House transfer / buying from ex with ongoing loan / costs

you somehow ignore the fact that this happened to you in the context of a divorce, which is not the case here. If I were to transfer a piece of land to you today (without all the complicating circumstances), it would still be something different and according to everything google tells me, it would be classified as a form of gift for tax purposes. Even if the part the notary has to make in the land register is ultimately the rewriting.

Here it is a bit more complicated with the loan involved, (so yes, maybe it should be assessed differently again) I would definitely seek expert advice on this. (You can already tell that the forum is not at all in agreement)

Marrying as a tax avoidance tactic... How soon after the wedding can the divorce be so that the [FA] does not become suspicious?

But you somehow ignore that this happened to you in the course of the divorce,

No. I wrote on page 1 that it is not that expensive… it may be that it is still expensive for him.
My answers then just drifted off because this general answer

You cannot re-register a house but only sell or gift it.

is wrong! That’s why the back-and-forth now, which I have documented.

In the end, one should not rely on general answers when it comes to technical questions, especially if they concern specialized fields such as law.

Here it is a bit more complicated with the loan involved, (so yes, maybe it should be assessed differently again) I would definitely get expert advice on this. (You can already tell that the forum is not unanimous)

Exactly my opinion.
I am certainly no expert in such matters, but I also do not present myself as one. Others here are more "daring" ;)

I am certainly not an expert in such matters, but I don’t present myself as one either.

No, but somehow you started with "We simply transferred it." Then with "My ex still got money for the transfer, but that was private," which immediately makes one think of shady dealings (black money bypassing the notary to secure advantages), and in the end you produce a "notarial agreement on the consequences of divorce." In every thread, the OP is repeatedly asked to provide complete information, and now you keep giving additional info bit by bit. I really find that annoying :(. You could have simply said that the property was transferred as part of the regulated divorce. Then it would be immediately clear to everyone that this is a totally different legal transaction. There is never any property transfer tax in that case. That's normal. And it’s not a sale either. That is also clear – but I have already written that. Then we could have all saved four pages of discussion. Apart from that, your situation is as different from the OP’s as fire is from water. The OP has to pay property transfer tax. Period. Normal transaction.

Honestly, I’m not taking the blame here just because you think I’m talking nonsense and accuse me of cheating. Time and again you have made false accusations, so I kept responding.

My ex still got money for the transfer, but that was private"

I never wrote anywhere that he got money for the transfer!
Please read again! Or next time someone accuses you, maybe you should read yourself twice?!

where you immediately think of shady deals (black money bypassing the notary to secure advantages) and in the end you present a "Notarial agreement on the consequences of divorce."

Those are your receiving antennas! You think you know so much and if someone comes along to correct it, you’re immediately accused of cheating... because it can’t be that you’re wrong with the “ypg, that doesn’t exist”

In every thread the OP is repeatedly asked to provide complete information and now you keep giving additional info bit by bit

Because you accused me bit by bit of being wrong?!

You could have simply said that the property was transferred as part of the regulated divorce.

Why? At first I mentioned my ex-husband, not partner, not ex.
You are/You’re really a species... acting like Google, and when someone comes along with the Brockhaus, facts get twisted.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to be confrontational. I just had the feeling that your suggestion was "you can simply transfer it at the notary, that costs (almost nothing), it was like that for me too," and I found that suggestion a bit risky because the context is completely different. But maybe I put words in your mouth too much, I’m sorry about that. I never assumed that you were doing anything shady (tax evasion or anything like that) and certainly not maliciously. I just wanted to point out that this might need to be assessed very differently here, which is why I referred back to your context (maybe too bluntly). And my layman’s understanding is that in many cases, a transfer at the notary means a gift (or it happens in the context of another contract aka divorce or purchase). I thought your understanding was that this generally isn’t the case (because for you it really wasn’t a gift/purchase. It’s understandable to assume that at first), which is why I just wanted to shout out a warning once, because at least from my perspective, your context was relevant and this one here is different.

Actually, we all just want to help, which is why I hope there’s no bad blood here. I think the most important point to take away from the discussion is: It’s too complicated for a layman’s forum ;) Don’t trust us!