German Housing Minister Verena Hubertz (SPD) is pushing ahead with a reform of the Building Code intended to accelerate housing construction and simplify procedures. After the already adopted “construction turbo”, a broader draft law on the “modernization of urban development and spatial planning law” is now to follow. What is presented as a technical update, however, contains a provision with far wider implications. In future, the state could help decide who is allowed to acquire property.
At the centre is an expanded municipal right of first refusal. Cities and municipalities would be able to intervene even when they consider a buyer politically problematic. The proposal refers specifically to individuals attributed with “anti-constitutional activities”. In such cases, a municipality could step in, take over the purchase and replace the original buyer. The political direction is stated openly by the ministry itself. The instrument could apply, for example, “if right-wing extremists attempt to buy into a village”.
What the draft does not mention is striking. Neither Islamist milieus nor left-wing extremist structures such as Antifa appear in the justification as comparable examples. The focus is clearly on right-wing actors.
The draft, first reported by the German news platform Nius, sets an unusually low threshold for intervention. No criminal conviction and no illegal conduct would be required. The text states that the activities do “not necessarily [have] to be militant-aggressive or illegal”. It is sufficient if they appear capable of “producing political effects sooner or later”. The decisive factor therefore becomes not conduct, but an assessment of potential political impact.
Suspicion Is Sufficient, Assessment Decides
To enable such interventions, the law governing the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is to be amended. Security agencies would be allowed to share personal data with municipalities, specifically for reviewing a right of first refusal. The Federal Criminal Police Office would also be involved. There is no provision for judicial review. Decisions would be taken at administrative level and based on assessments rather than court rulings.
The consequence is clear. Political classification would become a de facto precondition for property ownership. Anyone considered relevant by the domestic intelligence service could fail when attempting to purchase real estate.
The scope of the provision is broad. It does not only cover clearly defined extremists. Individuals who have not committed any criminal offence could also fall within such assessments. Someone who expresses migration-critical views on platforms such as X or openly shows sympathy for the Alternative for Germany (AfD) could come into focus if authorities see a “political effect”.
The logic shifts accordingly. The state would not intervene only when laws are broken, but already when political views are deemed problematic. Suspicion would suffice. Assessment would decide.
Property Ownership Subject to State Approval
The reform would also affect existing ownership. It expands intervention powers against so-called “junk properties”, meaning buildings that are neglected or deliberately left to decay. Owners could be required to renovate. In cases of “extreme misuse”, expropriation would even be possible. Hubertz herself described the measure as a “sharp sword”.
This creates a double shift. On one hand, access to property is politically pre-filtered. On the other, state authority over existing ownership increases. The property market would formally remain intact but be redefined at key points. When purchasing, official assessments would play a decisive role. In ownership, the state would expand its powers up to and including expropriation.
The reform is presented as an adjustment of planning law. In practice, it creates an instrument that more closely links security agencies, administrative authorities and property rights. The state would no longer limit itself to regulating use and development. It would increasingly intervene in access to property and secure additional powers over existing ownership.