Property purchase - Risk of a "linked transaction"?

Unfortunately, I only briefly skimmed over the GbR matter earlier. And there is also living according to the WEG, there are community projects, there is great living together. There are alternative ways to get a house, and actually a house-building forum should not constantly speak badly about these options, because every offer has its target group. There are configurations, it all makes sense that these offers exist.

Any idea how I could secure myself there? Does the tax office even get wind of such arrangements or does it ultimately depend on what is stated in the notary contract?

For example, there is the way to sign the land purchase in one year, and the construction contract in the other year. Or to have a lot of time between the two contracts. I bet that "first the land, then the construction contract" is more likely to be seen as independent transactions than the other way around. But how do you want to secure yourself in front of law, justice and order? You usually secure yourself with or before a future risk... it is what it is: you want to build with this house company. No land, no house. The house company has now brokered a piece of land. And where would the risk be now? It’s about some money... five digits, but not the world. Sure, it would be nice if you don't have to pay it. But what is this about? If you are afraid (-> security), then wait for the next piece of land. It’s that simple. If you will be upset if the tax office actually sees a linked transaction, then leave it. If you don't have 20,000€ (or however much it may be) to spare, then just forget about building the house altogether. Maybe you’ll be lucky, maybe not.

Of course, developed plots are expensive

more expensive. Of course, you have to pay for sewage, electricity and water to be easily accessible. Either way.

Before thinking about the dream house: go to the building authority, take care yourself whether it is buildable or not.

I would do that too.

that in principle both parties can be obligated to pay (§ 13 Nr. 1 Grunderwerbsteuergesetz according to Wikipedia).

That's true. but it is absolutely uncommon in sales to private individuals. Of course, you can try to impose it on the seller in the contract. I don't think that will be successful.

Here lies the root of the problem. I’d be surprised if they don’t have a contract with each other. And then it’s a tied deal.

I suspect so too

Yes, developed plots here unfortunately usually cost so much that in the end you can only put a doghouse on them

From what I gather you already know that yours is not developed to build a house on.

Maybe I am completely on the wrong track here or we are somehow talking past each other... my understanding of the process: Each buyer obtains financing confirmation separately for their share of the property (this is also required by the seller). My financial advisor also said that he sees no disadvantages for us in the process via GbR.

A GbR is a partnership without its own legal personality, and extremely dangerous for its partners (who must be able to trust each other C-O-M-P-L-E-T-E-L-Y). With regard to real estate transactions (possession, development, encumbrance), I see a GbR formed by a married couple as the only form of GbR for which I can imagine the trust of third parties. With three partners, a GbR is a small bomb, and with at least five (theoretically, in practice I know none like this) it is a kamikaze mission for gamblers who find classic Russian Roulette not thrilling enough. Therefore, I see two possibilities here, AND I DO NOT LIKE EITHER: - A) this is how I understood your statements - The buyers are supposed to form a GbR together, this GbR buys the entire property from the seller, divides it, dissolves, and hands over the partial plots to its partners. Then the partners of the GbR would have to secure the money they borrowed with a share in the whole property, which they own as a partnership with the other GbR buddies. That also means: all their banks would have to be registered in the land register of the whole property, which belongs to the partnership. I cannot imagine that without all the banks of all involved GbR buddies having to thoroughly scrutinize ALL OF THEM — not just their own customers — as financing borrowers with a "yes" result. If you manage that, the devil goes to the monastery. - B) this is how I can imagine it better - You misunderstood the procedure, and it is not you buyers who should all join together in one GbR, but each of you should form each a GbR with the seller. Then, once all the buyer-and-he-GbRs are established, the seller divides the property and sells the parcels to the "He-and-You GbR," the "He-and-Fritz GbR," the "He-and-Franz GbR," and so on. Because of his respectively half share, these are not sales (he thinks!), and he then withdraws from each GbR afterwards. I would see this as an abuse of structure not only in the tax law sense. Also keep in mind that criminal law speaks of a "gang" from three perpetrators onwards! The seller’s tax advisor might consider this a brilliant coup, but you would seriously burn your fingers by participating in such an alleged win-win.

The FA will send a questionnaire at some point. It must be filled out truthfully. Then it decides whether it is a tied transaction or not.

