Advertisement
Germany’s rental market is heading for its most interventionist reset in a decade. Federal Construction Minister Verena Hubertz is assembling the toughest tenancy-law package in years, targeting index-linked rents, furnished accommodation and rent gouging. Investors hoping for a pause in rule-making may now find the opposite is underway.
Housing affordability has shifted from policy headache to electoral liability. Six million tenants now spend more than 40% of their disposable income on housing, according to the German Tenants’ Association. The coalition agreement already mandates tighter rules in strained markets, and Hubertz is leaning into the brief. “Of course, more supply is needed through housing construction, but fair rules are also needed,” she told Funke Media Group. With building permits at a 30-year low, the political calculus is straightforward.
Hubertz’s examples land with brutal clarity. Furnished flats have become the symbol of perceived excess. “If someone puts an old couch in the corner and then charges €35 per square metre instead of €8 per square metre, and that happens in the big cities, then that has nothing to do with reasonable surcharges,” she said. Index-linked contracts producing double-digit jumps during the energy-price shock are another easy target — and neither sits comfortably with the current mood.
Index-linked rents remain a niche product — except where they concentrate. IW data show they account for 2.6% of all German tenancies and 4.1% in the top seven cities. But in buildings completed since 2014, the share rises to 19%. That clustering alone makes the segment politically irresistible and, for investors, particularly exposed.
“Because modernisation costs cannot be passed on to tenants in index-linked rental agreements, these rental agreements are particularly attractive to landlords in newer buildings,” the IW notes. The mechanism allows annual CPI-linked increases rather than adjustments tied to local comparative rents. Hubertz sees the mismatch as the core flaw: “The energy price crisis has shown how problematic it is when there are rapid double-digit rent increases in a short period of time.”
Economists caution that the deeper fault-line is the widening gap between existing rents and new contract rents. “This is a real problem, especially in large cities,” says Christian Oberst, IW economist. Tenants cling to low-cost units, turnover stalls, supply stagnates and pressure shifts to the open market. More frequent, smaller, index-based adjustments could smooth the system and avoid CPI-linked shocks — a message policymakers appear ready to absorb.
The Bundesrat has floated several fixes. Hamburg once proposed capping index-linked increases at 3.5% annually, regardless of inflation; Bavaria pushed for adjustments tied to local rent indices. Only the latter survived. Hubertz has not yet endorsed a model, but she has labelled current indexation “a problem” and asked the Justice Ministry’s expert commission to design limits. For investors underwriting new-build multi-family, this is the hinge point: capped escalators would reshape revenue projections overnight.
Hubertz’s toughest rhetoric is saved for furnished rentals. In major cities, these have become the political shorthand for opportunistic pricing — “student-flat décor at boutique-hotel rates,” as one industry observer puts it. Her first step is transparency: contracts must clearly separate basic rent from furniture surcharges. “Once this transparency has been established, we can start thinking about rules,” she said. Caps on surcharges are the logical next step.
This has direct implications for micro-living, co-living and serviced-apartment models, where furnished premiums form a core yield component. What international investors previously regarded as “market innovation” is now being reinterpreted as regulatory arbitrage — a shift with consequences.
Rent gouging, long difficult to prosecute, is also back in the frame. Hubertz wants lower thresholds and harsher penalties. Politically, this is the easiest measure to advance. Landlords testing the limits of local comparative rents risk becoming cautionary examples in Bundestag debates.
The minister is also attempting to untangle Germany’s sprawling subsidy landscape. Dozens of schemes — KNN, KFN, WEF, Jung-kauft-Alt — will be folded into one programme for new construction and one for renovations, with families prioritised. Baukindergeld could return as a grant rather than a low-interest loan. Income limits may be adjusted. EH55 subsidies will end once the construction backlog clears, as budget rules prevent subsidising legal standards.
The direction is unmistakable: Germany is tightening oversight of rental price formation, curbing CPI-driven escalators, imposing transparency on furnished segments and lowering the threshold for prosecuting abusive pricing. None of this resolves the structural supply shortage, but it DOES narrow the scope for rental-growth strategies that rely on indexation, furnished premiums or wide spreads between old and new contract rents.
Owners with stable leverage, long-term horizons and modest uplift expectations will adjust easily. Investors banking on CPI-led growth, rapid repricing or premium-heavy furnished models will face a more uncertain rulebook. Foreign capital, increasingly active in new-build multi-family, will need reassurance that long-term returns remain defensible under tighter controls.
Hubertz presents her reforms as fairness rather than punishment. But the politics of affordability have clearly overtaken the economics of yield. In the next phase of Germany’s rental market, winners will be those who price transparently, avoid regulatory grey zones and accept that the era of effortless rental uplift is coming to an end.
Get access to selected articles
