Foreign direct investment in Greece: a practical overview
Structuring, screening and sector clearances for inbound investment into Greece — what changes for the deal timeline, and where it doesn't.
Greece has remained one of the more active inbound-investment markets in south-eastern Europe, with sustained interest across real estate, energy, ports and logistics, tourism infrastructure and, increasingly, technology and financial services. For international investors, the practical questions are rarely about the desirability of the market — they are about sequencing: what has to happen before signing, what can run in parallel with due diligence, and what only becomes relevant after closing.
Screening under the EU FDI framework
Regulation (EU) 2019/452 establishes a cooperation mechanism between EU member states and the European Commission for screening foreign direct investment on grounds of security or public order. Greece's own screening framework interacts with this mechanism for investments in sensitive sectors — critical infrastructure, dual-use technology, media and certain strategic assets. In practice, this means an early sector classification exercise is worth doing before a term sheet is signed, not after: it determines whether a clearance step sits on the critical path to closing, and how long that step realistically takes.
Structuring around the regulatory perimeter
Beyond FDI screening, the applicable regulatory perimeter depends heavily on the target sector: energy and infrastructure projects carry their own licensing and environmental permitting tracks; real estate acquisitions above certain thresholds intersect with Golden Visa and non-EU ownership rules near border regions; financial services and payments targets bring Bank of Greece and Hellenic Capital Market Commission authorisations into the picture. None of this is exotic, but it does mean the corporate structuring work — holding company jurisdiction, financing structure, warranty and indemnity coverage — needs to be built with the sector-specific track already mapped out, rather than treated as a separate workstream that catches up later.
What this means for timeline
The single most common source of slippage we see is not the substantive regulatory analysis itself, but the assumption that it can start after signing. Sector clearances, where required, sit on the same calendar as financing conditions and corporate approvals — sequencing them from the outset, rather than discovering the dependency mid-transaction, is what keeps a deal on the timeline the parties actually agreed to.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on a specific matter, please contact us.