Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

100 loans where the bank makes 10€/month each = 1000€/month. 10 loans where the bank makes 100€/month each = 1000€/month.

As writes, just like me, the loan volume is different. At higher interest rates, simply not as many people can afford to borrow money. And this is already clearly noticeable in the industry.

Then example calculation with smaller volume (money and house).
Earlier:
600k€ with 1.2% interest = 600€/month interest
100 people: 100 * 600€ = 60,000€/month

Today:
300k€ with 2.4% interest (fictional as an example) = 600€/month interest

Or to expand on your statement, and some can still afford these interests (I would be interested to know how many still take out 600k€ at 3.5% interest)
Then the sum mixes:
A few:
600k€ with 3.5% = 1750€/month interest
A few more (build smaller):
300k€ with 3.5% interest = 875€/month interest
Out of 100 people:
10 * 1750€ = 17,500€/month
50 * 875€ = 43,750€/month
40 (can no longer build)
= 61,250€/month

Interest per month remains the same

Earlier 100 people with loan volume €60 million.
Today only 60 people with loan volume €21 million.

Money creation only 1/3.

(I would be interested to know how many are still borrowing 600k€ at 3.5% interest)

You can estimate that relatively well from the reports on new development areas. Recently, the 3, 4, 5-family homes were overbooked, now many new development areas still have available spots. This means, conversely, that the vast majority of the population cannot do that. Alternatively, you can calculate the installment, with that interest rate and amount it’s about 3000€ per month (2.2% repayment). The average household net income in Germany is just over 3500€, so you have to earn well above average to afford this loan. Otherwise, exactly what says applies. It’s not about the interest volume. The created money in the example is the sum of all loans and that is decreasing. By the way, not only in house construction, but also in the corporate sector. Interest has an even greater impact there, because on the one hand the investment becomes more expensive and thus the expected profit smaller. On the other hand, the expected profits from this investment are also discounted more strongly which makes the investment even less worthwhile.

Today offer of 3.88% effective with 100% financing of 380k with 15 years fixed interest rate with kfw124 component 100k over 10 years fixed interest rate. The fun would cost just under 1,900/month.

Will it get better? Rather not :-/

aber in der Realität braucht es kein physisches Bargeld. Die Zentralbanken sind auch tatsächlich gar nicht diejenigen die das Geld tatsächlich schöpfen, das passiert in den Geschäftsbanken (Sparkassen, Volksbanken, Privatbanken...) indem Kredite vergeben werden denen nur ein partielles Guthaben der Bank entgegensteht (faktisch so wenig, dass man es überschlagsweise mit "nichts" ansetzen kann).

I'll leave out the ad personam part before and state that I said exactly that: Central banks do not create money that somehow appears in citizens' wallets when they "print money" electronically, as it is nicely called. They provide banks with liquidity for trading among themselves and/or with the state. These are separate money cycles from commercial bank loans.

Why is that important? Because simple "printing" of inflation via central banks thereby does not necessarily become more plausible.

But you didn’t claim that either, so I don't want to attribute any gaps in knowledge to you ;-) .

I just learned from the Standard how widespread loans without a fixed interest rate are in Austria:

Currently, Austrian banks have 132 billion euros in outstanding real estate loans. Almost 65 billion of these are variable loans. In addition, there are 128 billion euros in variable loans that banks have granted to companies. Among companies, this type of loan is even more common than among households.

These loans mostly depend on the Euribor rate

Since this thread already embraces a colorful bouquet of topics and there is great participation, one more little flower doesn’t matter anymore, hence the question to the group regarding the „Ausfallentschädigung nach der Aktiv/Passiv Methode“. At the time of concluding our financing, a default compensation of approx. 52k was (pre)calculated. Naturally fitting the interest rate environment at that time. Now there was a statement from acquaintances that the bonds relevant for this have performed so well that the prepayment penalty today (theoretically) could be settled with a „handshake“. Since we have so far naturally continued to assume that we don’t need to know this exactly, we also have not dealt with the current project cancellation costs. But since this statement, the question has been on our minds: is that really the case?

Everything stands and falls with the political situation right now and one should at least have mentally gone through the „worst-case scenario“. Because if we have demolished the house, it will be really complicated afterward to pull the emergency brake or even to have it pulled by the GU.