Rent cuts for retailers – That sounds fair, but it is ethically questionable
The BGH ruling is not good news for taxpayers and the state, says WELT editor Michael Fabricius
Source: picture alliance / dpa / dpa-Zentralbild / xSoeren Stache, Claudius Pflug
Even if many commercial tenants are now hoping for rent cuts due to the lockdown, the late ruling by the Federal Court of Justice is likely to be disappointing for most. Everything depends too much on the individual case. And a bitter aftertaste remains for taxpayers as well.
When the state closes shops during a lockdown, it is basically a matter of negotiation between tenants and landlords how they can agree on outstanding rent payments. This is what the Federal Court of Justice decided, and at first glance it sounds fair and reasonable. The only new thing is that a landlord cannot avoid negotiating an estate from the outset. But that’s about all.
That should be a disappointment for tens of thousands of tenants. The verdict comes late, and hardly any tenant would have been so legally versed during the tough lockdown last winter that he would have made the rental payment formally correct and subject to written reservation – which is a prerequisite for subsequent renegotiation and reimbursement.
In future lockdowns, if they come, it will also continue to boil down to individual decisions before the courts, if the financially weak and battered shop owners dare to do anything at all.
But the ruling is also bad news for taxpayers and the state. Around 200,000 retail companies were affected by the lockdown a year ago, and according to the retail association, around 60 percent of them continued to pay full rent at the request of their landlords. The money did not come from past or present business transactions, but from us, the citizens.
Around 27 billion euros were paid as part of bridging aid III and III plus, a good part of which went to large and many small retailers. The state has taken on up to 90 percent of the fixed costs, including salaries for employees, money for loans, electricity – and for rent, one of the largest items.
In the end, taxpayers secured almost two-thirds of retail landlords in Germany, even in lockdown, with almost full sales, while business owners suffered double-digit losses. In the financial crisis, when it came to bailing out the banks, something like that was called a “bail out”. According to the rule of law, the BGH judgment may be correct. Nevertheless, it is ethically questionable.
“Everything on shares” is the daily stock market shot from the WELT business editorial team. Every morning from 7 a.m. with the financial journalists from WELT. For stock market experts and newcomers. Subscribe to the podcast at Spotify, Apple Podcast, Amazon Music and Deezer. Or directly via RSS-Feed.
.