By ruling of 11 March 2026 (Case No. II R 6/23) the Federal Fiscal Court (Bundesfinanzhof) ruled on a fundamental question concerning real estate valuation for inheritance and gift tax purposes: the comparable prices determined by the expert committees (Gutachterausschuss) are in principle authoritative and must be applied by both the tax authorities and taxpayers alike. For affected heirs and beneficiaries of gifts, this is a decision of considerable practical significance – and a clear signal as to when consulting an independent valuer is advisable.

The case

The proceedings concerned the valuation of an inherited condominium. The tax office determined the market value at EUR 186,000 based on 20 comparable prices provided by an expert committee (Gutachterausschuss). Pursuant to § 182 para. 2 no. 1 BewG residential property is, in principle, to be valued using the sales comparison approach for inheritance and gift tax purposes, whereby pursuant to § 183 para. 1 sentence 2 BewG the comparable prices communicated by the expert committee (Gutachterausschuss) are to be applied with priority. The heirs challenged this valuation, objecting in particular to the selection of comparable properties and the calculation of the average value.

The decision

The Federal Fiscal Court (BFH) rejected these objections. The statutorily mandated priority given to the comparable prices of the expert committee (Gutachterausschuss) was found to be constitutionally unobjectionable. This is justified by the committees' particular expertise and factual knowledge, their greater proximity to local conditions, and their special competence in value determination, which is characterized by margins of judgment and discretion. These are state bodies, established on a statutory basis and organized independently.

The decisive consequence for practice is this: judicial review by the tax courts of the comparable prices is limited to instances of obvious inaccuracy. Only once such inaccuracies come to light must the tax court further investigate the facts ex officio. Mere criticism of the methodology or of the selection of individual comparable properties is therefore not sufficient to overturn the valuation.

What this means for heirs and beneficiaries of gifts

The decision narrows the scope for challenging a value assessment perceived as too high solely by raising objections to the procedure of the expert committee (Gutachterausschuss). Anyone who considers the determined value incorrect faces a higher hurdle – but also a clear alternative.

This is because the legislator expressly permits, under Section 198 of the German Valuation Act (BewG) proof of a lower fair market value. This proof is typically provided by means of an appraisal report from a publicly appointed and sworn valuer for the valuation of real property, or by an appraisal report from the expert committee (Gutachterausschuss) itself. This is precisely where, according to the ruling, the effective lever lies: rather than selectively attacking the official comparable prices, the taxpayer can submit a fully independent, methodologically robust market value appraisal as complete counter-evidence.

A qualified appraisal report can capture the individual value-influencing characteristics that are typically lost in standardized comparable prices – such as significant maintenance backlogs, unusual floor plans, encumbrances, noise or location disadvantages, or legal particularities. Precisely because judicial review of the committee's prices is now expressly limited, this independent means of proof gains greater importance.

Conclusion

The ruling II R 6/23 strengthens the position of the expert committees (Gutachterausschuss) but by no means excludes legal protection for taxpayers – it merely shifts it. Anyone who considers an inheritance or gift tax valuation to be excessive should have it examined early on to determine whether a qualified market value appraisal can prove a lower fair market value. A well-founded expert assessment is thus not only a corrective measure, but often the only promising way to correct a valuation perceived as inaccurate.