for their own gains at the cost of delegitimizing EU institutions has become a sport among EU nations. But Luxemburg best exemplifies those countries that seemed immune to this, because Luxemburg best exemplifies a nation that would lose everything if the EU disintegrates. Even they are now doing it