Peter Adrian, the President of the German Chambers of Industry and Commerce (DIHK), defended the existing inheritance tax exemption rules for businesses passed down to family heirs and warned that the consequences of any unfavorable changes could be severe. Speaking to the “Rheinische Post” (Monday edition), Adrian stated that every family-owned business represents more than just a company; it relies on people-employees, apprentices, and often entire regional economies. He argued that those who wish to protect these businesses must ensure that the productive operating assets continue to be sheltered from inheritance tax.
The DIHK chief stressed that these exemptions are not privileges or subsidies. Instead, they are governed by strict requirements, such as the continuation of the business operations or the maintenance of jobs. He explained that business assets are generally tightly integrated into the company’s operational structure, meaning they are not available to heirs as liquid cash. Consequently, the addition of a tax burden immediately impacts the company’s investment capacity and competitive ability.
Adrian cautioned that if the exemption were removed, up to 50 percent of the transferred value could be levied as tax. In such a scenario, many heirs would be forced to sell parts, or even the entirety, of the business just to afford the tax payment. Furthermore, he pointed to the current tense atmosphere, noting that the chambers themselves provided insight into the difficulty of the situation. According to their figures, in 2024 alone, the regional chambers had conducted nearly 10,000 consultations with businesses undergoing succession. This figure represents a record. Moreover, he noted that more than one in four of these companies are now considering ceasing operations altogether. Implementing a tougher tax policy during this period, Adrian concluded, would be a profoundly detrimental signal.
Even the option of deferring the inheritance tax is not a suitable alternative to the exemption. He warned that deferral merely spreads the financial burden over time, draining funds from the company for many years that could otherwise be used for investments, innovation, and maintaining employment.
