Are foreign buyers driving up Cyprus property prices?

The data says it’s complicatedAre foreign nationals snapping up real estate in Cyprus at an increasing rate? Yes, the numbers show that unequivocally. Has the situation spun out of control, driving up property prices for the rest, and even posing security considerations near ‘sensitive’ areas, as some politicians claim? Here the answer is less clear. The discussion was rekindled in parliament this week as MPs and the government are jointly working on amendments to the basic law, intending to place restrictions on the acquisition of real estate by foreign nationals. The Cyprus Mail understands that the term “foreign nationals” relates to non-EU persons. In parliament, one Akel MP asserted that foreigners now account for half of all property sales. He went on to frame the issue as one of national security, saying foreigners are buying up land near sensitive sites such as the ceasefire line, military installations, airports and harbours. Related Articles • Government moves to restrict foreign property purchases • Limassol and Paphos behind two-thirds of Cyprus property sales growth • Ministry clarifies new affordable housing schemes • Paphos posts highest new-house prices in Cyprus despite market slowdown • Cyprus property sees 13,288 sales in 8 months; Larnaca jumps 35% in August as Limassol slips • Investors back Cyprus, but energy bills and red tape spoil the pitch The same lawmaker also claimed that the en masse purchases had the effect of pricing out local buyers – a view shared by others. We asked Interior Minister Constantinos Ioannou if there is a timeline for the amendments to go to the House plenum for a vote. “It doesn’t depend on us [the government], it depends on parliament.” He did confirm that the amendments drawn up by the government include prohibitions on buying land near military camps. This constraint, he added, would apply to non-EU nationals only. In addition, they propose restrictions on the acquisition of land in agricultural areas – again applying to non-EU nationals. As far as airports go, the minister said there are already restrictions in place on buying land or building at a certain distance from such sites. This applies to anyone – Cypriot, EU or non-EU national. Half of sales made by foreigners For a more nuanced and granular perspective, we reached out to a real estate expert. Pavlos Loizou, the CEO of Ask Wire – a company dealing with real estate data analytics – said it’s important to get the terminology right and differentiate between the various issues. Is it true, we asked Loizou, that half of property sales involve foreign nationals. “The claim is right and wrong at the same time.” Locals and foreigners are buying different types of properties The Land Registry reports two different events. The first is a deposited contract of sale. This often relates to new or under-construction property for which a separate title does not yet exist, although it can also arise in other transactions where transfer is deferred. The second reported event is a completed sale or transfer, where legal ownership is transferred at the Land Registry. “The same property may therefore appear first as a contract and later as a transfer. The two figures should not be added or treated as equivalent.” In 2025 the comparison was 7,255 foreign-associated properties under deposited contracts against 18,114 total contracts. For January-August 2026, it was 5,562 against 13,288. “The trend is real,” said Loizou. “Foreign-associated contract activity increased by 16.5 per cent in 2025, while the whole contract market grew by 14.7 per cent. In January-August 2026, foreign-associated activity was approximately 20.4 per cent higher than in the equivalent 2025 period.” But “half of all sales” is still misleading. The latest proxy number is approximately 42 per cent, not 50 per cent. Completed transfers to foreign buyers remain close to 20 per cent. “If the proposed legislation targets non-EU nationals, the relevant contracts proxy is approximately 27 per cent, while completed transfers to non-EU buyers are only around 10 to 12 per cent.” These statistics include houses, apartments, fields, development land and commercial property. Who is buying? But what percentage of sales relate to individuals, and what to companies? Loizou said the individual-company split is unknown as the published Land Registry statistics don’t provide it. They also don’t identify the ultimate beneficial owner behind a Cyprus or EU company. “I’m unaware of evidence that the Land Registry is improperly registering transactions. If by ‘shenanigans’ you mean structures that make ultimate ownership difficult to follow, then there are genuine and long-standing blind spots.” For example, a company can own the property while its shares change hands. The registered property owner does not change. Also, a non-EU person can invest through a Cyprus or another EU company. And rights under a deposited sale contract can be transferred through an assignment agreement without an immediate transfer of title. “These structures have been used for decades and are not inherently illegal. The problem is that the statistics do not consistently reveal the person who ultimately controls the property.” In a September 2025 report, the Audit Office identified 9,746 assignment agreements still in force, covering Cypriot, EU and non-EU parties, but the Land Registry system could not separate them by nationality. Foreigners are counting for an increased number of property sales The report stated that “the reported transfers/sales to foreigners [non-EU nationals] do not include transfers/sales to Cypriot companies with foreign shareholders, since under the current law these companies are not considered ‘foreign’ and therefore do not need approval from the District Officer for the acquisition of immovable property. “These cases are recorded as transfers/sales to Cypriot buyers, and as a result the official statistics undercount the true participation of foreigners in the market. Therefore, the true number of transfers/sales to foreigners may be significantly higher.” These findings identify control and data weaknesses, but they do not prove widespread illegality, Loizou commented. What about sensitive areas? What of foreign-related purchases in areas near the Green Line, airports or harbours? There is no published parcel-level evidence establishing that “many” foreign purchases are concentrated around sensitive infrastructure. The published figures are district-level. They cannot show proximity to an airport, harbour, military site or the Green Line. Loizou stressed: “The first question should be: what precisely makes an area sensitive, and what harm is ownership expected to cause? Is the concern control of access, line of sight, the proposed use, the aggregation of adjoining plots or the possibility of obstructing future infrastructure? Each risk requires a different response.” As for two main port areas, they sit within major development locations. Larnaca port is part of an urban coastal area surrounded by residential and development zones. It is “natural” that projects there will target international as well as local buyers, Loizou opined. Limassol port is beside Zakaki, where the state and market have permitted or encouraged major attractions including MyMall, the casino resort and Limassol Greens. To his knowledge, the same pattern is not evident around Paphos airport, where much of the surrounding land is agriculturally zoned. This suggests that zoning and development potential are more important than proximity to infrastructure alone. Are foreign buyers driving prices up? Next up, the million-dollar question: are foreign buyers driving up prices? According to the expert, foreign demand does contribute to price pressure, particularly in coastal, new-build and development-land markets. But the claim that foreign buyers are responsible for housing unaffordability across Cyprus is too broad to be supported by the data. “The different datasets demonstrate that foreign participation does not mechanically translate into price increases. Paphos has by far the highest foreign-associated share but not the highest price growth. Famagusta has a foreign-associated share of approximately 46.5 per cent, yet its residential price index was almost unchanged.” The more salient point is that local and foreign purchasers often operate in different market segments. Foreign purchasers tend to target completed or new high-end apartments, larger houses, a relatively thin market for large commercial assets and, increasingly over the past three to five years, land for development. A village purchase is far more likely to be made by a Cypriot Whereas local buyers account for much more activity involving lower-budget houses and apartments, residential plots for self-build, village properties, agricultural land and smaller transactions between local parties. “A €50,000 village property and a €5 million development site each count as one transaction. Transaction counts therefore say nothing about value, size or direct competition between buyers.” If foreign buyers are mainly purchasing higher-end stock, direct competition with a local household seeking a modest home is limited. There can be an indirect effect when foreign capital raises development-land values or encourages developers to build more expensive products. “But this is a localised channel, not proof that foreigners caused the national affordability problem.” Affordability also reflects delayed planning and permitting, construction costs, population and employment growth, company relocations, insufficient long-term rental supply, short-term letting and a mismatch between the homes that exist and what households can afford in the locations where they need them. Can the market be regulated? So, can the market be regulated, or is this political theatre? “The market can be regulated, but the present discussion is framed too bluntly and risks becoming largely performative. Cyprus already has an approval framework for acquisitions by many non-EU buyers. The problem is not the complete absence of regulation; it is weak data linkage, limited visibility of ultimate beneficial ownership and a failure to define the precise risk being addressed.” Loizou said a coherent approach would separate the objectives. For national security, authorities should map the genuinely strategic parcels and assess ultimate ownership, connected holdings, share transactions, long leases, financing and control rights. Where a particular parcel is essential to infrastructure, use targeted reservation or compulsory-acquisition powers where legally justified, rather than broad nationality restrictions. For housing affordability, address suitable supply, planning delays, vacant and underused stock, affordable-housing obligations and long-term rental availability. “Foreign demand has increased and should be monitored,” Loizou said. “But security, housing affordability and investment policy require different datasets and different tools. The government should first define the harm, then measure it properly, and only then regulate the specific channel through which it arises.”