The City of Munich intends to introduce a so-called "rent monitor". This digital tool is designed to automatically scan publicly accessible online listings, compare the advertised rents with the current rent index, and inform landlords of potentially excessive demands in relation to applicable legal provisions. However, this initiative, ostensibly aimed at ensuring compliance with rent regulations, is being critically assessed by experts.
According to Thomas Aigner, Managing Director of Aigner Immobilien GmbH, the implementation of such a system entails various disadvantages. He refers to the creation of new costs due to required personnel at a time when the city already has high debt. This calls into question the financial viability of the measure.
Another critical point is the signal emanating from such control measures. They could deter private investors, who are essential for the urgently needed housing construction in Munich. These investors might withdraw from the market, further complicating the creation of new housing. It is emphasised that neither rent caps nor digital monitoring instruments generate new housing.
Potential Consequences and Alternative Solutions
A feared consequence of the rent monitor is also a shift in housing allocation. Private landlords might stop advertising their vacant rental flats publicly and instead allocate them "under the counter" – for example, through notices or word-of-mouth. This would significantly complicate the search for housing for newcomers and individuals without an established network in Munich.
Instead of symbolic measures, more pragmatic approaches to alleviate the housing market are proposed. One point is the termination of the "sprinkler system subsidy" through the rent freeze at the municipal housing association Münchner Wohnen. This measure costs the city 30 million EUR in taxpayers' money annually and, in the critics' view, exclusively benefits tenants who already live at below-average rents. Reversing the rent freeze would provide Münchner Wohnen with its own liquid funds for the maintenance and new construction of its portfolio.
Furthermore, the consistent implementation of urban development measures (SEM) is considered crucial. Despite potential resistance in citizen participation, their advancement is essential to realise new development areas and affordable housing on a large scale and to address the acute housing shortage in Munich.
Conclusion and Outlook
In summary, the planned rent monitor is classified as a loud but ineffective measure, primarily representing a clientelist policy. According to Aigner's assessment, it primarily benefits a specific group of voters, namely those tenants who already have accommodation. The actual cause of Munich's housing shortage – the persistent lack of housing – would remain unresolved. Effective measures to create additional housing, however, would be advantageous for all parties involved. Thomas Aigner thus illustrates the necessity of focusing on solution-oriented approaches to eliminate the structural deficit in housing.
