Search
Contact
09.05.2023 | KPMG Law Insights

UPDATE Transparency register and real estate in Germany – escalating reporting requirements for foreign companies

The Federal Administrative Office has clarified that foreign companies must be reported to the Transparency Register even if they only indirectly hold shares in German real estate. The reporting requirement applies to all companies in the investment chain. However, only if their shareholding reaches a threshold of at least 90 percent.

The real estate market has long been considered by experts to be particularly vulnerable to money laundering. For this reason, the legislator is increasingly pursuing the goal of ensuring that it is comprehensible to whom real estate property is attributable.

Against this background, notaries were initially required to check whether the acquiring company is registered in the transparency register in the case of real estate purchase agreements. Insofar as this was not the case, the notary may not perform the notarization (prohibition of notarization).

In order to also cover foreign structures, reporting requirements for foreign companies were successively introduced. Until now, the latter were obliged to report their beneficial owners to the transparency register if they acquired ownership of real estate located in Germany directly or by way of a share deal.

Sanctions Enforcement Act II obliges foreign companies to report to the transparency register

With the Sanctions Enforcement Act II, reporting obligations for foreign companies to the transparency register have been further extended as of January 1, 2023.

The reporting obligation now also applies to foreign companies with existing real estate in Germany. This is subject to an implementation deadline of June 30, 2023.

This applies both to direct investments in real estate and to share deals in which shares in companies owning real estate were acquired in the past (acquisition transaction pursuant to Section 1 (3) or (3a) of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Act – GrEStG).

As a relief, the legislator has provided that a reporting obligation does not apply if the companies concerned have already transmitted the information on the beneficial owner to a register of another EU member state.

Clarification by the Federal Office of Administration dated May 5, 2023 on reporting requirements for indirect holdings in German real estate

As is so often the case, the new regulation raised various questions in practice, in particular whether only the foreign company in which the acquisition transaction pursuant to Sec. 1 (3) or (3a) GrEStG is or has been realized must be reported or whether all foreign companies in the chain of ownership are subject to a reporting obligation.

The Federal Administrative Office responsible for the Transparency Register has provided guidance on this issue in the FAQ newly published on May 5, 2023:

  • According to the Federal Administrative Office, the transparency obligation extends to all foreign legal entities to which shares in a company with domestic real property are or (in the past) were directly or indirectly transferred.
  • In the opinion of the authority, this means that even for existing properties
    all
    legal entities in the chain of shareholdings are subject to the notification obligation, insofar as they each individually meet the requirements of Section 1 (1) of the German Commercial Code. 3 or par. 3a GrEStG and meet the threshold of at least 90% of the shares.
  • The principles of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Act apply to the determination of the directly or indirectly controlled shares in the company (i.e., in particular, calculating through the threshold of 90% at each shareholding level).
  • In turn, this means that if foreign legal entities within the participation chain do not meet the requirements of Section 1 para. 3 or para. 3a GrEStG – here the threshold value of 90% is probably meant in particular – they are also not obliged to notify the transparency register.

Consequences of an incorrect or missing report to the transparency register

Non-compliance with the above-mentioned reporting requirements may result in substantial fines. According to the catalog of fines, these fines are based primarily on the company’s sales or balance sheet total and can amount to up to EUR 150,000 in the case of a first-time infringement. In case of serious, repeated or systematic violations, fines may increase up to EUR 1 million.

In addition, the law provides for “naming-and-shaming” in the case of final decisions imposing fines of EUR 200 or more – currently, more than 1,200 decisions have already been published.

From an economic point of view, it may be particularly critical that, due to the express prohibition of notarization in real estate transactions, a transaction may fail or, in any case, be significantly delayed if it is not reported to the transparency register or is reported incorrectly.

Conclusion

While this provides a certain degree of clarity on the one hand, on the other hand the legal understanding of the Federal Administrative Office creates a considerable burden for foreign groups of companies with German real estate holdings.

Explore #more

14.11.2024 | KPMG Law Insights

EU deforestation regulation forces companies to act

Anyone who trades in or uses the raw materials soy, oil palm, cattle, coffee, cocoa, rubber and wood and certain products made from them should…

06.11.2024 | In the media

Interview in stores + stores magazine on the topic: “Companies need AI rules”

Evaluating application videos using AI, translating employment contracts via smartphone or using AI analyses for target agreements and salary discussions – all of this is…

31.10.2024 | In the media, Legal Financial Services

Statement by Ulrich Keunecke in the in-house counsel on the topic of capital market compliance

For private equity investors, going public is the most common exit strategy when investing in a company.
However, family businesses and SMEs can also gain…

30.10.2024 | In the media

Guest article in ZURe on the topic of reporting channels under the Whistleblower Protection Act and the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act

The dual obligation to implement reporting channels in accordance with the HinSchG and LkSG poses major personnel and administrative challenges for practitioners, especially in times…

25.10.2024 | In the media

Guest article in the Audit Committee Quarterly: New regulations on the remuneration of works councils

On June 28, 2024, the German Bundestag passed the Second Act Amending the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG). This amendment is intended to increase legal certainty…

23.10.2024 | In the media

Guest article in the Neue Zeitschrift für Gesellschaftsrecht: Update Gesellschafterdarlehen: Risks in M&A transactions

Christian Hensel and Daniel Dörstling have published a new article on the insolvency-proof handling of shareholder loans in the context of M&A transactions in the…

18.10.2024 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises Adiuva Capital on the acquisition of a majority stake in Advellence Solutions AG and Sharedien AG

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH and KPMG Law Switzerland (KPMG Law) advised the owner-managed investment company Adiuva Capital GmbH (Adiuva) on the due diligence, structuring and…

18.10.2024 | KPMG Law Insights

BAG: Showering can be working time

Can showering be working time? The Federal Labor Court had to decide on this question (BAG, judgment of April 23, 2024 – 5 AZR 212/23

11.10.2024 |

Deforestation regulation: The most common mistakes made by companies

The very name of the regulation is misleading. “Deforestation Ordinance” sounds more like a set of rules for agriculture or forestry. But it…

11.10.2024 | In the media

Guest article in the Asset Management Guide 2024: The Fund Market Strengthening Act – Flexibilization and Debt Fund reloaded

On August 5, 2024, the Federal Ministry of Finance published the draft bill for the Act to Strengthen the German Fund Market and Implement Directive…

Contact

Arndt Rodatz

Partner
Head of Criminal Tax Law

Fuhlentwiete 5
20355 Hamburg

Tel.: +49 40 360994 5081
arodatz@kpmg-law.com

Christian Judis

Senior Manager

Friedenstraße 10
81671 München

Tel.: +49 89 59976061028
cjudis@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll