Temporarily lease land

and what's the point of all this hassle with potential security vulnerabilities and possible problems at the bank, costs for the specialist lawyer who explains whether and how the whole thing works, etc...

it always has to be the complicated version involving lawyers and so on. as if you want to profit from it. it can also be simple. and asking the current owner doesn't cost anything to find out what kind of tax savings are actually involved. if the sale is theoretically possible and it's just about euros, you can calculate/check the additional costs of an immediate purchase and then decide whether this extra price is worth it compared to other options.

Problem: The sale cannot take place now - says the OP. This invalidates your argument. With a concluded purchase contract and a registered option agreement, no bank has problems if the transfer of ownership occurs much later - you are absolutely right and this is common practice.

What is AV in this context!?

No, that does not happen often. I estimate that in my life I have already seen thousands of financings with a financing volume of up to EUR 250 million (at various banks). Building on someone else's property (without a purchase contract for it) I have seen only once.

Hmm ... I have personally seen and experienced this several times just in the last 2-3 years. Without much thinking, I can surely come up with 5 cases!?

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

Notice of conveyance?

Auflassungsvormerkung?

That will not be enough for security.

Interesting topic here.

But I don't think we are talking about millions. And not about business people either. But about two private individuals (see initial thread).

Regardless of all fictitious and complicated solutions, a pragmatic way will have to be found here, as already written.

That's what I think.

Best regards
Thorsten

Difficult again, although it is quite simple ...

It absolutely does not matter whether the parties involved are private, commercial and/or extremely wealthy - the point is: it is possible. One can quite easily obtain a building permit on someone else’s land. The owner basically only needs to know about it, i.e. give their consent.

Problem: The sale cannot take place now - says the OP.

Wrong. According to the information from the OP, the land can already be sold now, the owner just does not want to (yet). Therefore, the purchase object is (presumably) already existing, so it can also be traded and used as collateral.

That makes your argument invalid.

Because not A, not B.

With a concluded purchase contract and registered land charge, no bank has problems if the ETU occurs much later - you are absolutely right and that is also common practice.

Oh, well then ...

*roll eyes*

One can quite easily obtain a building permit on someone else's property. The owner basically only needs to know about it, i.e. give their consent.

He doesn't even have to know yet. But I'm sure he will make his presence known on his land as soon as the construction work begins :D Rhineland greetings