RENODIARYRENOVATION MANAGER
DEEN Start for free
DE
Tax & Depreciation Buying & Valuation

Estate Agent Commission in Germany: Who Pays It in 2026

Last updated: 30 August 2026 · Reading time approx. 9 minutes

"Since 2020 the agent's commission is always split" — that line appears in hundreds of German property listings, and for investors it is regularly wrong. The splitting rule covers only two types of property and only consumer buyers. Buy an apartment block and you still pay whatever was negotiated. Buy a condominium and you may hold a claim you never knew about. This article shows where the line runs, what a breach costs — and why the commission does almost nothing for you in the year you buy.

The splitting rule has a narrow scope

Sections 656a to 656d of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, BGB) govern agent commission on a property purchase. Two filters sit in series; both must be met, or there is no split.

Filter 1 — the property. § 656c (1) sentence 1 BGB speaks expressly of a "Kaufvertrag über eine Wohnung oder ein Einfamilienhaus" — a purchase contract for an apartment or a single-family house. Apartment blocks, commercial property, bare land and garages are not named and are therefore not covered.

Filter 2 — the buyer. § 656b BGB states it in a single sentence: "Die §§ 656c und 656d gelten nur, wenn der Käufer ein Verbraucher ist" — sections 656c and 656d apply only where the buyer is a consumer. Under § 13 BGB a consumer is "jede natürliche Person, die ein Rechtsgeschäft zu Zwecken abschließt, die überwiegend weder ihrer gewerblichen noch ihrer selbständigen beruflichen Tätigkeit zugerechnet werden können" — any natural person entering into a transaction for purposes predominantly outside a trade or independent profession. A GmbH is out; a natural person is not automatically in. What matters is the purpose of the specific transaction.

The text-form requirement always applies. § 656a BGB requires an agency contract for an apartment or single-family house to be in text form — and it sits before the consumer restriction of § 656b BGB. So a commission promised verbally across the kitchen table is formally void regardless of who is buying.

Which of the two situations are you in?

Within the scope, the statute distinguishes two cases, depending on whether the agent works for both sides or only one.

SituationProvisionWhat applies
Dual agency — the agent is paid by buyer and seller § 656c (1) BGB Both sides may only commit "in gleicher Höhe", in equal amounts — 50% of the total each. If the agent works for one side free of charge, it may take nothing from the other. A waiver granted to one side automatically benefits the other.
Single mandate — only the seller engaged the agent, but the cost is to be passed to the buyer § 656d (1) BGB Passing the cost on is only valid if the principal remains liable for the commission "mindestens in gleicher Höhe" — at least in the same amount. And it only falls due once the principal has actually paid and proof of that payment is produced.
Apartment block, commercial, land — or a buyer who is not a consumer §§ 656b, 656c BGB (not applicable) No statutory split. Who bears the commission and how much is freely negotiable — in practice regularly at the buyer's expense.

The second half of § 656d (1) BGB is easily overlooked and is worth real money to a buyer: you only have to pay once the seller has paid their half and the seller or the agent produces proof of it. An invoice that arrives before that proof is not yet due.

What counts as a "single-family house"? Not what the building plan says

This is where it gets decisive for investors. The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) has defined the term not by construction but by the purpose of the acquisition: a single-family house within the meaning of §§ 656a et seq. BGB exists where the purchase, recognisably to the agent, serves the residential purposes of the members of a single household (BGH, judgment of 6 March 2025 – I ZR 32/24). Two consequences follow, both detached from the physical building:

For an investor that means: buying a two-family house to let both units is not buying a single-family house — the splitting rule does not apply, and a listing that claims otherwise changes nothing. Conversely it can apply where the same house is bought for the buyer's own household. The second decision attaches a condition you have to meet actively, though: the intention must have been made recognisable to the agent at the latest when the agency contract is concluded.

Breach of the splitting rule: the buyer owes nothing, not half

§ 656c (2) sentence 1 BGB provides that a deviating agency contract is "unwirksam" — void. For § 656d BGB the consequence is not in the statutory text; it comes from the BGH, and it is considerably sharper than many agents assume: an agreement that breaches § 656d BGB is void, and it is not reduced to the half amount (BGH, judgment of 6 March 2025 – I ZR 138/24). The buyer then owes nothing at all.

This becomes relevant through an arrangement that looks harmless: the parties to the purchase agree between themselves that the buyer bears the full commission. The seller then no longer remains liable "at least in the same amount" — and the entire pass-through fails. A buyer who finds such a clause in the notary's draft should have it checked rather than accept it.

Tax: the commission is not an expense, it is an investment

For a let property the second surprise is the tax treatment. A purchase commission is not immediately deductible. It is expenditure incurred in order to acquire the asset and therefore forms part of the acquisition cost: "Zu den Anschaffungskosten gehören auch die Nebenkosten sowie die nachträglichen Anschaffungskosten" — ancillary costs and subsequent acquisition costs are part of the acquisition cost (§ 255 (1) sentence 2 HGB).

Acquisition cost only takes effect through depreciation. Depreciation (Absetzung für Abnutzung, AfA) is a deductible expense under § 9 (1) sentence 3 no. 7 EStG; the straight-line rates for buildings are set out in § 7 (4) sentence 1 no. 2 EStG: 3% where completion was after 31 December 2022, 2% where completion was before 1 January 2023 and after 31 December 1924, and 2.5% where completion was before 1 January 1925. And because only the building depreciates, the commission is apportioned as well — the share attributable to the land is not depreciable at all. How that ratio is determined is covered in our article on splitting the purchase price between land and building.

