Is building a house financially feasible?

In addition, we were informed that immense development costs will arise on the leasehold property. When we inquired during the initial meeting, we were told that the development costs were included in the house price as a flat rate. Now they amount to about half the price of the land extra.

Yes, development costs can indeed initially overwhelm one due to their amount

In our case, leasehold is nothing unusual. Of course, I have concerns about it, which is why I asked for your opinions. But this is a common practice here. The term is 80-99 years. Before signing the contract, it must of course be clarified to what extent the lease payments can be increased and whether this is contractually fixed.

What is important with leasehold is that it is a chamber recognized by the financing bank. Then everything is contractually regulated, the length of the contract, increase of the lease payment, and confidentiality agreement.

Also, what no one really knows: the contract can be extended!

Ultimately, supply determines demand: those who want to live in a densely populated city cannot expect a 2000 sqm plot for single-family housing to be on offer.
If you look for a plot in the Munich area, you gladly take the 300 sqm plot, even if it swallows horrendous sums.
If the preferred area is characterized by leasehold properties, then you accept the lease as given.

Only the others always have a problem

I don't think that currently (even over 100 years) a 5% ground rent can be established. Viewed over the term, that would correspond to five times the value of the property. Even monetized, the property would be clearly too expensive at that interest rate today.

Well, it is like that. It is simply a return expectation that is also being met. The purchaser also doesn't need to take out a single euro in financing for that.

The bottom line is that a property under leasehold should not be a disadvantage for most prospective builders. You just have to deal with it.

Exactly right!

Well, that's just how it is. It's simply an expected return that is also being met. The buyer doesn't need to take out a euro of financing for that.

Then the buyer is economically blind. And a 5% return is not financing? What then? Lease=contract=obligation=monthly burden=essentially financing

Where do these 5% come from now???

Leasehold rent is just like rent. You pay and pay, and the land never belongs to you. If it were 10 euros a month, okay, but it’s rather 200. For that, you can already get more than 100k euros in credit for a piece of land that will belong to you after 30 years! For 100k, you should be able to get a decent piece of land in most areas. That alone clearly speaks against leasehold. The problems with selling as well. Who wants such a construct? And where was it disproved that the house passes into the ownership of the lessor at the end of the leasehold contract (for a few euros in "compensation"?) You just have to take over the land including the old house from grandma, tear down the old house and build a new one on it for expensive money, then the contract runs out, the lessor doesn’t want to extend, and you get the eviction lawsuit on your desk? Or you "get to choose" whether you’d rather pay triple the leasehold rent in the future? And if you can’t do that and don’t extend the leasehold contract, then even the claim for compensation expires and the house is completely gone. Doesn’t that sound great?!

You can read about this here xxx.wallau-Bewertung.de/Erbbaurecht.HTML

btw. our predecessor had leased a piece of land with this house that we did not take over (too slow, too lazy, neighbor was faster). But the lease contract was included in the documents for the house and every few years the rent was cheerfully increased significantly. It was "only" a forest plot, but the leasehold rent quintupled (!!) over the 20-year term.