Tech E&O insurance in Germany
What your German IT liability policy covers, where it stops at the US border, and what a US customer's insurance clause really asks for.
Prefer to read first? Jump to the summaryRequest your Tech E&O check in 2 minutes
A few short questions about your company and your situation. Then Jan replies personally with an honest first assessment, in English or German, whichever you prefer.
2 minutes · free · no obligation- Your IT liability or professional liability policy, read against the clause in your contract
- Territory, US courts, defence costs and trigger, confirmed in writing by the insurer
- Tech E&O and cyber side by side, so nothing falls between the two
- Software as a product: where the new EU rules touch your cover
- Your customer's insurance clause, translated and compared with your policies
Tech E&O in Germany in six points
Tech E&O (technology errors and omissions) is the cover US customers ask for by name when a software or IT company delivers a service. German policies cover the same risk under other names, with other triggers and other limits. This page shows how the two fit together, and where they do not.
There is no single German product called Tech E&O. The risk is usually spread over an IT liability policy or a professional liability policy for pure financial loss (VSH), and a separate cyber policy. For a US customer the questions are always the same: is the USA inside the territory, are claims raised in US courts covered, do defence costs reduce the limit, and which event triggers the policy?
Key takeaways
- Tech E&O has no one-to-one German product. In Germany it sits in an IT liability policy or a professional liability policy for pure financial loss (VSH), usually next to a separate cyber policy.
- General liability alone is not enough. In the GDV model wording for general liability, the extension for pure financial loss excludes losses from your own products, work and services, and the data module excludes IT activities such as software development.
- The description of activities decides. The GDV model for IT service providers names software creation, implementation and maintenance, IT analysis and training, and network work. Application service providing (SaaS) and the operation of data centres are covered only if specially agreed.
- The trigger matters as much as the limit. The GDV IT model is event-based, and claims for pure financial loss can be reported up to three years after the policy ends. US contracts speak of claims-made cover, a retroactive date and a period after the customer contract ends.
- The border is where gaps appear. The GDV IT model excludes punitive damages, counts defence costs abroad against the sum insured and has special deductible rules for the USA and Canada. The GDV cyber model counts only claims raised in the EEA under EEA law.
- Software is a product under EU law for products placed on the market after 9 December 2026. Natural persons can claim for injury, property damage and private data loss. Business customers cannot rely on the directive; their claims still run under contract and tort law, which is what Tech E&O is for.
What is on this page
Three policies, one risk
A US customer asks for Tech E&O. In Germany the same risk is spread over up to three policies, each with its own wording. Reading them together is the first step.
The table below translates the terms you meet in a US or UK contract into the policies you will find in Germany.
IT liability (IT-Haftpflicht)
Liability for injury, property damage and, within named activities, pure financial loss from IT work. The GDV model for IT service providers shows how such a wording is typically built.
Professional liability for pure financial loss (VSH)
Liability for pure financial loss from advice, planning and services. For IT and consulting firms it is often the policy behind the words professional liability or E&O in a contract. Wording and trigger differ by insurer.
Cyber insurance
Your own costs after a security incident and, in the third-party part, claims by others. It overlaps with Tech E&O when a software flaw leads to a breach, so the two wordings have to be read together.
This page explains how to read German policies against US terms. It is a method, not an insurance product, and it is no coverage statement: which policy responds depends on your wording and the facts.
| Term in the contract | Closest German counterpart | Usual trigger | What to watch |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technology E&O, professional liability, E&O | IT liability (IT-Haftpflicht) or professional liability for pure financial loss (Vermögensschadenhaftpflicht, VSH) | The GDV IT model is event-based. Other VSH wordings are often breach-based. | Is every service you sell named, including SaaS and hosting? Which losses carry a sub-limit? |
| Professional indemnity (UK term) | The same German policies as above | As above | The term differs, the questions do not: territory, trigger, limit and the period after the policy ends. |
| Commercial general liability (CGL) | General liability (Betriebshaftpflicht, BHV) | Event-based | Is the USA inside the territory? Is the sum insured as high as the contract asks? |
| Cyber liability, network security and privacy liability | Cyber insurance (third-party part) | The GDV cyber model counts the loss first verifiably established during the policy period. | The GDV model counts only claims raised in EEA states under EEA law. |
| Technology products and services liability | A mix: IT liability, product liability (PHV) and cyber | Differs by policy | A single limit in the contract may need several German policies. Read them together. |
| Products and completed operations | Product liability (Produkthaftpflicht, PHV) | Event-based | The GDV general liability model excludes products destined for the USA and Canada unless agreed. |
| Contractual liability, hold-harmless | Not a policy of its own: it must be co-insured in the policies above | Not applicable | The GDV IT model excludes guarantees and other contractual extensions of liability. |
| Umbrella, excess liability | Higher limits, or an excess policy on top of the liability policies | Follows the underlying policy | Check that it follows the same terms and the same territory. |
Closest counterpart, not identical: wording, triggers and exclusions differ by insurer. The model wordings are non-binding GDV templates.
