Contact Santheos
This is an empty menu. Please make sure your menu has items.
This is an empty menu. Please make sure your menu has items.

Electronic Building Identity vs Engineer’s Report: Two Different Checks Before a Greece Golden Visa Purchase

Buyers are often told that an Electronic Building Identity is available and conclude that the technical file is complete. It is important, but it is not a universal answer to every technical, contractual or Golden Visa question.

The Greek Ministry of Environment and Energy explains that the Electronic Building Identity / Independent Divided Property system gathers required property information into a Certificate of Completeness. A buyer-focused engineer’s report is different: it is a scoped professional analysis requested for a particular transaction or, in specified investment-residence cases, a route-specific document with required statements.

The two documents have different jobs

Document Primary function It does not prove
Electronic Building Identity / Certificate of Completeness Brings statutory building or divided-property data into the relevant electronic system for transfer purposes Commercial completion, defect-free handover, price adequacy, clear title or Golden Visa approval
Buyer-focused engineer’s report Tests transaction-specific technical questions agreed in its scope A substitute for title search, notarial deed, tax process or the immigration authority’s decision

The safe question is not “Which document is better?” It is: Which question does each document answer, for this exact unit and this exact transaction?

What a buyer should match before signing

  • address, building, floor and legal horizontal-property description;
  • KAEK or relevant registry reference;
  • main spaces, ancillary spaces, parking and storage included in the deed;
  • approved plans and actual layout;
  • stated existing use and any claimed new residential use; and
  • permit history, revisions or approvals relevant to the claimed works.

If a brochure calls the unit “B-12” but the building identity and draft deed use another legal identifier, do not solve the mismatch by copying the marketing label into the contract. The engineer, lawyer and notary need to identify the underlying legal and technical explanation.

Why the distinction matters for change-of-use projects

The EUR 250,000 route for a qualifying change of use is a specific exception, not the ordinary EUR 400,000 or EUR 800,000 acquisition route. The current MITOS procedure describes full ownership and possession of one property whose main spaces are changed to residential use, alongside documentary conditions. For specified cases, it calls for an engineer’s technical report with route-specific statements.

That does not mean every engineer’s report has the same role, or that an Electronic Building Identity alone establishes all immigration conditions. An investor should ask whether the report is a general technical review, a report for the residence-permit procedure, or both—with each purpose and limitation clearly separated. MITOS includes additional evidence for industrial buildings, including a five-year non-operation condition; a generic building document should not be assumed to contain that analysis.

A practical document sequence

  1. Before reservation: obtain current plans, stated use, schedule and a list of documents available now versus later.
  2. Before signing: have the appointed engineer reconcile the exact unit against permits, plans and, where relevant, change-of-use evidence.
  3. Before final payment: separate legal change-of-use completion from construction completion, snag closure, possession and utility activation.
  4. Before residence filing: compare the final deed, registration evidence, route-specific technical material and applicant documents together.

Hypothetical example

A former office is marketed as an apartment. The seller provides a Certificate of Completeness and a new floor plan. The buyer’s engineer notices that the plan identifies a storage room differently from the draft deed and that the claimed change-of-use evidence is not linked clearly to the exact unit. The appropriate result is a discrepancy log: what differs, who owns the correction, which document will be updated and what evidence will confirm it.

It would be unsafe to conclude that the Certificate of Completeness guarantees the project’s completion, the exact ancillary-right transfer or residence-permit eligibility. This is a hypothetical example only.

Questions to put in writing

  • Which property and divided ownership does this document identify?
  • Is it current for the proposed transfer date?
  • Which plans and permits were used for its preparation?
  • Does it address the use stated in the deed and marketing file?
  • Which matters are outside the engineer’s scope?
  • For a EUR 250,000 change-of-use file, which route-specific statements are contained in the final engineer material and which are evidenced elsewhere?

Santheos coordinates project records and makes the document trail understandable within its agreed service scope. Independent legal and technical advisers remain responsible for advice to the buyer, and the competent authority determines residence-permit outcomes.

Related Santheos reading

Official sources

This article is general information, not legal, tax, technical or immigration advice. Eligibility and filing outcomes depend on the property, the applicant and the competent authority.

Continue your research

Prepared by: Santheos Research & Project Team. Last reviewed: September 2026. General information only, not legal, tax or immigration advice. Eligibility is subject to final legal review. Review the Greece Golden Visa Encyclopedia, the official Mitos entry, or contact Santheos for a property-specific discussion.