Inbound investment into Greece: a practical overview

Greece continues to attract international investment across a broad range of sectors, including real estate, energy, infrastructure, tourism, logistics, technology and financial services.

For international investors, however, the practical questions are rarely about the attractiveness 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.

Foreign direct investment screening in Greece

Greece introduced a dedicated foreign direct investment (FDI) screening framework through Law 5202/2025, implementing the EU framework established by Regulation (EU) 2019/452. The regime applies to qualifying investments by third-country investors and, subject to specific conditions, to investments by EU investors that are controlled by third-country persons or entities or by third-country governments, or, in certain cases, where third-country persons, entities or governments hold a qualifying participation in the EU investor. Covered investments are screened on grounds of security or public order.

The Greek regime distinguishes between sensitive and particularly sensitive sectors. Sensitive sectors include energy, transport, health, information and communication technologies and digital infrastructure. Particularly sensitive sectors include defence and national security, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, port infrastructure, critical underwater infrastructure and certain tourism infrastructure in border areas. The applicable thresholds and conditions vary depending on the sector and the nature of the investment.

That distinction matters at the deal-planning stage. The applicable sector classification and threshold can determine whether an investment is subject to FDI screening and, consequently, whether the screening process needs to be factored into the transaction timetable.

In practice, sector classification should therefore be addressed early — ideally before signing a term sheet. It can determine whether FDI screening becomes a critical-path item for closing and needs to be built into the transaction timetable from the outset.

Structuring around the regulatory perimeter

Beyond FDI screening, the applicable regulatory perimeter depends heavily on the target sector and transaction structure. Energy and infrastructure projects carry their own licensing and environmental permitting tracks; real estate acquisitions above certain thresholds may intersect with investment migration considerations, including the Golden Visa framework, as well as restrictions applicable to non-EU ownership in certain border regions; financial services and payments targets may be subject to notification or approval requirements from the Bank of Greece or, depending on the nature of their activities, the Hellenic Capital Market Commission.

None of this is exotic, but it does mean the corporate structuring work — holding company jurisdiction, financing structure, allocation of regulatory risk in the transaction documents — 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. Regulatory clearances, where required, sit on the same critical path as financing conditions and corporate approvals — sequencing them from the outset, rather than discovering the dependency mid-transaction, is often 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.