The commission fee
For many home seekers it was always a little daunting and sometimes incomprehensible because the cost-benefit factor was probably not always clear: the brokerage fee. From year 2015, that is now over, because the "Tenancy Act Amendment (MietNovG) for damping the rises of rent on tight housing markets and to strengthen the purchaser principle in the housing agency" was adopted. In short: "Who orderes, pays!" In the majority of cases the landlord is now charged with the commission fee, rather than the tenant.

Commissions are tax deductible as a business expense
In some cases this can even cause a glut, as many apartment deals now are more lucrative for seekers by eliminating the commission. It is detrimental to the owner, who then also remains to handle this in addition to the extra costs of more home seekers. Here then the real estate agent comes back into the game, who is specialized in this type of work and can become a true relief. Landlords may not incidentally deport the brokerage costs directly or indirectly to the tenants, as this is prohibited by law and they are also tax deductible as a business expense. Real estate purchases and sales remain untouched from the purchaser principle.

Attenuation of rise in rents
Another part of the new law concerns the "damping of rising rents on the tight housing markets," meant the "rental price brake". The affected areas have yet to be determined by the individual provinces, where then just a usual local reference rent plus ten percent may be called for re-letting. This excludes new buildings. So everything points to a tenant-friendly control. We hope that all requirements are successfully implemented.


"Spurious ordering principle"
In the German real estate association IVD it is believed that it will continue to not create too many situations where the tenant apartment seeker pays the commission. The reason for this is that the law also enshrined a legislation which it is stated that a commission can no longer be collected once the object has been previously unsuccessfully offered a prospect.

On the one hand it is, in cases where brokers rely on their inventory of homes when a searcher logs, often not clear is who the client now, the IVD said. On the other hand, it could be a consequence that brokers would not accept orders from seekers anymore. Because of the risk, that the apartment does not appeal to the seeker and the broker can not collect a commission fee anymore, this schemeis  simply too high, in IVD President Jens-Ulrich Kiessling, who also speaks of a "non-genuine customer principle" ,

And of course there are also fears in the IVD that landlords simply offer their homes themself again in the market. The broker would then be left behind.

Impact on fixed-term contracts
Fears of tenant advocates, it could easily occur in the future "bypass operations", are also in the room. A broker could try just to pretend a tenant that he has sought and found the apartment on his behalf, but previously was committed "secretly" from a landlord. However, heavy fines are provided for such cases.

How to deal with all of these scenarios in Germany, will be observed in Austria with Argus eyes. Finally, the purchaser principle is also requested here regularly.

Source 1:
Source 2: