Inheriting Property Abroad: What German Succession Law Covers and Where the Law of the Property’s Location Has the Final Say

Published on 20.09.2026

Estate with Property Abroad

Focus of this article: This article does not deal with cross-border estates in general but specifically with real property located abroad as an asset of the estate. It explains why, alongside the German or foreign law governing the succession, the law of the state in which the land is located (lex rei sitae) must also be observed; how registration in the foreign land register works in practice; how an inherited foreign property is valued for German inheritance tax; and what applies concretely in France, Spain, Italy, the USA and Switzerland. Readers who first want an overview of the succession law that applies where the deceased lived abroad will find it in our article German Inheritance Law for Residents Abroad.

A holiday apartment on the Costa Blanca, an inherited family house in Tuscany, an apartment in Florida: more and more German estates contain property that is not located in Germany. For the heirs, this raises a question that sounds simple at first glance but is not: does German succession law actually apply to this property, and if so, is that alone enough to be registered as owner in the foreign land register in the end? The answer requires a distinction that is regularly overlooked in practice. Who inherits is a different question from how ownership of the property is made visible and effective in the country concerned. This article sets out both levels and shows what matters in concrete terms for an inherited foreign property.

Two Separate Legal Questions: Who Inherits, and How Does Ownership Become Visible Abroad?

For the question of who inherits a property located abroad, the following principle applies within the scope of the EU Succession Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, EuErbVO), which has already been dealt with in detail elsewhere. Under Article 21 (1) EuErbVO, the entire succession on death, and therefore in principle also a property forming part of the estate, is governed by the law of the state in which the deceased had their habitual residence at the time of death, not by the law of their nationality. Through an express choice of law under Article 22 EuErbVO in a will or a contract of succession, a German national can instead stipulate that German law is to apply. This basic mechanism is set out in more depth in the article on German inheritance law for residents abroad and is not repeated here.

For property as an estate asset, however, there is one further point that often gets too little attention in general overviews of international succession law but is decisive for practical administration. The EuErbVO does regulate who inherits, but it expressly does not regulate how that law is given proprietary effect in the country concerned and made visible in the land register or a comparable register. Article 1 (2) of the Regulation expressly excludes several areas from its scope:

• Article 1 (2) lit. k EuErbVO excludes “the nature of rights in rem” from the scope of the Regulation. This means that which kinds of ownership, usufruct, easements or similar rights in rem a legal system recognises in land at all is determined not by the law governing the succession but by the law of property of the state in which the property is located (lex rei sitae).
• Article 1 (2) lit. l EuErbVO additionally excludes “any recording in a register of rights in immovable or movable property”, including the legal requirements for such recording and the effects of recording or failing to record. These questions are therefore also governed by the law of the registry state.

In addition, Article 30 EuErbVO allows the state where the property is located to apply special provisions which, for economic, family or social reasons, restrict or otherwise affect the succession in respect of certain assets, such as agricultural and forestry businesses or certain properties, where those provisions are to apply under the law of that state irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the succession. An example often cited in the literature is the Austrian law of undivided inheritance (Anerbenrecht) for agricultural and forestry farms.

For heirs of a foreign property, this separation means in practice that even where it is established that German succession law applies under the EuErbVO, for example because the deceased had their habitual residence in Germany or made a valid choice of law, this does not automatically replace the formalities that the state of location prescribes for registering the change of ownership. The law governing the succession answers the question “who inherits, and in what share?”, while the law of the state where the land is located answers the separate question “how is that result validly reflected in the register there?”.

Unity of the Estate Avoids Split Succession, but Not Always Completely

Within the scope of the EuErbVO, the principle of unity of the estate applies to the law governing the succession itself. A single law is to apply to the entire estate, regardless of whether it is a bank account, a company share or a property, and regardless of which EU Member State each of them is located in. For heirs with a property in France, Spain or Italy, for instance, this means that as long as the EuErbVO applies, the location of the property does not decide which succession law applies to the succession itself. This differs from the position in many states before the Regulation entered into force, which traditionally followed the law of the place of location for immovable property.

