KfW BEG funding stopped 261, 262, 263, 264, 461, 463, 464

Anyone who wants to believe that it is because of suddenly empty pots can do so. This would not have happened under Altmaier.

There are also figures for this. So there is no need to question it so rumor-ladenly.
"The enormous flood of applications in recent weeks, which has gained significant additional momentum in the past few days, is leading to the exhaustion of the funds provided by the federal government for the Federal Funding for Efficient Buildings (BEG); the program therefore had to be stopped, also in view of the provisional budget management. Alone in the period from November 2021 to today, applications worth over 20 billion euros in funding volume have been received by KfW."

"Although it was known that the EH55 standard had established itself as the norm in new construction, the end of the EH55 funding was only announced in November 2021 with effect from the end of January 2022. Thus, in 2021, 6 billion euros of tax money—and thus around one third of the total funds available for building efficiency funding in 2021—were committed to a building standard that had long since established itself in the market.

The then announced imminent end of the EH55 new build funding in November 2021 led to a 'run' on the funding. This extreme increase in funding applications for EH55 new builds alone in January 2022 has led to the funds of 5 billion euros available to KfW under the provisional budget management for the 'Federal Funding for Efficient Buildings' already being exhausted."

there are also numbers on this. So there is no need to question it so rumor-ladenly. "The enormous flood of applications in recent weeks, which has gained significant additional momentum in the past few days, is leading to an exhaustion of the budget funds provided by the federal government for the Federal Funding for Efficient Buildings (BEG); the program therefore had to be stopped, especially considering the provisional nature of the budget management. In the period from November 2021 to today alone, applications amounting to over 20 billion euros in funding volume have been received by KfW."

Sounds like a nicer justification than "We consider the construction of further single-family houses to be unnecessary from a climate policy perspective and want to largely hinder or make their creation unattractive. Now a different wind is blowing, dear flight refugees from the commuter belt!" Better to blame the applicants who, due to politically caused deadline shortening, got into a hurry and were forced to bring forward their KfW55 plans en masse.

Sounds nicer as a justification than "We consider the construction of further single-family homes as not necessary from a climate policy perspective and want to largely make their creation more difficult or unattractive. Now a different wind is blowing, dear suburban escapees!" Better to shift the blame to the applicants who got into a hurry due to politically caused deadline shortening and were forced to bring forward their KfW55 plans all at once.

Sorry, that’s nonsense. Aside from that: Why should the general taxpayer (including tenants who will never be able to build) support people with money (sometimes >50,000 thanks to the granny flat trick) for a standard that is common and not progress? Why should the middle class have their houses subsidized? The money would be better invested, for example, in municipal housing construction to help many.

The contracts are definitely signed, but then I don’t understand why the advisor says there will be no more money. This contract must, as far as I understand, be valid for both parties. Are they liable now?

I’m not a lawyer, but to my knowledge, in Germany "Pacta sunt servanda" still applies = contracts must be fulfilled. If the advisor of the Commerzbank made a mistake, he probably has to deal with the consequences...

If the house construction fails because of a €32,000 subsidy, one shouldn't build anyway or should adjust the planning to the creditworthiness.

You obviously work at a bank, I guess as an advisor? Me too, but in processing. However, I have to disagree with you on this statement. With such an amount, the financing can very well fail, at least in our rural area or at our rather small bank. Construction costs are also exploding here, but at the same time the respective land prices (still) don't keep up. Presenting all that relatively cleanly as a bank (with all the increasing regulations) is becoming more and more difficult. Since the banks' profitability problems are also taking effect, more and more financings are accepted that are initially calculated "on a knife-edge." This is certainly not the rule, but an additional €32,000 is no small matter for me.

With such an amount, the financing can very well fall through, at least in our rural area or with our rather small bank.

So you finance your customers up to their necks, so that this amount would break their necks. Exactly this statement supports my claim.

Since the banks' earnings problems are also taking effect, more and more financings are taken on that are initially calculated "to the limit."

"To the limit" = it is maxed out. That is exactly what I said too. Creditworthiness is not sufficient for more. So consider whether to build at all or as planned or rather go for cheaper = smaller or existing stock.

And yes. I work at a bank. Mainly financing commercial real estate customers. Additionally, I manage about 100 banks that refinance through us. Maybe you belong to this group as well ;) .