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

Hello everyone,
fundamentally, the disappointment of many future homeowners is understandable. I am one of the first applicants from 07/2021 and we will probably move into the new house by the end of February. Our bungalow will be a KfW Efficiency House 55 EE with about 90 m² of living space. This size is sufficient for us. As a prospective retiree, I often read here about living spaces beyond 150 or 200 m². With construction prices of 2,500 euros/m² and more, the lost subsidy corresponds to about 8 - 10 m² of living space. In your place, I would not question the new construction of a house. My thoughts would go in the direction of possibly reducing living space. At the latest, when the children go their own ways, you will be glad about a bit less living space.

Why should the general taxpayer ...

Because "homebuilders" are also part of the general taxpayers.

(including tenants who will never be able to build)

... or don’t want to; building a house means restrictions that not everyone wants to accept.

... for a standard that is common

I actually don’t know whether the 55-standard house is standard or declared a standard because it has been built quite frequently thanks to subsidies. I assumed the Energy Saving Ordinance / Building Energy Act are the standards. But I really don’t know.

Why should the middle class have their houses subsidized?

Because people who move into their own houses free up apartments? Or because the middle class also subsidizes themselves and others and therefore perhaps also has the right to discounts? (I believe you have to be able to grant this, especially since the middle class does not receive the houses as gifts but usually two people work hard for a lifetime and give up other things. By the way, my husband and I do not belong to the middle class.)

The money would be better invested, for example, in municipal housing construction to help many.

Yes, at least social housing construction will be intensified over the next four years. Let's see who wants and has to live in such apartments, especially with children.

especially since the middle class does not get houses for free but usually two people work hard for a lifetime and give up other things.

That could be debated. For example, I don't know anyone who has built in the last 10 years without generous help from their parents or inheritances. Whether it's a plot of land or financial assistance. Or the condominium from study or early career times, which was supported by the parents - even if only through guarantees. And this also applies to most of my friends who come from rather simple backgrounds or craftsman families. I am in my mid-40s and what has been inherited in recent years is almost bizarre in terms of the amounts. If you really want to support simple prospective homeowners, taxes and fees on the first self-used property should be massively lowered depending on wealth. Currently, even millionaires benefit from the subsidy amounts. That surely cannot be the point.

For example, I don’t know anyone who has built a house in the last 10 years without generous help from their parents or inheritances. Be it a plot of land or financial assistance. Or the condominium from study or early career times that was co-financed by the parents – even if only through guarantees. And this also applies to most of my friends who come from rather modest backgrounds or families of craftsmen.

Rather modest backgrounds and then generous help and inheritances don’t really go together.

In the normal middle class, most building families are usually equipped with small aids, but for example, in my middle-class environment (family gross income between 100 and 140 thousand euros), I don’t know anyone who was dependent on family help.

Anyone who dares to look beyond the horizon will notice that these are not the only funding pots that have run dry/are running dry.

For funding funds, the rule "while supplies last" basically always applies, because they come from funding pots.

We are currently planning a 40EE and have already calculated with the amount :/

That was exactly the problem with the previous funding: the builders included the funds in their budget planning. The builders did not need to postpone their double garages to a later construction phase or settle for carports or open parking spaces, since the funding paid for the garage. Basically, this effectively promoted garage construction!

I also think that even if there is no/less funding for a 40 house, most will continue to build a 55 as long as it’s allowed... In our case, the surcharge for the house from 55 to 40 is about 25k... And neither I nor our wallet is green enough for that...

That was a mistake of the previous funding: the immediately next level of the climate target plan was already being promoted, which ecologically convinced builders were already voluntarily aiming for. A three-tier model should have been chosen, i.e. funding only granted from the second next level onwards. Or at least the Efficiency House 55 only in combination with the granny flat (simple, not added) and the Efficiency House 40 only from the first residential unit.

I actually don’t know whether the 55 house is standard or is declared as standard because it has been built quite frequently thanks to the funding. I assumed that the Energy Saving Ordinance/Building Energy Act are the standard.

That remains to be seen, since the funding for KfW55 has ended as of today. The more builders use this as an occasion to downgrade from the Efficiency House 55 to the legal standard, the higher the likelihood that the introduction of the Efficiency House 55 as the new legal standard will be accelerated.

Simple circumstances, but paid-off houses or apartments that have massively increased in value in recent years due to inheritance and appreciation. That fits very well together. At least in the greater Munich and Hamburg areas. An apartment in Schnellsen, which was bought for little money 20 or 30 years ago, now also sells for high six-figure amounts.