KfW Energy Efficient Building

... I completely agree with you
I have a question, maybe you know:
If you build separate residential units, do you have to finance them separately (possibly a separation for the tax office), or can you finance the costs for both units together in one pot?

Regards, Yvonne

For the tax office, it may make sense to take out separate loans. However, interest can also be allocated proportionally to the owner-occupied and rented portion based on m². Separate loans have the advantage that I can prioritize repaying the loan for the owner-occupied portion (higher repayment rate/special repayment), while the loan for the rented portion, for example, is repaid at only 1%.

... I’m completely with you.
If you build separate residential units, do you have to finance them separately (possibly a separation for tax purposes), or are you allowed to finance the costs for both residential units collectively in one pot?

I don’t actually know, especially when it comes to tax-related aspects. I strongly advise consulting a tax advisor.

And now to my experiences and thoughts on this. As Musketier already says, you don’t have to do anything and can finance everything from one pot, but if the tax advisor isn’t on the ball, it can very quickly lead to unwanted interpretations by the tax office. Also, separating two residential units within one loan is not always that simple. If you want to make life easier for yourself, the tax advisor, and the tax office, then I would separate both residential units as much as possible on the credit side and have the purpose of use documented somewhere by the bank for each loan. (For example, residential unit ground floor, residential unit first floor, etc.) This way you have the advantage that you can use different repayment shares and pay off the owner-occupied apartment faster, while the larger interest share applies to the rented apartment.

By the way, I would always make this separation if renting out at some point (even if only in 10 or 20 years) actually seems realistic or is planned. Because after that time, dividing a loan (or even several, house bank, KFW 153, 124, other promotional loans) in a way that the tax office can understand and accept without major discussion... I don’t know, nobody (including the tax advisor) really feels like doing that.

However, I don’t want to leave out a possible disadvantage. Some banks have different conditions between owner-occupied residential property and rented properties, which can lead to an increase in interest costs (but doesn’t have to). That depends on negotiation skills. Note on this: Here too, a shift of interest costs (cheaper interest for owner occupation, more expensive interest for rental use) can potentially lead to a tax advantage.

You probably mean the KfW home ownership program. Energy-efficient construction is independent of rental status. You can also build a residential complex with 100 apartments and receive funding 100 times (often used for senior homes where there are independent apartments and not just rooms ==> has proven to be very profitable for investors in the past).

Thank you, yes, that’s what I meant. I only knew that owner-occupied apartments/houses were subsidized.

hm, if I allocate all financings per housing unit, then I have 50k KfW low-interest loan for each housing unit – or could I (caution, simplified calculation!) for three financings with 2x50k KfW and 1x100k "regular bank" also calculate for tax purposes as 2x50k KfW for the self-used unit and 1x100k for the rented unit? The "regular bank loan" should, after all, have higher interest than the KfW...

Thanks, yes that's what I meant. I only knew that owner-occupied apartments/houses are subsidized.

commercial buildings (hotel, office, etc.) are not financed (at least with the 50k-per-unit program), maybe that's what you meant?