German construction industry sees slight revenue gains in 2025
FRANKFURT, June 5 (Reuters) - German construction industry revenue is forecast to record a slight increase of up to 1% in 2025 after a decline in 2024, an industry group said on Thursday.
The BVB construction association said it was cautiously optimistic and predicted revenue of 428 billion euros ($488.43 billion) for the year.
In 2024, revenue slumped 3% to 425 billion euros as the country's property sector grappled with its worst crisis in decades.
($1 = 0.8763 euros)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Auto Blog
an hour ago
- Auto Blog
Mercedes CEO Has a Trump Tariff Deal That Could Reshape US-EU Auto Trade
Ola Källenius's comments to Der Spiegel comes as German automakers like Mercedes, BMW and Volkswagen negotiate with the Trump Administration. Tariffs have the auto industry on watch Hours before an event in Michigan on April 29, President Trump signed two executive orders aimed at reducing the impact of trade tariffs on the automotive industry. One order prevents automakers, who face 25% tariffs on auto imports, from being subject to additional levies on materials. The other order allows automakers to apply for tariff relief, which will reduce a portion of the costs associated with their imported components. However, these benefits will be gradually phased out over the next two years. Ola Källenius, CEO of the Mercedes-Benz Group, and Winfried Kretschmann, Minister President of Baden-Württemberg, stand in the production area during a tour of the Mercedes-Benz passenger car plant in Rastatt. During a rally that night in Michigan, Trump described this move as providing 'a little flexibility' to the automotive industry, hoping to persuade automakers to produce their cars and components in the United States. He said, 'We gave them a little time before we slaughter them if they don't do this. They're going to make so much money. They're going to have so many jobs.' Despite the developments, German luxury car manufacturer Mercedes-Benz withdrew its earnings guidance for 2025 during the announcement of its Q1 results. This decision was driven by uncertainty regarding the potential impact of President Trump's tariffs on imported vehicles. The company also stated that if auto tariffs remained at their current levels, it would decrease profit margins by 300 basis points on cars and 100 basis points on vans. Mercedes CEO offers some guidance on a potential tariff solution In a new interview with German business publication Der Spiegel, Mercedes-Benz CEO Ola Källenius said that while he is looking at different scenarios, the kind of investments he has to make are ones that could last for decades, rather than ones made 'in response to a volatile situation' such as the current US-EU tariff situation that is currently unfolding. Recognizing that the current administration has the impression 'that we in Europe are closed to certain issues and only demand openness where we have strengths,' the CEO proposed a deal meant to balance its imports and exports. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. 2025 Mercedes-Benz G 580 EQS — Source: Mercedes-Benz In his proposal, Källenius would allow duty-free imports of U.S.-built cars into Europe in exchange for tariff waivers on an equal number of vehicles exported by EU automakers to the U.S., adding that it would alleviate and fulfill its desire to reindustrialize and become an attractive destination for companies to set up factories for exported goods. 'For every car that leaves the USA or Europe, a car from the other side comes in duty-free,' Källenius told Spiegel. 'We have put this idea to both sides, and it is a possible component of the negotiations between the USA and the EU.' Such a solution would work for a company like Mercedes-Benz. In the same interview, Källenius noted that Mercedes 'is a major producer' of cars in the United States, adding that the company builds and sells around 350,000 vehicles in the country, which could count for consideration in trade talks. 'But the models we build and sell [in the U.S.] are not the same,' Källenius told Spiegel. 'Two-thirds of the vehicles from our plant in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, are exported to 150 countries worldwide. We therefore contribute to a more balanced trade balance for the USA. We believe this should be taken into account in the negotiations.' The team at Spartanburg that helped make the seven millionth BMW a reality. — Source: BMW Ford CEO Jim Farley proposed a similar idea Källenius's idea of rewarding U.S. exports is roughly on the same wavelength as similar ideas proposed by other automotive CEOs. Previously, Ford CEO Jim Farley raised the idea that automakers like Ford should get credit for building cars in the United States that are shipped overseas for international consumption, noting that it is 'essential' that the federal government come up with policies that encourage manufacturers to build cars for export, adding that it exports nearly as many vehicles as its brings in. 