There are nevertheless exceptions to this principle of unity that are relevant in practice and that specifically concern property:

Bilateral special treaties. Under Article 75 EuErbVO, older international conventions to which a Member State already belonged before the Regulation remain unaffected. The best-known case with a German connection is the German-Turkish Consular Convention of 1929 with the accompanying estate protocol. Under it, movable assets are governed by the deceased’s national law, whereas a property located in Turkey is governed by Turkish law as the law of the place of location. A German testator with a Turkish property can therefore find themselves in a split succession with respect to precisely that one property, even if German law applies to the rest of the estate.

Third countries with their own split succession. Outside the scope of the EuErbVO, numerous states, including classic common-law countries such as the USA, the United Kingdom, Canada or Australia, but also Thailand, for example, traditionally apply a split system. Movable assets are treated under the law of the deceased’s domicile, whereas immovable assets are treated under the law of the place of location. Under Article 20 EuErbVO, German courts do in principle also apply the law of such third countries where it is designated by Article 21 or 22 EuErbVO. However, that does not change the fact that the third country itself applies its own, possibly different conflict-of-laws rules to the property located there as soon as the local land register or registry procedure comes into play.

For practical estate planning, it follows that anyone who owns or inherits a property in one of these states should not automatically assume that a choice of German law made in a will also readily covers the property in the state of location, at least not with regard to its treatment under property and registry law.

The Land Register, Cadastre or Registry Procedure Abroad: Why the German Proof Alone Rarely Suffices

From the separation described between the law governing the succession and registry law follows a practical key point that regularly surprises heirs. Even a correct, undisputed German proof of succession, whether a certificate of inheritance (Erbschein) or, within the EU, the European Certificate of Succession (ECS) under Articles 62 et seq. EuErbVO, does not automatically lead to registration in the land register or cadastre abroad. The ECS must indeed be recognised in all EuErbVO Member States without any special recognition procedure being required (Article 69 EuErbVO). But precisely because of Article 1 (2) lit. l EuErbVO, it does not dispense with the formal requirements that the respective registry law provides for the registration itself.

In practice, this often means:

• a notarially authenticated declaration or deed under the law of the state where the property is located, documenting the transfer of ownership in the form prescribed there (examples in the country overview below);
• a certified translation of German documents by a translator recognised or sworn in the target country;
• outside the EU, regularly an apostille under the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 or, for non-contracting states, a consular legalisation;
• compliance with local time limits within which the re-registration or the related tax return must be filed. These periods run independently of any German period for disclaiming the inheritance and must be observed separately.

Anyone who does not plan for this additional effort from the outset risks considerable delays. This is not because the status as heir itself would be disputed, but because the purely procedural implementation abroad follows its own rules, independent of German succession law.

Country Overview: Registration Procedure, Inheritance Tax and Particularities for Inherited Property

The following overview summarises, for five countries of particular practical relevance, how the re-registration of ownership of an inherited property works in principle and which tax particularities must be noted. It does not replace an individual assessment. Procedures, time limits, allowances and tax rates are repeatedly amended in all of the countries mentioned and, moreover, differ considerably from region to region in some cases.

← Tabelle nach links wischen, um weitere Spalten zu sehen

This table shows by way of example how differently the seemingly uniform question “how do I inherit a property abroad?” is answered from country to country, structurally so even where German succession law applies throughout as the law governing the succession under the EuErbVO. In common-law countries such as the USA or the United Kingdom there is the further point that, unlike under the German principle of universal succession, whereby the estate passes directly to the heirs on death, a court-appointed personal representative (executor or administrator) regularly first becomes entitled to dispose of the estate before a property can be transferred to the heirs at all.

Inheritance Tax under the Location Principle: How a Foreign Property Is Valued in Germany

Regardless of which succession law applies as a matter of civil law to the succession, German inheritance tax remains an independent level to be examined separately. Under Section 2 (1) No. 1 ErbStG (German Inheritance and Gift Tax Act), unlimited German inheritance tax liability already arises if either the deceased or the recipient was a German resident at the time of death. In that case, German inheritance tax in principle covers the entire estate under the worldwide-assets principle, including a property located abroad, regardless of which country additionally levies its own tax on that very property under the location principle. How the resulting double taxation can be mitigated through the sparse network of German inheritance tax double taxation treaties or through unilateral credit under Section 21 ErbStG is the subject of the separate article Inheritance Tax and Double Taxation Treaties and is not repeated here.

