Tenant protection should be strengthened: And the landlord lobby is annoyed

The aim is to give the rent control “more validity,” according to the recently published report Draft law from the Federal Ministry of Justice. If you take this formulation literally, it means: Yes, there is a price cap, which was extended by the black-red federal government for another four years, but it is often easy for landlords to circumvent it. The reform draft aims to make this more difficult in the future, so it’s about closing loopholes.

One like this loophole To date, this represents the furnishing surcharge. Landlords can charge more rent for a furnished apartment without having to state exactly how much they charge for the furnishings. The draft law describes this regulation as a “transparency problem” and therefore requires: mandatory information about the furniture surcharge. In addition, this must be based on the “current value of the furniture” and must not exceed 5 percent of the total rent for a fully furnished apartment.

At the request of the taz, the German Tenants’ Association described the planned reform as an “important and overdue step” – because only through separate designation could violations of the rent cap through the furnishing surcharge be recognized as such. According to the tenants’ association, an imbalance of power would still exist: “In tight housing markets, tenants often lack the scope to defend themselves against excessive surcharges.”

“Vote of no confidence” against landlords?

Haus & Grund, the interest group of landlords and homeowners, sees it completely differently: the draft law is “a vote of no confidence in the millions of private renters who provide the majority of rental apartments,” said the lobby organization in a press release. The lobby group sees the required labeling of furniture surcharges as a “massive bureaucratic effort for private renters”, which also has a negative impact on the housing supply.

Haus & Grund also criticizes the cap on the annual index rent increase to 3.5 percent planned in the draft. The limitation not only ignores the real costs that landlords have to bear, but also slows down the repair and modernization of apartments. This in turn endangers the substance.

While Haus & Grund represents the interests of landlords, the draft reform sees it as necessary to “protect tenants from the risk of being financially overwhelmed in times of sharp price jumps”. Another legal loophole that the draft aims to close relates to short-term rentals. This model is used to drive up rents, especially in tight housing markets. The current exceptions to the tenant protection regulations for temporary rentals will in future only apply to rental periods of up to six months. The hope is that the measure will mean that fewer tenants looking for a permanent place of residence will have to resort to temporary offers.

The German Tenants’ Association is skeptical on this point: As long as there is a housing shortage, those looking for housing will have to continue to resort to such offers. There is also a risk that landlords will increasingly offer contracts lasting six months. Since multiple short-term rentals would still be legally possible, abuse cannot be definitively ruled out.

Basically the right direction

All in all, however, the German Tenants’ Association is satisfied: for the first time, strategies to circumvent the rent cap have been specifically focused on. However, many regulations still lack the necessary binding force. The conclusion: “The draft is an important step, but it should be further refined.”

It initially remains unclear whether the coalition partner will support the plans for stronger tenant protection in the same way as the Justice Minister’s draft law Stefanie Hubig (SPD) – or whether the party takes the words of the landlord lobby to heart and implements changes in the legislative process. The CDU parliamentary group and the spokesman for housing policy, Jan-Marco Luczak, were not available for a taz query by the time of going to press.