ᐅ Moving in before transfer of ownership / usufruct / rental agreement – disadvantages?

Frischluft schrieb:

If it’s important:
The mentioned apartment still has an outstanding loan. The parents are the borrowers.

Who will assume the debt? Will the usufruct right then be registered as a subordinate lien?

Grundaus schrieb:

Which house in a rural area is worth 600,000 euros?

No house, an apartment in poor condition.

Grundaus schrieb:

Over 8 pages, the wildest speculations have been made here, although many mistakes have already been made on your side. Which house in a rural area is worth €600,000? Why wasn’t it rented out even though there is still debt on it? The whole effort with lease agreements, usufruct, and gifts is all unnecessary. The debts must be settled beforehand, who takes them over and pays them. Financing for someone just returning from abroad for a property burdened with usufruct is difficult. The value is below the threshold of €400,000, so both gift tax and later inheritance tax do not apply. Anyone can move in anywhere without a lease, without rent, without it affecting anything later. And whether the house is handed over now or in 3 months or 3 years doesn’t matter.

Thank you for your opinion, but why such a "harsh" tone?

For clarification:

• I never said or wrote that the apartment is worth €600,000 / has a value of €600,000. See #42.
• It just wasn’t supposed to be rented out, that was not desired. It might sound strange, but that’s how it is, it does happen. It was always intended for personal use, but original timelines have changed, and that’s how it came about.
• I never said it was in poor condition, only that the kitchen is old. Maybe “more bad than good” was misunderstood, but it referred exclusively to the kitchen, meaning the kitchen furniture and appliances.
- Quote from #1 -
An apartment was acquired by parents and has stood empty ever since, but it would basically be ready to move in immediately (more bad than good, but there is a working bathroom and an old kitchen (with old but functioning appliances).
- End quote -

• The property / apartment is currently not burdened with usufruct. Usufruct is a planned model for the way forward, which I presented here in the discussion, a consideration. We thought it was a good and also a common approach. Meanwhile, one could think this is the stupidest thing to do, when reading all this and absorbing it. OK, that requires reconsideration, which I already mentioned.

Once again here, thanks for the information and the suggestion to reconsider this.

nordanney schrieb:

Who takes on the debt? Is the usufruct registered as a subordinate charge?

No house, an apartment in poor condition.

Good question.

To avoid the costs of refinancing the loan and the associated fees, as well as to avoid taxes related to "speculation," meaning costs arising from the sale of a private property within 10 years, we considered having the parents, the donors, continue the loan. Good or bad idea?

I’m not exactly sure what “subordinate registration” means. I’ll have to look it up—sorry, as I mentioned earlier, I’m not familiar with this.

I have already written something about the supposedly poor condition.

Good luck.

Frischluft schrieb:

To avoid rewriting the loan and the related fees, as well as to avoid the burden of "speculation," meaning the costs associated with the "private sale within 10 years" rule, we considered having the parents, the gift-givers, continue the loan. Good or bad idea?

Loans cannot simply be transferred. Having the parents continue the loan is actually sensible. By the way, the loan has nothing to do with the speculation tax—you have to pay that if applicable, regardless of whether the apartment is financed or not.

Frischluft schrieb:

I don’t exactly know what "subordinate registration" means. I’ll have to look it up—sorry, I’m not familiar with this as I mentioned earlier.

Brief explanation:
In the land register, there’s the rule "first come, first served." For a forced sale, this means that the rights are honored in their order of priority. If the right of usufruct (usufructuary right) is registered first (i.e., before the mortgage), it remains valid even during the forced sale—this protects you. However, no bank will finance a property like that, and no one will want to buy it (who wants to buy something where rent goes to a third party?). But if the usufruct is subordinate to the mortgage, the bank will be happy because in the event of a forced sale, the bank gets paid off and the usufruct is simply deleted. That’s bad for you because then the usufruct right disappears.

Frischluft schrieb:

I already wrote something about the supposedly poor condition.

It read differently in your initial post.

Thank you.

And yes, that was expressed poorly.

PS:
We will read through everything again over the next few days and reconsider it.