Unfortunately, it has to be: The house in case of inheritance, spousal protection

Hello everyone.
One should take care of such matters early, so I am doing that right now and encountering some pitfalls. Has anyone maybe already solved this question for themselves? I look forward to opinions:

Case: A married couple buys a house together and lives in it. The marriage remains permanently childless. The spouses appoint each other as sole heirs in the Berlin will without naming final heirs (or with the clause that the last surviving spouse can freely dispose of the inheritance, including the appointment of a final heir at their own discretion).
So far so good.

Unfortunately, it is not that simple because when one of the spouses dies, the house does not completely pass to the surviving spouse. Instead, the parents of the deceased receive at least the compulsory portion, which amounts to 25% for both parents together (if both are still alive). If the relationship with the daughter-in-law/son-in-law, who still lives in the house, is not the best, it could happen that the parents-in-law demand the compulsory portion, sue for it, or enforce it through compulsory partition auction.

To prevent this, there are two possibilities: either try to delay the payment by applying for a deferral, which seems uncertain to me.
The other possibility would be to significantly reduce the value of the compulsory portion by registering a mutual usufruct right during the lifetime of both spouses.

The usufruct value is determined by age and annual value (5%) of the property, for example, with a value of 200,000 euros and an age of the entitled person between 30-50, it would be 10,000 * 15 (years of remaining use assumed tabularly) according to § 52 Court and Notary Costs Act, which makes 150,000 euros. The property in the forced sale would thus only be worth 50,000 euros.
Only 25,000 euros of this would belong to the inheritance (with 1/2 ownership of each partner), so 25% compulsory portion would be a measly 6,250 euros still due to both parents together.
Since the inheritance event would occur (long) after the usufruct right is registered, the usufruct right would also have priority and would not expire in the case of a compulsory auction by a compulsory portion beneficiary.
Even if it had lower priority (e.g., if the financing bank would enforce the remaining debt due to the surviving spouse’s insolvency), the surviving spouse would at least be entitled to a monthly compensation pension. This is what I have researched so far.

However, I do not fully understand the last point. This would mean that one only has to register a usufruct right and could then secure housing and financial rights such as rental income from the bank even in the event of insolvency, or a compensation pension? But that is another topic.

Have you ever thought about what should happen to your house in the event of inheritance, or maybe also the constellation "no children, but parents should also not inherit"?
All with the aim that the surviving spouse is secured, does not end up ruined due to excessive financial claims (for example, if a parent is dependent on social assistance, the authorities would come and hold out their hand), and does not end up on the street?

Just a quick keyword: inform yourself about [Pflichtteilverzicht]. I don't know if that would be possible in this constellation.

With a good relationship with the parents, they can quite easily waive their compulsory portion. Alternatively, I would not work with usufruct but with a right of residence to be able to stay in the apartment. In case of doubt, it also reduces the value of the property even to zero.

With usufruct, one can also stay in the apartment but additionally has other rights, such as being able to rent out the house and keep the rental income. With a right of residence, this would not be the case, meaning if one, for example, moves into a nursing home and no longer lives there, that is the end of it.

With a good relationship, the whole thing would be no problem. But one cannot necessarily rely on that. The parents-in-law could, for example, think that the surviving spouse has to give up the house and instead buy a small apartment from the proceeds. Although there would still be the option to apply for a deferral, there is at least the risk that in weighing the interests, the house would have to be sold if the heirs themselves need money. Everything is not so simple.

With a right of residence, that would not be the case, i.e. if you go into a nursing home, so no longer live there, that’s it.

That’s true, but if you become in need of care, do you then want to keep and rent out the house or do you perhaps have completely different "problems"? I am glad to be able to sell the house.

Just a question for you, what exactly do you want and why? Maybe there are better tips then.

The property would only be worth 50,000 euros in the forced auction.

But only if the bank is subordinated. If you have financing on the property, a right (whether usufruct or right of residence) will be exclusively subordinated, thus not changing the value of the object in the auction, since it will be removed for the highest bidder.

Lifetime right of residence. Then they can try to sell it.