Expert Report for the Expert Council on Integration and Migration: Migration and Housing: Economic Effects and Social Implications

Since the 2010s, a previously sluggish market has shifted toward persistent scarcity, driven by positive net migration, concentrated internal migration, rising incomes, and a prolonged low-interest environment, recently tempered by higher interest rates and a sharp decline in construction. In European comparison, Germany remains a “nation of renters” with a low homeownership rate, while the number of households continues to grow, especially in economically dynamic cities.

Descriptively, living space per capita has increased over time, yet gaps between owners and renters, and by migration background—persist. Subjective assessments indicate that renter households with a direct migration background more often perceive their dwelling as too small. Regarding housing costs (defined as cold housing costs; for owners: cold charges plus interest and principal payments), average rents for migrant and non-migrant households are nearly identical; by contrast, owner-occupiers with a migration background face higher ongoing costs, partly because mortgages are more common. In the housing cost burden (share of net household income), a stable disadvantage for migrant households appears among both renters and owners.

Econometrically, multivariate models with extensive controls (household and dwelling characteristics, region, year) are estimated alongside a “movers” perspective (short residence duration). Results suggest that differences materialize less in nominal costs than in relative burden: households with a direct migration background, ceteris paribus, often face a housing cost burden around 1 to 2 percentage points higher than comparable non-migrant households. This pattern holds for renters and owners and is broadly corroborated in the recent movers subsample. These findings indicate robust associations; underlying mechanisms (e.g., preferences, networks, discrimination) are only partially observable in household data.

Policy implications point primarily to expanding supply: faster planning and permitting, productivity gains in construction, greater standardization/replication, and improved land mobilization. Targeted demand-side support (housing allowance) should complement this. Social housing can mitigate access barriers for disadvantaged groups if allocation rules focus on access problems and binding periods are used effectively. Stricter rent controls risk constraining supply. Ensuring migration as an economic asset ultimately requires sufficient, affordable housing and fair access in tight markets.