New building with granny flat - general contractor restricts rental and KfW funding

Um, yes. The state promotes with up to 45,000 euros - financed from taxes - something so that it is not used in the sense of the promotion, sure. Living space is not an end in itself. It must also be used and the purpose of the promotion is that there is living space for MORE people.

But no X5 Hybrid driver is forced to operate the subsidized car electrically either. :rolleyes:

First of all, I question: Where does it say that? Do you have a source?

I cannot name a source, but we have a granny flat and it has its own ventilation system. The general contractor actually wanted to install just one system for both units at first, we didn’t want that and our expert also said it’s not allowed. A tenant must be able to regulate the system themselves, it can’t be that a tenant has to accept the settings just as the landlord wants them for their own unit.

The purpose of the funding is to create LIVING SPACE for MORE people.

At least that is not stated as a funding purpose in the guideline, it says: The aim of this guideline is to stimulate investments in comprehensive measures to increase energy efficiency and the share of renewable energies in final energy consumption for heating and cooling in residential buildings in Germany, and to reduce CO2 emissions in the building sector in Germany. The construction and renovation of residential buildings that feature energetically optimized construction and technical systems and meet the requirements defined in the technical minimum standards of this guideline in terms of overall energy efficiency (reference: primary energy demand) and the energy efficiency of the building envelope (reference: transmission heat loss) to achieve an efficiency house standard, are supported. Coherence with CO2 pricing and efficient use of funds with regard to the CO2 savings achieved is taken into account. The funding guideline contributes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the building sector to 70 million tons of CO2 equivalents by 2030, thereby achieving both national and European energy and climate targets by 2030. Moreover, the funding guideline implements the 2019 decisions of the Climate Cabinet and the Climate Protection Program 2030. With this guideline, approximately 50,000 comprehensive measures per year (full renovations to or new construction of efficiency houses) for residential buildings are to be approved, with a gross investment volume of around 32 billion euros, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 520,000 tons of CO2 annually. Your interpretation is certainly not wrong, but at least from those who designed this thing, it is not mentioned with a single word. *shrugs*

I can’t name a source, but we have a granny flat and it has its own ventilation system. The general contractor actually wanted to install only one system for both units at first, we didn’t want that, and our expert also said that’s not allowed. A tenant must be able to regulate the system themselves; it can’t be that a tenant has to accept the settings just the way the landlord wants it for themselves.

As far as I understand, there are several requirement catalogs that need to be considered here. On the one hand, of course, the KFW requirement on “What is a dwelling unit,” then also the KFW requirements for efficiency classes. Depending on the class, there are different points that must be complied with. And then naturally the state building codes and such. I mean, I’m no expert, but after reading the guideline and the Building Energy Act, there seem to be very, very many things that influence each other and create dependencies that then become mandatory, even though this is nowhere explicitly stated.

It is exactly such an attitude that is why social coexistence does not work.

Or the nonsense with plug-in hybrid cars where the luxury upper-class body is subsidized and at 70% of the cars during inspection, the charging cable is still in its original packaging in the trunk.

When a subsidy is introduced with taxpayers' money to create living space that is in short supply, the purpose is hardly that single households use this to get more living space and money for more living space.

But no X5 hybrid driver is forced to operate the subsidized car electrically. :rolleyes:

Exactly, now you got it: NO ONE who drives a X5 PHEV is doing something wrong or committing fraud because they only have to pay tax on half, because: As long as there is no requirement in the law stating that they must also use the vehicle electrically, it is the policy that messed up. No one needs to feel guilty about that. Guess what: If you drive a Tesla Model 3 Performance, you only have to pay tax on a quarter of the gross list price. And it’s not that simple with the KFW subsidy either: Read what it says. And what it does NOT say cannot be "read into" either. End of story. BTW, it is always exciting how certain people here in the forum are not helpful at all but just try to make the OP feel guilty - whether out of envy, personal dissatisfaction, or whatever. You definitely don’t help the OP if you tell him to look up the criminal code or to feel bad.

It’s so simple: The energy consultant you need signs off on meeting the requirements. If he doesn’t, then you have to check the facts and make improvements. Otherwise, there’s no subsidy. Likewise, the PHEV driver does NOT get the half-taxation if they cannot drive at least 40 km electrically or if they emit too much CO2.