Hello everyone,
We are currently buying a house, and something very strange happened that I’m not sure how to handle.
A bit of background: after a long search and countless viewings, we finally managed to get a house.
The viewing had to be arranged at very short notice, and there was no time for my partner to join. (Luckily, I recorded everything on video.)
My partner never saw the house from the inside but was still convinced by the videos and the location, so we signed the purchase contract.
Now to the situation:
We met the real estate agent (almost) for the first time when signing the purchase contract; before that, there were only a few phone calls where he requested the financing confirmation and informed us about the notary appointment.
All other contact and the viewing were conducted with the neighbor, who is a friend of the owner.
Shortly before the notary appointment, the agent wanted to meet again. He then offered me to pay the €20,000 (about $21,500) commission in cash right after the notary appointment to avoid taxes, which could save us almost €3,000 (about $3,200).
(I have to admit, at the time I thought he meant we could save the 3% VAT, so I said it probably shouldn’t be that much.)
I declined the offer, which obviously didn’t please him...
Later, after talking to someone else, I realized that he was actually suggesting an undeclared cash payment, completely without paying 16% or 19% VAT.
A quick calculation confirmed that we would have paid about €17,000 (about $18,300) in total.
Still, I was glad to refuse because we included the commission in our financing and would have had no proof of payment.
Now here’s the strange part:
We have just received an invoice for the full €20,000 (about $21,500), which states that no VAT is due due to the small business regulation (Kleinunternehmerregelung).
This confuses me a lot. If he doesn’t have to charge VAT, how could he make the previous offer?
The company looks well-established, offers many services, and according to the website has been around for 20 years. (In theory, it could still be possible that he qualifies as a small business under VAT rules.)
I don’t understand any of this.
At the same time, he seems to be a very close friend of the owner, and we don’t want to upset him since we haven’t taken possession of the house yet.
The payment deadline on the invoice is the day after tomorrow.
I would appreciate any advice.
Best regards
We are currently buying a house, and something very strange happened that I’m not sure how to handle.
A bit of background: after a long search and countless viewings, we finally managed to get a house.
The viewing had to be arranged at very short notice, and there was no time for my partner to join. (Luckily, I recorded everything on video.)
My partner never saw the house from the inside but was still convinced by the videos and the location, so we signed the purchase contract.
Now to the situation:
We met the real estate agent (almost) for the first time when signing the purchase contract; before that, there were only a few phone calls where he requested the financing confirmation and informed us about the notary appointment.
All other contact and the viewing were conducted with the neighbor, who is a friend of the owner.
Shortly before the notary appointment, the agent wanted to meet again. He then offered me to pay the €20,000 (about $21,500) commission in cash right after the notary appointment to avoid taxes, which could save us almost €3,000 (about $3,200).
(I have to admit, at the time I thought he meant we could save the 3% VAT, so I said it probably shouldn’t be that much.)
I declined the offer, which obviously didn’t please him...
Later, after talking to someone else, I realized that he was actually suggesting an undeclared cash payment, completely without paying 16% or 19% VAT.
A quick calculation confirmed that we would have paid about €17,000 (about $18,300) in total.
Still, I was glad to refuse because we included the commission in our financing and would have had no proof of payment.
Now here’s the strange part:
We have just received an invoice for the full €20,000 (about $21,500), which states that no VAT is due due to the small business regulation (Kleinunternehmerregelung).
This confuses me a lot. If he doesn’t have to charge VAT, how could he make the previous offer?
The company looks well-established, offers many services, and according to the website has been around for 20 years. (In theory, it could still be possible that he qualifies as a small business under VAT rules.)
I don’t understand any of this.
At the same time, he seems to be a very close friend of the owner, and we don’t want to upset him since we haven’t taken possession of the house yet.
The payment deadline on the invoice is the day after tomorrow.
I would appreciate any advice.
Best regards
Wolkensieben9 Jan 2021 21:34Snowy36 schrieb:
Is that just a guess that it works that way, or do you actually know? I've always wondered about it...You agree to that with every bank account opening.Snowy36 schrieb:
Is that just a guess that it works that way, or do you actually know? I've always wondered about it...Try searching for "account inquiry" or "account access" to find out who is allowed to view your account information based on legitimate interest.A real estate agent usually requires the tax identification number from both buyer and seller, so that in case of a tax audit they can name the contracting parties to the tax authorities.