One point that matters in practice specifically for property, but is often under-illuminated in general accounts of inheritance tax, concerns the valuation of foreign real estate for German inheritance tax purposes:

• Under Section 12 (7) ErbStG, foreign real estate is to be valued under the provisions of the Valuation Act (Bewertungsgesetz, BewG), specifically Section 31 BewG (“valuation of foreign tangible assets”). This provision in turn refers to the first part of the Valuation Act and in particular to the so-called fair market value (gemeiner Wert) under Section 9 BewG, meaning the price that could be obtained on a sale in the ordinary course of business.
• Unlike domestic real estate, for which the German tax administration applies standardised assessed-value procedures under Sections 176 et seq. BewG, there is no comparable automated valuation scheme for foreign real estate. In practice, the valuation follows the principles that are also customary domestically, namely the comparative value, income capitalisation or cost approach, and for undeveloped plots the land value method, applied to the valuation data available abroad.
• A foreign cadastral value, a local tax assessment basis or a value applied in the state of location for the inheritance tax there is not binding on the German tax administration. At most it can serve as a reference point, but it does not replace an independent determination of the fair market value by German standards.
• Precisely in cross-border cases, Section 90 (2) AO (German Fiscal Code) imposes on the taxpayer an increased duty to cooperate compared with purely domestic cases. They must clarify the facts themselves and obtain the necessary evidence, because German tax authorities cannot in principle conduct their own investigations abroad. In practice this often means that heirs have to submit a valuation report by an expert recognised abroad, ideally court-certified, in order to obtain a valuation accepted by the tax administration. If no reliable proof is provided, estimates to the heirs’ detriment are a risk.

The personal allowances under Section 16 ErbStG, for example €500,000 for spouses and €400,000 for children, apply irrespective of whether the estate consists of domestic or foreign assets. They reduce the taxable acquisition as a whole, however, not specifically the portion attributable to the foreign property. Anyone who underestimates the valuation of the foreign property or, without sound proof, applies a low tax base risks queries and corrections from the tax office, which further delay the cross-border estate process that is often lengthy anyway.

Disclaiming the Inheritance and Time Limits: A Common Misconception about Foreign Property

In advisory practice, the assumption persists that a foreign property in the estate automatically extends the period for disclaiming the inheritance. That is not correct in this blanket form. Under Section 1944 (1) BGB (German Civil Code), the period for disclaiming the inheritance is in principle six weeks from knowledge of the devolution of the inheritance and of the ground for the appointment. The extension to six months provided for in Section 1944 (3) BGB applies only if

• the deceased had their last residence exclusively abroad, or
• the heir is themselves abroad when the period begins.

If, by contrast, the deceased and the heir both lived in Germany and the estate includes only a single holiday property abroad, the short six-week period remains. The location of individual assets abroad is irrelevant for an extension of the period. This is particularly significant in practice because uncertainties about the condition or encumbrances of a foreign property, such as mortgages and land charges, outstanding local property taxes, service charges of an owners’ association or official renovation orders, often emerge only after the short period has expired, when foreign registers or administrations provide information more slowly than domestic bodies.

In addition, under German law the inheritance can in principle only be disclaimed for the inheritance as a whole. Anyone who wants to keep the valuable parts of the estate but deliberately detach themselves from an over-indebted or legally unclear foreign property cannot do so through a partial disclaiming limited to the land. In such situations, at most estate administration (Nachlassverwaltung) to limit liability or, where there is actual over-indebtedness, insolvency proceedings over the estate may come into consideration. Both, however, presuppose that the inheritance was first accepted or was not disclaimed in time.

