From January 1, 2026, all residential rents will be required to be paid through a bank account. Otherwise, even if the landlord collects the rent, he will lose the 5% tax deduction for depreciation. The regulation is included in the Finance Ministry’s new draft bill on the Customs Code and provides for an audit by the AADE to check whether all 12 annual installments have been paid exclusively by bank.

The problem, as POMIDA (Panhellenic Federation of Property Owners) points out, is that the penalty is imposed on the owner, even when he is not responsible for not complying with the provision. The new regulation is supposedly aimed at enhancing transparency, but in practice it traps landlords in penalties for third-party failures.

Effectively from 1 January 2026, the Independent Public Revenue Authority will check, based on bank transactions, whether rents were paid for all 12 months of the year from the tenant’s account to the landlord’s account. Otherwise, even if the landlord collects the rent regularly, he will lose the 5% tax credit currently provided for depreciation purposes. POMIDA calls this an indirect and punitive taxation of landlords, who will find themselves losing a significant tax benefit due to circumstances beyond their control. It gives specific examples:

In the first case, the tenant refuses for his own reasons to pay the rent by bank transfer – either because he doesn’t want his transactions to be seen, or because he doesn’t care about the tax return, or because he finds it easier to pay by cash. The landlord has no legal tool to force him to change his position, even if the provision is explicitly mentioned in the lease. The result is that while the landlord has collected the rent, he is penalized by the IRS with a loss of the deduction.

In the second scenario, the tenant pays by bank transfer, but late, i.e. one or two months late.

For example, November and December rents are paid in January and February of the following year. While the landlord has been understanding, the AADE information system does not recognize the payments in the following fiscal year and shows that two rents are missing. As a result, a penalty is imposed with a loss of tax deduction.

In the third case, payments are banked but made partially, in irregular amounts and dates, often along with other charges such as utilities. While the landlord and tenant have agreed and are resolving disputes privately, the state does not readily recognize partial payments and assumes there is no full bank payment.

Finally, in many cases the payment is made to a third party, such as a lawyer, manager or relative of the landlord, when the latter lives in the province or abroad. Even though the payment is valid and covers the agreed amount, the AADE does not recognize the third party’s bank account as acceptable and therefore deducts the deduction.

POMIDA stresses that the goal of transparency in transactions cannot be achieved by a measure that acts as a punitive measure for the consistent owner. For this reason, it submits seven specific proposals to the Ministry of Finance, aiming at a balanced implementation of the measure:

First, it calls for the elimination of the automatic penalty of loss of tax credit when the responsibility falls on the tenant rather than the landlord. Second, it proposes to enshrine the landlord’s right to terminate the lease if the tenant refuses to meet the bank payment obligation. Thirdly, it calls for small rents of up to EUR 500 to be exempted from the measure for a transitional period until the end of 2028. Fourthly, to provide an exemption for landlords and tenants over 70 years old or with a disability of more than 80%. Fifth, to introduce an irrevocable amount for rents, as is already the case for wages and pensions. Sixth, to allow payment to a bank account of an authorised third party. And seventh, to enable payment through the IRIS banking system at no extra cost to the transactors.

The bottom line is that the new regulation creates a completely unequal regime where the fault of a tenant can turn into a penalty for a consistent landlord. POMIDA is calling for a review of the provision before it comes into force to ensure that the intended tax compliance is not turned into yet another trap for landlords.