Objection to real estate transfer tax

If someone wants exactly such an object, they also know what is coming their way regarding real estate transfer tax.

If someone buys land and house separately from different people ("...not dependent on each other..."), but the two later turn out to have already spoken on the phone before and a tax official finds out, you have lost 200% and have to pay. Litigation is completely pointless. This can be proven, names are known.

Tip from the tax office: Buy land, leave it fallow for 7 years, then have someone else build on it or build yourself. This way no tax official should become suspicious and be able to construct a connection between the land seller and the builder.

Very realistic. Applies to everyone whose last name is Croesus.

Do barking dogs bite? Could it possibly be that those whose "names are known" are among the smart alecks who bought the land from the wife/brother/aunt of the builder or who fell for such an offer?

Dogs that are hit bark? Could it possibly be that those whose "names are known" belong to the smart alecks who bought the property from the wife/the brother/the aunt of the builder or fell for such an offer?

If that had been the case, they probably would have deserved nothing else but to be shot at by dear old Uncle State.

Since I know the case in detail, I can assure you that this was not the case and both were acquired independently of each other.

The only stupid thing is that one of the two was already under the tax office’s radar, i.e. was being monitored, and once spoke on the phone with the other. It ended up hitting the unsuspecting builder, who then wanted to cheat the state. Really stupid outcome.

Besides, I would be reluctant to call the builder a dog. Even if in Bavaria they say: "They’re already dogs." But that does not apply in this case.

It's not that dramatic. We also bought the property here, together with a planning and demolition contract from a single source. We bought, demolished, and built in the same year (completion the following year). The tax office kept asking questions, we constantly had to fill out new forms, which contained some pitfalls that we recognized. The tax office tried to establish a connection between the construction contract and the purchase of the property, which never actually existed. There were also questions like: "why did you choose the current construction company." That really is none of the tax office's business and I was quite tempted to answer: "because the contractor has such beautiful blue eyes," but I just managed to hold back... In the end, we received the notice: real estate transfer tax only on the property, nothing else!

The objection against the property tax assessment notice of the municipality (not the real estate transfer tax!) alone does not achieve anything, you really have to challenge the fundamental assessment notice from the responsible tax office (unit value), or both together, otherwise the whole thing is futile.

But does it even bring anything? Possibly the municipalities are allowed to keep too much collected money after all. The ftd writes on this:
"If Karlsruhe were now to stop the unit valuation of properties, even the refund of the property tax already paid would be considered. However, it is also conceivable that the Federal Constitutional Court will be lenient towards the city treasurers and grant the legislature a deadline for a new regulation."