Compulsory Share and Legacy: A Monetary Claim Rather Than Automatic Co-Ownership, with Important Exceptions Abroad

For heirs with a foreign property, a close look at the legal nature of the claim is also worthwhile in relation to compulsory share law. Under German law, the compulsory share (Pflichtteil) under Section 2303 BGB is purely a monetary claim against the heir or heirs and not a right in rem in individual estate assets. Where German law governs the succession, a person entitled to a compulsory share therefore does not automatically become a co-owner of the inherited foreign property. The value of the land merely enters the calculation of the estate value relevant for the compulsory share. How such a claim can be enforced where assets are located abroad, and what role the so-called ordre public reservation plays in that, is dealt with in detail in the firm’s article Compulsory Share Law and Foreign Assets.

Particularly in comparison with foreign law, a difference emerges here that becomes practically relevant specifically for property. French law, for example, knows in the “réserve héréditaire” a compulsory share concept that, in its basic design, allocates to descendants a share in the estate itself and not merely a monetary claim against the heirs. Where a French property is concerned, this can in practice lead to a community of heirs (indivision) within which the persons entitled to a compulsory share have a say in the use, letting or sale of the property, a structurally different result from the German compulsory share claim, which is purely a matter of the law of obligations. Anyone who wants to leave a French property without triggering such a proprietary participation should take this difference into account at an early stage through an arrangement tailored to the individual case. A mere choice of German law under Article 22 EuErbVO does not, as shown above, affect the registry-law and property-law treatment of the property itself in any event.

A comparable separation applies to a legacy. Under German law, a legatee does not directly acquire ownership of a property left to them but, under Section 2174 BGB, merely a claim under the law of obligations against the heirs for transfer. For a foreign property, the actual transfer can trigger additional formal requirements prescribed by the state of location that go beyond the German claim to transfer.

Practical Checklist for Heirs of a Foreign Property

The following practical steps can be derived from the connections set out:

1. Establish the state of location and the property precisely. Identify early the land register, cadastre or registry designation and any existing encumbrances such as mortgages, land charges or service charges.
2. Clarify the law governing the succession. Check the deceased’s habitual residence, any choice of law in the will, and the applicability of the EuErbVO or, where relevant, a bilateral treaty taking priority.
3. Examine the registry law of the state of location separately. Establish which notarial deed, translation, apostille or legalisation is required there for re-registration in the land register or cadastre, independently of the German proof of succession.
4. Assess the period for disclaiming realistically. Do not automatically assume an extension to six months merely because a single property is located abroad. If in doubt, take legal advice promptly.
5. Check the value and encumbrances before accepting. Where local liabilities are unclear in particular, consider estate administration or insolvency proceedings over the estate as a means of limiting liability.
6. Prepare the valuation of the foreign property for German inheritance tax early. Ideally with a locally recognised valuation report, in order to meet the increased duty to cooperate under Section 90 (2) AO.
7. Keep double taxation in view. Check whether an inheritance tax double taxation treaty exists with the state of location or only the credit under Section 21 ErbStG is available.
8. Classify compulsory share and legacy questions separately. In particular, check whether the applicable foreign law structures compulsory share claims as a monetary claim or as a proprietary participation.

Conclusion

Anyone who leaves or inherits a property abroad should keep two levels strictly apart. The question of who becomes the heir under the law governing the succession, regularly under Article 21 or 22 EuErbVO, must be clearly separated legally from the question of how ownership of the property is actually transferred in the state of location and made visible in the register there. Article 1 (2) lit. k and l EuErbVO make clear that rights in rem and register entries remain outside the scope of the Regulation, with the result that even a correct German proof of succession does not replace the local formalities in France, Spain, Italy, the USA or Switzerland. In addition there is German inheritance tax, which is independent and, under the worldwide-assets principle, regularly covers the entire estate, and for which a property located abroad must be valued under its own rules that are often underestimated in practice. Anyone who bears these distinctions in mind from the outset avoids unnecessary delays in administering the estate and unpleasant surprises with time limits and tax burdens.

Attorney Dr. Johannes Fiala and the law firm, with a focus on international succession law, tax law and asset protection in Munich, support clients in the legally sound classification of a property located abroad within an estate, from clarifying the applicable succession law and coordinating with the registry law of the state of location to inheritance tax valuation and avoiding double taxation. Please get in touch without obligation to discuss your individual situation in an initial consultation.