Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

  • Erstellt am 2021-04-23 10:46:58

sysrun80

2023-10-25 08:21:38
  • #1
The number is not new. This requirement has existed since 2020. The city of Hanover also has this in a statute. However, it clearly states what the purpose is:

* the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in energy supply
* the saving and the most possible avoidance of the use of fossil energy sources such as coal, natural gas, and heating oil

It also clearly describes when one does not fall under this obligation

emissionsfreie Wärmeerzeugungsanlage: primär durch die Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien betriebene Anlage, die auch mittelbar (z. B. durch gesteigerten Stromverbrauch) nicht zu einem Anstieg der dadurch hervorgerufenen Emissionen führt (z. B. Solarthermie, Wärmepumpen, Geothermie)

I would then like to see how the mentioned municipalities want to manipulate this to generate money.

Certainly, if you follow this path with the FW, a certain number of users must be reached to operate economically. But if the core of the regulation is the saving of CO2 and fossil fuels – well, then someone should try to enforce that against a heat pump with photovoltaic and green electricity. Presumably, this will keep the administrative courts busy for a long time.
 

mayglow

2023-10-25 08:33:13
  • #2
I rather suspect the usage obligation as a "if a replacement is already due" kind of thing and can hardly imagine that it can be pushed through otherwise.

I am still undecided about district heating and local heating networks, what I think of them. We once looked at a new development area where the developer then centrally sets up a combined heat and power plant and you get heat from it (I think you have to get it) (and I even think you become co-owner). I believe the first 10 (or 15?) years or so were also fixed in terms of how expensive it would be, and I think the developer also took care of a maintenance contract. Basically, that sounded reasonable to me for the dense settlement prevailing there, but the calculated monthly price was quite steep and the prospect of having to argue with about 50 other homeowners about how to proceed sounded rather discouraging to me.
 

Buchsbaum

2023-10-25 08:37:03
  • #3
How was it again with the revenue-neutral new property tax? They reassured and downplayed it. Hardly anyone is supposed to pay more than before. How does reality look? It is becoming more expensive for everyone. Suddenly, no one wants to know anything about revenue neutrality anymore. Don't worry, the municipal utilities and communal heat producers will surely find enough "customers" to cover their costs and make money. The legal basis for this has already been established.
 

AllThumbs

2023-10-25 08:44:25
  • #4
Then you must be the first where the municipality has already set the assessment rates and who has already received his property tax notice based on the new calculation method
 

Buchsbaum

2023-10-25 08:52:34
  • #5
I am probably the only one whose assessment rates were significantly increased even before the introduction of the new property tax.

The burden of the property tax will rise nationwide on average by 10 to 20 percent. These figures are cited by the homeowners' association Haus und Grund, which warns of an explosion in housing costs. The reason for the increases is apparently the new calculation of the property tax from the year 2025.

Municipal umbrella organizations had promised a revenue-neutral property tax reform. This is now no longer being mentioned. Property owners have filed objections against 3.25 million notices. The municipal umbrella organizations are backing away from their commitment to a revenue-neutral property tax reform 2025.
 

markusla

2023-10-25 08:55:50
  • #6
And what does that have to do with the new method of calculation?
The multiplier can also be adjusted like this …
 
Oben