Developer or general contractor! Safety?

However, I have to revise my statement regarding the exemption from real estate transfer tax for subsequent special requests when buying from a developer in this generality!

For reputable developers, it should be absolutely no problem to state the fixed price in the notary purchase contract according to the construction service description and handle all special requests in a supplementary offer. Then no real estate transfer tax is due on these amounts...

Incidentally, I would never have bought from our developer if they had denied us access to the construction site. But it was clear from the beginning that both we and possibly experts would have access at any time. In our case, building with a developer was therefore quite pleasant, as we could enter the construction site as builders but did not have to worry about insurance, construction electricity, etc. Upgrades such as tiles, parquet, etc. we settled directly and uncomplicatedly with the tradespeople.

No, /3 para. 2 of the Broker and Developer Ordinance provides for payment in up to seven partial amounts. The regulations are intended to protect purchasers from making advance payments too far in advance and being left with a potential loss if the developer goes bankrupt.

Thank you first of all for all your answers! I don't believe this is a covert builder's model, as it was always clear that real estate transfer tax must be paid on the total amount! What concerns me now is mainly the VAT, which is shown in the contract for work, i.e. price including VAT, but we are wondering whether we can still somehow be held liable for VAT back payments, as that would definitely be a deal-breaker for us... Do you happen to know?

Furthermore, there is a payment schedule!! We do not know whether it is safer to build with a developer or in the version that is now emerging here!

I would simply ask there where you expect the back payment from. I have found our tax office, for example, to be very informative and friendly.

To rate a developer as more risky because if they go bankrupt, all your money is gone. If the general contractor goes bankrupt, you’ve at worst paid for the drywall without them having started with it, right?

That is wrong, because developers are legally obliged to settle according to the Real Estate Agent and Developer Ordinance and this payment plan is rather balanced. With the general contractor, the payment plan is a matter of negotiation, so this could work to the customer’s disadvantage.

To handle special requests in a supplemental offer. Then no real estate transfer tax is due on these amounts...

Could be, but not necessarily. If the developer’s books are audited afterward, it can happen that the buyer still receives a claim for additional real estate transfer tax several years after moving in. It may be unlikely, but it is possible. Nevertheless: Normally, the contractually fixed price counts for real estate transfer tax and other fees. All supplements have no further effect on that as long as they are not further communicated.

I don’t think this is a disguised client-builder model, since it was always clear that real estate transfer tax must be paid on the total amount!

There are other disadvantages, which presumably reflect the uncertain incidental construction costs. The question is, who benefits from issuing two contracts? Why is this variant being offered to you? Was that your wish? Why?

We don’t know whether it is safer to build with a developer or with the version that is now emerging here!

The question is, what do you understand by safety (fixed price? defect freedom? adherence to deadlines? provider insolvency?). What is better about the land-general contractor coupling compared to the developer model?

Here are a few exclamation marks: !!! You’re welcome.