Federal Government | Dobrindt wants to make socialization more difficult

Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt opposes the Berlin Left's plans to socialize large real estate companies. Photo: Michael Brandt/dpa Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) wants to make the socialization of large housing stocks much more difficult through a federal law. The Federal Ministry of the Interior has presented key points for a so-called investment protection law. Socialization of rental apartments should therefore only be possible if it is absolutely necessary. In addition, affected companies should receive compensation at market value, which will be paid out immediately in cash. The Berlin Left announced resistance and considers the plans to be unconstitutional.

The trigger for the initiative is the plans of the Left, the Greens and the SPD to transfer large private housing stock into public ownership in the event of a joint government formation in Berlin. During their explorations, the three parties agreed to combine companies with at least 10,000 apartments in the capital. The compensation amount should be limited to a maximum of 16 billion euros. Dobrindt's requirements, if they become law, would make the project considerably more difficult.

"In my opinion, the proposal is so obviously illegal that a possible law probably wouldn't even have to be complained about."

According to the key points confirmed by the Ministry of the Interior, a state government would first have to prove that it has fully exhausted other options for improving housing supply. These include investments in housing construction and its promotion. Setting the compensation based on the market value of the apartments would also make the project many times more expensive.

Dobrindt justified the initiative in “Bild” with the protection of property. The law makes it clear that an “arbitrary left-wing socialization fetish” is not compatible with the Basic Law. The first plans for such a law were announced in the summer. In July, the coalition committee of the Union and the SPD decided to prevent socialization of private housing stock.

The co-chair of the Left party, Luigi Pantisano, sharply rejected the plans. "The federal government is afraid of a strong left that enforces the interests of the people in Berlin," he explained. Berliners have decided twice to socialize large housing stocks: first in the 2021 referendum and then with the election of the Left as the strongest force in the House of Representatives election in September. Dobrindt and the federal government showed that “Vonovia’s shareholders are more important to them than the tenants in Berlin.” Pantisano also called on the Social Democrats to take a position: “The federal SPD must now decide which side it is on. On the side of the rental mafia or the tenants. The planned law will not stand before the Federal Constitutional Court, the Left chairman was convinced.

Elif Eralp, mayoral candidate of the Berlin Left, also criticized the plans as unconstitutional: "You cannot use a federal law to make impossible what the Basic Law provides and what Berliners voted for." The project is not an investment protection law, but a law against tenants in Berlin.

The rental policy spokesman for the left-wing faction in the House of Representatives, Niklas Schenker, also referred to the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court. A law that only serves to prevent socialization is not legally tenable. The compensation must create a fair balance between the interests of the owners and the general public. "In my opinion, the proposal is so obviously illegal that a possible law probably wouldn't even have to be complained about."

Criticism doesn't just come from the left. Hakan Demir, tenancy law rapporteur for the SPD parliamentary group, considers the plans to be constitutionally risky. If Dobrindt actually wants to prevent socialization in accordance with the constitution, he would have to take the regular route of changing the Basic Law, Demir told the “Tagesspiegel”. However, the federal government lacks the necessary two-thirds majority for this.

The SPD politician argues that the federal government should not use its legislative competence to deprive the states of the exclusive opportunity to legislate. He expects that the planned regulations could fail before the Federal Constitutional Court. He could understand a state government taking action against this in Karlsruhe.

The constitutional lawyer Ulrich Battis also expressed legal concerns to the Funke media. In particular, he considers the determination of compensation based on market value to be problematic. The Basic Law leaves a certain amount of leeway when it comes to compensation, which would be risky to be restricted by such a requirement. Battis considers the remaining regulations to be fundamentally implementable. What is crucial, however, is whether socialization remains permissible at all.

Legally it is about Article 15 of the Basic Law. This stipulates that land, natural resources and means of production can be transferred to public ownership or other forms of public economy through a law. With the plans of the possible red-green-red government in Berlin, Article 15 would be applied for the first time in Germany's history.

In Berlin, the socialization of large housing companies is one of the central projects of a possible coalition of the Left, the Greens and the SPD. The Left won the House of Representatives election on September 20th with 25.7 percent. She is aiming to form a government with the Greens and the SPD. Despite their reservations about socialization, the Social Democrats agreed to a compromise in the explorations. The three parties want to present the corresponding law in mid-2028; It should come into force one year after its announcement.

According to current plans, around 160,000 apartments from five large real estate companies would be affected. Cooperatives and community-oriented actors should be excluded, as should apartments built after 2021. The companies should be allowed to keep a base stock of 10,000 apartments each. The planned compensation of a maximum of 16 billion euros is to be financed through loans and refinanced through rental income.

The plans are met with strong rejection in the Union. Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) described the protection of property and trust in the market as the foundation of the economic order. Federal Minister of Economics Katherina Reiche (CDU) warned of a danger for Germany as an investment location. The real estate industry is also against the project. Vonovia, the largest company affected, considers corporateization in the planned form to be unconstitutional and points out the importance of private investment.

At the same time, the debate over Berlin's housing policy is only part of a broader criticism of the left. At its “Germany Day,” for example, the Junge Union called for a possible Berlin state government to be excluded from information from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the Federal Criminal Police Office. CSU boss Markus Söder also brought up a so-called extremism clause in the state financial equalization in order to exclude a Berlin led by the Left Party from corresponding payments. At the same time, there were allegations of anti-Semitism against individual members of the Berlin regional association, which were also part of the discussions about a possible coalition. The left rejected all advances. With agencies.

This article cost you nothing. Us: research, production and technology. We saved on office rent as well as on printing and distribution. And we gave up salary. Nevertheless, the calculation doesn't work without you. We need 300,000 euros by the end of the year. You pay what you can, in return we keep writing.

No paywall, no small print, just one goal: that nd stays.