How good is your Tech E&O cover? The traffic-light check
This is the part of the page to use with your own policy in your hand. It follows the questions that a US customer's clause raises, one by one: what is insured, where and in front of which court, and when and up to what amount.
The check goes policy by policy. An IT liability policy, a professional liability policy and a cyber policy each answer part of the clause, and none of them answers all of it.
What is insured
Which of your services the policy names, and whether pure financial loss, contract promises and delay are inside. The description of activities is the first thing to read.
Where and in front of which court
Whether the USA is inside the territory, whether claims raised in US courts or under US law are covered, and whether defence costs reduce the sum insured.
When and how much
Which event triggers the policy, how long cover continues after it ends, and whether the sum insured matches the largest contract you sign.
A data migration goes wrong for a US customer
Example Data Bridge GmbH, 18 employees, migrates the order database of a US customer to a new cloud platform. Records are lost, and the customer's ordering system is down for four days. The customer sues in a US state court and claims USD 240,000 for lost sales and rebuilding costs. Nobody was hurt and nothing was damaged: the loss is purely financial.
Policy A: Europe only, US proceedings excluded
The policy insures pure financial loss, but its territory ends at the European border or it excludes claims raised in US courts. The insurer can decline the claim, and the company pays it, and its own lawyers in the USA, from its own assets.
Policy B: worldwide, US proceedings included
The territory is worldwide and claims raised in US courts are included. The insurer examines the claim, defends against unjustified parts and pays what is justified. Defence costs may still reduce the sum insured, so even this policy needs a limit with room for long proceedings.
Fictional company and invented figures, for illustration only. Real outcomes depend on the policy wording and the facts.
The traffic-light check for Tech E&O cover
| Criterion | Good | Review | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope: what is insured | |||
| Description of activities | Every service you sell is named, or an open description covers typical IT activities. | Activities listed one by one; new services need a notification. | An important activity is missing. |
| SaaS, hosting and data processing | Named as insured activities, including running your own platform. | Covered after a special agreement, or with a sub-limit. | Not mentioned, or excluded. |
| Pure financial loss from software and IT services | Insured as the core of the policy, without a low sub-limit. | Sub-limit for typical losses. | Not insured for your own software and services. |
| Loss or corruption of customer data | Insured without a low sub-limit. | Sub-limit. | Excluded. |
| Contractual penalties, service credits and guarantees | Insured up to a stated limit, in writing. | Insured only as far as liability would exist without the contract term. | Excluded. |
| Delay and missed deadlines | Delay damages are insured. | Sub-limit. | Excluded. |
| Territory and courts | |||
| Territory | Worldwide, or at least every country where your customers are, including the USA and Canada. | The USA and Canada only after a notification, or with a sub-limit. | Germany or the EU only. |
| Claims raised in US courts or under US law | Insured, with no carve-out for US proceedings and no separate deductible. | Certain US or Canadian statutes excluded, or a higher deductible applies. | Excluded. |
| Defence costs | Paid on top of the sum insured. | Count against a sum insured that is high enough for long proceedings. | Count against a low sum insured. |
| Punitive damages | Insured as far as the law of the state allows. | Not mentioned: ask in writing. | Excluded. |
| Trigger and time | |||
| Trigger | Stated clearly, and it maps to the customer's clause (event-based, or claims-made with a retroactive date). | Stated, but it does not map one to one to the clause. | Unclear, or contradicting the clause. |
| Retroactive cover | Work delivered before the policy started is insured, unless you knew of a problem. | Limited to a number of years. | None. |
| Reporting period after the policy ends | 5 years or longer. | More than 1 and under 5 years (the GDV IT model allows 3). | None, or 1 year at most. |
| If you stop trading | Cover for late claims continues for a stated period, priced in advance. | Available on request, price open. | None. |
| Limits and neighbouring policies | |||
| Sum insured against your largest contract | At least the highest limit any customer contract asks for. | Lower, but a higher limit can be agreed for single contracts. | Far lower, with no way to raise it. |
| Annual aggregate | At least the aggregate the contract asks for, and twice the per-claim limit. | Meets the contract, but equal to the per-claim limit. | Lower than the aggregate the contract asks for. |
| Cyber insurance alongside | A cyber policy whose third-party limit and territory meet the contract. | A cyber policy whose limit or territory falls short. | No cyber policy. |
| Injury and property damage caused by software | Confirmed in writing: the general, product or IT policy responds. | Unclear which policy responds. | Excluded in all of them. |
Consulting grid, not norms. A gap is something to know before you sign; it does not mean that every policy must close it. The policy wording decides.