Wolkensieben schrieb:
You agree to this every time you open an account.
Just Google account inquiry or account investigation to see who is allowed to access your account with legitimate interest. Sorry, but I can't leave this statement so misleading. An account inquiry only shows who opened the account, when it was opened and possibly closed, and who holds any authorizations.
You do not get any insight into the account balance or the transactions.
The claim that the tax office or other authorities can look at the account at any time is simply not true.
Wolkensieben10 Jan 2021 00:12Wiesel29 schrieb:
Sorry, but I can’t leave this misleading statement uncorrected. When querying bank accounts, you can only see who opened the account, when it was opened and possibly closed, and who holds authorizations.
You do not get access to the account balance or transaction details.
The claim that the tax office or other authorities can check the account at any time is simply incorrect. Of course, your neighbor at the tax office does not see how much money you have in your account or whether you are receiving social benefits.
I wrote “with legitimate interest”:
Account Inquiry Procedure
On April 1, 2005, the “Act to Promote Tax Honesty” came into effect. Since then, account inquiries can be conducted in certain procedures for evidentiary purposes. The purpose of the law is to ensure fair and consistent taxation for all citizens. In addition, the account inquiry is used, among other things, to combat money laundering and terrorism financing, prevent social benefit fraud, and support the enforcement of public and private claims.
The automated retrieval of account information is regulated in Section 24c of the German Banking Act (Kreditwesengesetz - KWG) in conjunction with Sections 93 (7) to (10) and 93b of the Fiscal Code (Abgabenordnung - AO). Further regulations can be found in the application decree to the Fiscal Code (Anwendungserlass zur Abgabenordnung - AEAO) regarding Section 93.
From Section 93b:
(2) The Federal Central Tax Office may, in the cases of Section 93 paragraphs 7 and 8, upon request, automatically retrieve certain data from the file systems maintained under paragraphs 1 and 1a from the credit institutions and transmit them to the requesting party. The identification number according to Section 139b of an authorized person or a beneficial owner may only be disclosed by the Federal Central Tax Office to tax authorities.
(3) The requester is responsible for the legality of the data retrieval and transmission.
All of this is publicly available. It’s not a problem at all if you are an honest person.
Banks also regularly send the General Terms and Conditions, which I’m sure almost no one reads.
Snowy36 schrieb:
Just because it would be possible, nobody regularly checks the accounts of real estate agents. Not regularly, but unusual situations (real estate agents and small business owners) increase the likelihood of being targeted for a tax audit. Therefore, the suspicion that the agent might consistently cut corners during licensing as a form of concealment is not far-fetched. I would probably ask the agent directly if they have any objections to verifying that they are not hiding anything from the tax authorities ;-)
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Wolkensieben schrieb:
Of course, your neighbor doesn’t check with the tax office how much money you have in your account or whether you receive social assistance.
I wrote about “legitimate interest”:
Account Information Retrieval Procedure
On April 1, 2005, the “Act to Promote Tax Honesty” came into effect. Since then, account information retrieval can be conducted in certain procedures for evidence gathering. The purpose of the law is to ensure uniform and fair taxation of all citizens. Additionally, account information retrieval serves to combat money laundering and terrorism financing, prevent social benefit fraud, and support the enforcement of public and private claims.
The automated retrieval of account information is regulated in § 24c KWG in conjunction with § 93 paragraphs 7 to 10, as well as § 93b AO. Further regulations are included in the application decree to the tax code (AEAO) on § 93.
Excerpt from § 93 B:
(2) The Federal Central Tax Office may, upon request in the cases of § 93 paragraphs 7 and 8, retrieve individual data from the database systems maintained according to paragraphs 1 and 1a at credit institutions via an automated procedure and transmit it to the requester. The identification number under § 139b of an authorized person or an economic beneficiary may only be disclosed by the Federal Central Tax Office to tax authorities.
(3) The responsibility for the legality of data retrieval and transmission lies with the requester.
All this is documented and not a problem if you are honest.
Banks also regularly send the general terms and conditions; I’m sure hardly anyone reads them.And where does it say that account balances or transactions may or can be retrieved?