Both structures let you sell a Munich property and remain in your home. The crucial difference is future use: a right of residence protects personal occupation, while usufruct also permits letting and retaining the rental income.
AI generatedThe correct choice does not follow from the purchase price alone. Your desired flexibility, a possible later move, allocation of costs and the scope of the registered right are decisive.
Personal occupation of the agreed rooms. Letting to third parties is generally not included.
Personal occupation or letting with rental income. The broader right normally has a higher capital value.
The higher the capital value of the retained right, the lower the immediately available purchase-price portion.
For a Munich apartment worth €850,000, both calculations start with the same annual rental value. Full lifelong usufruct capitalises all potential use, including letting. A right limited to personal occupation may be valued lower. That difference affects the payment, while precise figures depend on the scope of the right and individual valuation.
This comparison illustrates the method and is not a valuation. Capital values depend on rental value, age, beneficiaries, contractual scope and applicable rules.
A right of residence may suit someone who wants to remain securely and agree compensation for a later move. Anyone wishing to preserve the option of letting the property to fund care will generally need broader usufruct. Both require clear provisions for land-register priority, costs, moving out and cancellation.
Six anonymised decision scenarios show when a right of residence may suffice and when broader usufruct can be useful.
An owner wants to remain securely in her apartment and rules out future letting. A tailored right of residence is compared with broader usufruct.
Key point: do not capitalise more rights than the personal plan requires.
A couple expects that residential care may later become necessary. Because the house should then be let, usufruct offers more flexibility than a personal right of residence.
Key point: include potential rental income after moving out in the decision.
An owner lives in the main apartment while the annexe is rented. A right of residence over specified rooms is compared with usufruct over the whole property.
Key point: describe the physical scope and income rights precisely in the land register.
A couple wants to maximise the immediate capital. A right of residence may have a lower capital value but would not automatically permit future letting.
Key point: do not view the higher payment separately from future use.
An owner may move closer to her children. Transparent compensation provisions for surrendering either a right of residence or usufruct are compared.
Key point: define the valuation date and calculation method for compensation.
One person wants only to remain at home while the other wants the option to let later. The structure examines whether joint usufruct or differently limited rights fit both aims better.
Key point: clarify both parties' rights and what happens after the first death.
Illustrative, anonymised case scenarios. They are provided for guidance and are not customer reviews.
About the author
This content is the responsibility of Michael Freitag, founder of FREITAG® Immobilien GmbH, based in the Munich & Starnberg region. The sample calculations on this page are simplified and do not replace an individual valuation or tax and legal advice.
Legal basis & sources
Managing Director of FREITAG® Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH
For the same property, you receive a transparent comparison of the potential payment, value of the right, letting options, ongoing duties and provisions for a later move.
