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

Then you just build in the cheapest way possible, and all the eco-saving frills stay out. If that's what you want, be my guest. Without all the incentives, no one would come up with the idea to build in the 40/+/EE/XYZ regions themselves.

But which home builder actually offers that? I would love to build cheaper, but I haven't met anyone who builds below KFW40/55 and also passes on the cost savings... serious question, who builds cheaper without KFW requirements?

I would extremely welcome it if the entire CO2 tax were no longer allowed to be passed on to the tenant. That would directly motivate landlords to use the reserves sensibly for energy-efficient renovations. Subsidies only against the obligation not to raise the rent for x years.

Always this perversion of believing as if there were a fundamental right to a positive return. Ownership entails obligations.

In your opinion, there would be no landlords anymore, because who would voluntarily put tenants into a property renovated at their own expense, sue off the parasites, sink enormous amounts of lawyer and court costs, be laughed at in the face, and as the crowning glory, even store the furniture at their own expense, only to completely renovate the place again months later? And you talk about positive returns...?!?

Then it will just be built in the cheapest way possible and all the eco-saving frills will be left out. If that's what you want, fine. Without all the incentives, no one would come up with the idea to build in regions with 40/+/EE/XYZ on their own.

yeah, because living totally comfortably and cheaply in poorly insulated, huge houses with rising energy costs … We call that Cutting off the nose to spite the face.

Admittedly, these days you really have to make an effort to be below 55 standard among home builders. But jokes like photovoltaics, batteries, controlled residential ventilation, energy consultants, etc. are no longer absolutely necessary. If necessary, you can live quite OK without them.

who should still rent out property in the future if they have to forego positive returns?

In your opinion, there would be no landlords anymore

Then more houses and apartments will come onto the market and prices will normalize.

Addendum: Of course, the return must be positive. But if renovation is necessary and it is negative for three years, that must be okay sometimes. No one is forced to be a landlord.

Admittedly, nowadays you really have to make an effort to get below the 55 standard with house builders. But jokes like photovoltaics, batteries, controlled residential ventilation, energy consultants, etc. are no longer absolutely necessary. If needed, one can also live quite OK without them.

And even this standard is significantly better than the condition of unrenovated old buildings. Ultimately, therefore, an empty threat.