'So many of the vehicles we build here are exported around the globe,' Farley said. 'Shouldn't we get credit for that?' Around the same time Farley made those comments, the export of some high-ticket models to China, including the F-150 Raptor, Mustang, Bronco, and Lincoln Navigator, was halted due to retaliatory tariffs as high as 150% on imported vehicles. Final thoughts For what it's worth, German automakers like Volkswagen, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz have a lot of leverage for a potential U.S. tariff deal, especially if they propose that German automakers receive credits based on the number of vehicles they produce in the United States. These aren't small potatoes, either. BMW alone manufactures some of its highest-volume models, such as the BMW X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, and XM, at its Spartanburg, South Carolina, plant, which serves both U.S. and international markets. According to data from the U.S. Department of Commerce, BMW is the largest automotive exporter by value in the U.S., shipping 'more than $10 billion' of cars in 2024. American hands assemble these cars, no matter the badge or its supposed country of origin. About the Author James Ochoa View Profile
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Post Office compensation chief steps down after Sir Alan Bates raised 'serious concerns' about schemes
A Post Office boss who backed compensation for Horizon IT scandal victims has left his position as Sir Alan Bates raised 'serious concerns' about schemes. Leader of the Post Office's Remediation Unit, Simon Recaldin, is believed to have opted for voluntary redundancy and left his post this week. It comes as the first part of a public inquiry report into the controversy, analysing the compensation process as well as the affect on victims, is anticipated to be released in the coming weeks. More than 900 sub-postmasters were prosecuted between 1999 and 2015 after faulty accounting software made it look as though money was missing from their accounts. Hundreds are still waiting for payouts despite the previous government announcing that those who have had convictions quashed are eligible for £600,000. A Post Office spokesperson said yesterday Mr Recaldin's departure was a part of an 'organisational design exercise' across the firm. Now Joanne Hanley, who was previously a managing director and global head of client servicing, data and operations for Lloyds', is understood to have taken up a large portion of the former Post Office chief, according to The Telegraph. It comes as Post Office hero Sir Alan Bates accused the government of running a 'quasi kangaroo court' payout system for the scandal's victims last month. More recently, Sir Alan said he would prefer to see the compensation schemes thrown out rather the people working on them. 'We have got serious concerns about the transparency and the parity across the schemes,' he told The Telegraph. Last November, Mr Recaldin giving evidence to the inquiry, apologised after it was unearthed staff who were managing compensation claims had also been embroiled in prosecutions relating to the scandal. When queried about ex Post Office investigators he said: 'So my regret – and it is a genuine regret – is that when I came in, in January 2022, that I didn't do that conflicts check, check back on my inherited team, and challenge that.' It comes as the Sir Alan, who famously won his High Court battle with the Post Office in 2019 revealed that he had been handed a 'take it or leave it' compensation offer of less than half his original claim. Mr Bates, 70, said the first offer, made in January last year, was just one sixth of what he was asking for, adding that it rose to a third in the second offer. He has now been given a 'final take it or leave it offer' - which he said amounts to 49.2 per cent of his original claim. He, alongside 500 other sub-postmasters, will now have to lodge their bid for compensation via the Group Litigation order, managed by the Government. Bates, who led the sub-postmasters' campaign for justice, attacked the government for reneging on assurances given when the compensation schemes were set up The Post Office currently manages the Horizon Shortfall Scheme, which is seperate to the aforementioned. This scheme was organised for victims who have not been compensated but believe they experienced financial loses due to the IT scandal. A Post Office spokesman said: 'As part of the Post Office's commitment to deliver a 'new deal for postmasters', we have undertaken a review of our operating model to ensure we have the right structure in place. 'We have been in consultation with a number of colleagues from across the business, including the Remediation Unit. As a result of this Post Office-wide organisational design exercise, Simon Recaldin has left the business.'