Is this questionnaire standardized? Can I view it somewhere in advance?

I find it strange nowadays that a landowner is looking for buyers. Where’s the proverbial catch here?

That’s because the seller himself lives there (on a future neighboring plot) and therefore has an interest in who buys/builds there. I have already met the person several times in person and would be extremely mistaken if in the end it were all just deception.

And I have a bad feeling because of the statement that developed plots are so expensive.

What amounts are we talking about here? 80 euros per sqm from him and 360 euros on the open market? Please give some figures.

I expressed myself poorly; by “developed plot” I meant what is usually offered by real estate agents – “everything developed, building like this and that, you can start tomorrow.” Here it is a somewhat longer “process” (we have been in contact for several months and it is rather slow going because the seller is trying to ensure the buildability and is in contact with some authorities, we have seen the emails about that, so it is transparent). Ultimately, however, the plot including the planned development costs (approx. €35,000 per party for the dead-end street and a few other items) will be significantly cheaper than other offers (which admittedly have significantly better infrastructure, but that premium isn’t worth it to us — we prefer nature). Plot prices here are otherwise around €700-800/sqm.

All my alarm bells are ringing. [...]
I have the feeling you might fall for the “short sale” that 11ant mentioned.

Relax ;) I am really not as naive as it apparently sounds here! What exactly is meant by “short sale” here? As I said, the plot and the owner both exist, I have seen both in real life.

Unfortunately, I only briefly skimmed the GbR thing earlier. [...]
... but it is what it is: you want to build with this housing company. Without land, no house. The house company has now brokered a plot. And where would the risk be now? It’s about some money... five figures, but not the world.
Sure, it would be nice if you didn’t have to pay it.

Sure, it wouldn’t be the end of the world. Still annoying if in the end it could have been avoided by small details during the process or contract. That’s why this thread exists. But it certainly wouldn’t be a “show-stopper” for the purchase.

True. But absolutely unusual in sales to private individuals. Of course, you can try to impose it on the seller in the contract. I don’t think that will be successful.

If it is included in the purchase price, it should not matter to the seller, right? But presumably either it’s not legal or it still does not exempt me from a tied sale?

Therefore, I see two possibilities here, AND I DON’T LIKE EITHER:

- A ) as I understood your explanations -
The buyers are supposed to form a GbR together; this GbR buys the entire property from the seller, divides it up, dissolves itself and hands over the subplots to its partners. Then the partners of the GbR would have to secure the money lent to them with a share in an overall plot which belongs to them as a partnership with the other GbR buddies. That would also mean: all their banks would have to be entered in the land register of the overall plot, which belongs to the partnership. I can’t imagine that without the banks of all the involved GbR buddies having to thoroughly check ALL OF THEM — not just their own clients — as financing borrowers with a “yes” result. If you manage that, then the devil has gone into the monastery.

- B ) this I could imagine more -
You misunderstood the approach, and it is not that you buyers should all join together in one GbR, but each of you should form each a GbR with the seller. Then, once all the buyer-and-he GbRs are established, the seller divides the plot and sells the parcels to the “He-and-you GbR,” the “He-and-Fritz GbR,” the “He-and-Franz GbR,” and so on. Because of his respective half share, these are not sales (he thinks!). Then he withdraws from the respective GbRs again afterwards. I would see that as abusive structuring not only in the tax law sense. Keep in mind, criminal law speaks of a “gang” from three offenders! The seller’s tax advisor might consider this a brilliant coup, but you would get seriously burnt playing along in such an apparent win-win.

Okay, I see that I definitely need more clarity on that point. I will try to find out exactly how it is supposed to work; hopefully this will clear up the fog here. As I said, I personally met the seller and wouldn’t want to assume criminal intentions or half-baked ideas — it sounded as if he has already informed himself extensively on the topic.

So I didn’t find a form sheet. But here someone writes quite extensively about what is being asked. https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/fragebogen-finanzamt-zur-bemessung-der-Grunderwerbsteuer.33227/ Yes, I had already asked there as well. It was about another property that ultimately didn’t happen. It’s interesting that apparently construction still hasn’t started there. At least not when I drove past a few weeks ago.