Compulsory self-catering is on the rise

The obligation to self-completely occupy is on the rise in the Netherlands and also in our region. Research by the Volkskrant shows that almost 60% of the municipalities already uses such a duty. Almost 30% has plans to introduce such a duty. The municipal administrators want to curb the influence of investors on the housing market. In many municipalities the obligation applies to all newly built homes upon completion, in a smaller number only to cheaper homes. Often a limit is drawn at houses for social sale (up to €200,000) or the maximum National Mortgage Guarantee of €325,000, writes De Volkskrant. Many municipalities also have an anti-speculation clause: the house may then not be sold on for a certain period of time.

I have written before that such a self occupancy obligation is of little consequence. In the end, it concerns just under 10% of the homes sold. Of these, a significant proportion are directly re-let to children of the buyers. Some municipalities do make an exception for this. This also indicates that there is a lot of work and control involved in such a scheme. Energy that municipalities could better put into enabling more housing construction. My main objection, however, is that this in turn leads to even higher prices for the homes that fall outside these rules. After all, the choice there becomes even smaller and this increasing tightness almost always leads to further increases in already hefty prices. In other words, by doing so municipalities thwart market forces and that does not necessarily have to have positive consequences.

There are also legal objections to this kind of arrangement, legal experts have meanwhile argued on the website of Binnenlands Bestuur. In fact, if the municipality is not the owner of the land, its property rights are infringed. Even where it is, the obligation to self-occupy may not lead to unacceptable interference with public law. Municipalities must therefore substantiate their policy very well. For homes above the NHG threshold, the lawyers write, they are still groping in the dark as to whether such a self occupancy obligation is justified. And it is not always easy to establish that a violation has occurred – after which a fine can be imposed.

In short, it seems cool, this owner-occupied home obligation, but the impact on the housing market will be limited and not positive. Moreover, there are still many snags and catches in the implementation.