Finextra
an hour ago
- Finextra
Preparing for BNPL regulation: What firms need to do now: By Ben O'Brien
The arrival of formal regulation for Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) products is no longer a question of if, but when. With the Treasury's May 2025 consultation response, the direction is this: by mid-2026, third-party BNPL lenders will fall within the scope of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). This change brings with it a full set of regulatory requirements—covering affordability, creditworthiness, redress, disclosures, and governance. While many firms are familiar with the general framework, the pace and detail of implementation demand serious attention. Risk leaders now face a critical window to build a strategy that aligns commercial goals with regulatory readiness. Scope of the new BNPL regime From mid-2026, third-party BNPL providers must be authorised by the FCA and comply with its rules on affordability, creditworthiness, consumer duty, complaints, disclosures, and more: Mandatory, proportionate affordability and creditworthiness checks Firms must demonstrate verifiable checks at the point of decisioning, aligned to individual circumstances, not just product type. Firms must demonstrate verifiable checks at the point of decisioning, aligned to individual circumstances, not just product type. Access to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) BNPL customers can now escalate complaints to FOS, increasing the importance of auditable redress processes and timely resolution. BNPL customers can now escalate complaints to FOS, increasing the importance of auditable redress processes and timely resolution. Tailored disclosure requirements for digital-first products The FCA will introduce a bespoke regime focused on real-world comprehension — not just information delivery. Firms will need to test and evidence understanding. The FCA will introduce a bespoke regime focused on real-world comprehension — not just information delivery. Firms will need to test and evidence understanding. Extension of Section 75 protections to BNPL agreements Providers will be jointly liable for qualifying claims, requiring clear merchant oversight, governance controls, and capital planning to manage new exposure. While third-party BNPL is the initial focus, merchant-offered BNPL products remain outside the perimeter for now. This exemption, based on Article 60F(2) of the Regulated Activities Order, is under review and could be revisited if scale or harm increases. What this means for compliance and risk leaders The FCA isn't looking for surface-level compliance. It expects firms to demonstrate that processes are working and that consumers are genuinely protected. Affordability frameworks must evolve Checks must be proportionate and verifiable, with models recalibrated to reflect customer circumstances. Even low-value lending must evidence the potential for harm reduction. Complaint handling will need to be FOS-ready This includes robust audit trails, clear redress pathways, MI reporting on themes, and training on FOS processes. Joint liability introduces new exposure Providers must enhance governance around merchant partnerships, define liability clearly in contracts, and plan for potential claims in their capital models. Joined-up governance is essential Effective programmes will require close collaboration across credit, compliance, legal, product, and ops teams—with clear ownership under SM&CR. Disclosures must reflect real-world understanding It's not just about format. The FCA expects firms to test, monitor, and evidence comprehension—particularly for vulnerable customers. Making best use of the Temporary Permissions Regime The FCA will launch a Temporary Permissions Regime (TPR) to support the transition. Providers must be ready to act quickly when the window opens. Prepare for registration Ensure that internal records, model documentation, and business models are clearly aligned with regulatory expectations. Conduct a readiness assessment Review decisioning processes, affordability checks, complaints management, and financial crime controls. Plan for dual-track execution Meet TPR requirements while simultaneously building toward full authorisation. Engage early with the FCA Establish open communication lines to reduce ambiguity and show proactivity. Plan for contingencies Prepare wind-down plans, customer messaging, and backup procedures in case of registration delays or rejections. Innovation and consumer protection can coexist The decision to exclude some legacy Consumer Credit Act requirements reflects the unique nature of BNPL: short-term, interest-free, and often accessed via digital channels. This creates space for a more relevant, user-centric approach to disclosures but it also raises the bar. Risk and compliance teams should work with product, legal, and design leads to ensure communications are: Integrated into real customer journeys Mobile-friendly and accessible Prompted by user behaviour Supported by outcome-based testing and complaints data Those who treat disclosures as a compliance task may struggle. Those who invest in relevance and usability will have stronger customer engagement and defensibility. Merchant carve-out and the risk of market distortion The decision to exclude merchant-led BNPL from the regulatory scope has sparked debate. Without oversight, merchant-offered credit could create competitive asymmetry and raise consumer protection concerns. Risk leaders should: Monitor merchant product developments and prepare for potential perimeter expansion Review all third-party merchant partnerships for regulatory dependencies Revisit financial promotions and credit broking arrangements, particularly where merchants promote BNPL products without broking permissions Regulatory costs and anticipated market impact The Treasury's impact assessment estimates: An Equivalent Annual Net Direct Cost to Business (EANDCB) of £2.3 million A Net Present Value of -£20.1 million over the assessment period over the assessment period Authorisation application fees: £5,000 to £25,000 Annual supervision fees: £10,000 to £50,000 Technology upgrades: £500,000 to £2 million per provider for systems supporting affordability, reporting, and complaints per provider for systems supporting affordability, reporting, and complaints Section 75 exposure: Estimated at 0.5% to 1.2% of transaction values With the UK's BNPL market valued at £20 billion annually, sector-wide exposure to Section 75 alone could exceed £100 million. Consolidation is expected. Government modelling suggests 20–30% of providers may exit the market post-regulation. But with global BNPL volumes growing rapidly, those who remain stand to benefit from a stronger, more trusted marketplace. How leading firms are responding Some providers have already started adjusting: Klarna Following regulatory scrutiny in Sweden, Klarna UK introduced income verification, real-time spend tracking, and risk-based onboarding. Monzo Flex Built affordability into product design from the outset, with integrated credit reporting and real-time tracking. PayPal Adopted a cross-functional compliance strategy with specialist teams, training, and documentation of governance processes. The clock is ticking and the gap between those who prepare and those who delay will widen fast. For risk leaders, this is a chance to go beyond baseline compliance, strengthening frameworks, improving customer outcomes, and shaping the future of BNPL in a regulated environment.
