How and to what extent can entry regulations today still affect start-up decisions across regions and countries before formal new venture creation? This study draws on an overarching institutional framework and conducts two sequential experimental vignette studies in which we uniquely expose 634 Belgian, Dutch and German nascent entrepreneurs to multiple real regulatory conditions for starting a new limited liability company. By causally disentangling how and to what extent different entry regulations and particular components of the regulation of entry can impact start-up decisions across regions, the experiments provide new very granular insights to move beyond existing knowledge about the negative association between entry regulations and new venture creation. Next to this, interestingly, after several robustness analyses, in both experiments, regional and informal institutional factors do not moderate the negative impact of the regulation of entry. In other words, across regions in this study, nascent entrepreneurs do not react significantly differently to the impact of different regulatory start-up conditions, which strengthens the generalizability of these findings. We discuss how these results contribute to the literature on regulatory institutions and entry in entrepreneurship, and how they add new knowledge to the intersection of regulatory quality reasoning in institutional theory and the entrepreneurship policy literature. We conclude by addressing policy implications and limitations.