StepAssumptionAmount
Purchase price, condominium built in 1998—€300,000
Assumed total commission7.14% of the purchase price€21,420
Buyer's share under an equal split50% of that€10,710
of which attributable to the buildingbuilding share 70%€7,497
additional annual depreciation2% (completed before 2023)€149.94
tax effect per yearmarginal rate 42%€62.97

The figures explain why the commission weighs so heavily in an investment calculation: €10,710 leaves the account in full in the year of purchase, and about €63 comes back in the first year. Had the €10,710 been immediately deductible, at a 42% marginal rate they would have been worth €4,498.20. That gap is not a tax-saving question but a liquidity question — it belongs in the purchase-cost line of a deal analysis, not in the tax line. The same logic applies to real estate transfer tax and the fixtures sold with the property.

You recover it on sale — if you sell inside the window. Under § 23 (3) sentence 1 EStG the gain on a private disposal transaction is "der Unterschied zwischen Veräußerungspreis einerseits und den Anschaffungs- oder Herstellungskosten und den Werbungskosten andererseits" — the difference between the sale price on one side and acquisition or production costs plus deductible expenses on the other. The purchase commission raised the acquisition cost and therefore reduces a taxable disposal gain; sentence 4, however, deducts the depreciation claimed in the meantime again. What that means in practice is covered in our article on German speculation tax on a property sale.

All of this is separate from a commission incurred for letting the property — that is, for finding a tenant. It does not serve the acquisition but the ongoing generation of income and is therefore a deductible expense under § 9 (1) sentence 1 EStG, "Aufwendungen zur Erwerbung, Sicherung und Erhaltung der Einnahmen". It takes effect in full in the year it is paid.

What the courts have decided

The statute does not say what a "single-family house" is, nor what happens when the splitting rule is ignored. The First Civil Senate of the Federal Court of Justice has decided both — and for investors the answers point in different directions.

BGH, judgment of 6 March 2025 – I ZR 32/24

What matters is not the building type but the purpose of acquisition as recognisable to the agent: a single-family house exists where the purchase "recognisably serves the residential purposes of the members of a single household". A granny flat or commercial use of subordinate importance — here an office extension covering one fifth of the total floor area — does no harm. For an investor that means the building plan does not answer the question. Buy to let, and you regularly fall outside the scope despite the words "Einfamilienhaus" in the listing.

BGH, judgment of 16 July 2026 – I ZR 111/25

The Senate continues that line and reverses it: even a property that is objectively an apartment block — here a two-family house — can be a single-family house within §§ 656a et seq. BGB where the purpose of acquisition is use by a single household and that use appears plausible on the objective facts. The equal-split principle then applies only if the prospective buyer made that intention recognisable to the agent at the latest when the agency contract was concluded. Anyone who wants to rely on it has to say so in advance — and should document it.

BGH, judgment of 6 March 2025 – I ZR 138/24

§ 656d (1) sentence 1 BGB catches every contractual arrangement that gives the agent a direct or indirect claim against the party that did not conclude the agency contract — including an agreement between buyer and seller among themselves. Where the buyers undertake in it to pay the full commission, the seller no longer remains liable "at least in the same amount", and the agreement is void; it is not reduced to half. The buyer then owes nothing.

Frequently asked questions

Does the equal split apply when buying an apartment block?

No. § 656c (1) sentence 1 BGB names only a purchase contract for an apartment or a single-family house. An apartment block acquired for letting falls outside it — how the commission is allocated is a matter of negotiation there.

Am I a consumer under § 656b BGB as a private landlord?

That depends on the purpose of the specific transaction, not on your legal form. § 13 BGB asks whether the transaction can be attributed "predominantly neither to a trade nor to an independent profession". Where German tax law draws the line between private asset management and a trade is covered in our article on the three-object rule; the civil-law classification follows its own standards and should be clarified with a lawyer in case of doubt.

Do I have to pay before the seller has paid?

Not within the scope of § 656d BGB. Under § 656d (1) sentence 2 BGB the claim against the other party only falls due once the principal has met its payment obligation and either the principal or the agent produces proof of it.

Is a verbal commission promise enough?

Not for an apartment or a single-family house: § 656a BGB requires text form. That provision sits ahead of the consumer restriction in § 656b BGB and therefore applies even where the buyer is not a consumer.

Can I deduct the purchase commission in the first year?

No. As an ancillary cost it increases the acquisition cost (§ 255 (1) sentence 2 HGB) and takes effect only through building depreciation under § 7 (4) EStG — and then only with the share attributable to the building. A commission for finding a tenant is a different matter; that is ongoing expenditure.

Purchase costs where they belong

RenoDiary separates purchase costs from ongoing expenditure, splits them automatically between land and building and shows the effect in cash flow and in the Anlage V.

Start for free

Sources

This article offers general orientation and does not replace individual tax or legal advice within the meaning of § 3 StBerG. Whether §§ 656c and 656d BGB apply to a specific purchase depends on the property and on the purpose of the acquisition; the sample figures are arithmetic illustrations, not market data.