Which cover fits which activity?
| Your activity | Usual mix of policies |
|---|---|
| Custom software and apps | IT liability or professional liability (VSH) as the core, general liability (BHV) for injury and property damage, cyber for data incidents. |
| SaaS and cloud services | As above, with SaaS and hosting named as insured activities. In the GDV model wording for IT service providers, application service providing is covered only if specially agreed. |
| IT consulting and implementation | Professional liability (VSH) or IT liability for pure financial loss from advice and project work, with general liability (BHV) next to it. |
| Managed services, support and maintenance | IT liability with maintenance and operation named; cyber for incidents on systems you run for others. |
| Embedded software, IoT and telematics | IT liability or VSH for the software, product liability (PHV) where the software is part of a physical product, cyber for connected devices. Check the USA and Canada for products. |
| Hardware resale and installation | General liability (BHV) and product liability (PHV) first, with IT liability where you also configure or program systems. |
Rule of thumb from advisory practice, not a legal requirement. What you need depends on your activities, your contracts and your customers.
Three questions for your insurer
Activities and SaaS
Is every service we sell named in the policy, including SaaS, hosting and maintenance, and is pure financial loss from them insured without a low sub-limit?
Contract terms
How does the policy treat the service credits, contractual penalties, guarantees and fixed deadlines that our customer contracts contain?
US proceedings
Are claims raised in US courts or under US law covered, are certain statutes excluded, do defence costs reduce the sum insured, and does a separate deductible apply for the USA and Canada?
The GDV model wording for IT service providers lists the cases it covers and works with exclusions. It excludes guarantees and other contractual extensions of liability (clause 3.4.2.2), and missed deadlines, dates and cost estimates (clause 3.4.2.9). Your own wording may differ, but these are the clauses to read first.
The headline sum insured says little on its own. The description of activities, the list of covered cases and the exclusions decide whether a claim is paid, which is why the check starts there.
In US contracts
A US customer reads your cover through its insurance clause: Tech E&O and cyber limits, additional-insured status, claims-made wording and notice of cancellation. The next section shows what such a clause typically asks for and what to ask your German insurer in return.
Reading the Tech E&O clause in a US contract
A US customer's insurance clause is short, but every line carries a question for your German policy. The table takes the lines that matter for software and IT services and sets each next to a published example and the question to put to your insurer.
The figures come from public sources and are examples, not a standard. Limits are negotiable, and the only requirement that binds you is the one in your contract.
| Clause | What it asks for | Published example (USD) | What to ask your German insurer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Professional liability / technology E&O | Cover for pure financial loss from your software, advice or IT services, often written on a claims-made basis. | One public US university, for design or build work only: 1M per claim, 2M aggregate. Two other public universities: 1M and 2M. | Is the cover an IT liability or professional liability (VSH) policy, and are all your services named? Is the USA inside the territory, and are claims raised in US courts covered? |
| Cyber and technology products and services liability | Third-party claims after a security incident or a failure of your technology, and sometimes your own costs. | The same university: at least 5M for each wrongful act. Other public universities: 2M, or tiered from 0.5M to 10M. A 2025 law firm review: 2M to 5M is not uncommon for small and mid-size vendors; larger or higher-risk vendors may face demands for 10M or more. | Does the third-party part respond to claims raised in the USA? The GDV cyber model counts only claims raised in EEA states under EEA law. |
| Claims-made cover and the period after the end | The claim must be made, and usually reported, while the policy runs or within a stated period after the policy ends. | The same university: claims-made policies must stay in place for at least 12 months after completion or termination of the agreement. Two other public universities: three years after the agreement ends. | Is your policy event-based or claims-made? The GDV IT model is event-based, and claims for pure financial loss can be reported up to 3 years after the policy ends. Ask how that maps to the clause. |
| Retroactive date | The date from which earlier work is insured under a claims-made policy. | One public university asks for a retroactive date on or before the start of the agreement. | Does the policy insure work delivered before it started? The GDV IT model covers earlier deliveries only if specially agreed. |
| Contractual liability and indemnity | Liability you take on by contract, such as hold-harmless and indemnity clauses. | The same university: general liability must include contractual liability. | Is contractual liability co-insured? The GDV IT model excludes guarantees and other contractual extensions of liability (clause 3.4.2.2). |
| Additional insured and waiver of subrogation | The customer is named as an insured under your policy, and your insurer gives up its right to recover a paid claim from the customer. | The same university: the university and its governing board named as additional insureds; the waiver of subrogation by endorsement. | Will your insurer agree both by endorsement, and for which policies? Ask in writing, policy by policy. |
| Notice of cancellation and certificate | Proof of cover before work starts, and notice if the policy is cancelled. | The same university: 30 days' written notice of cancellation (10 days for non-payment of premium); evidence of insurance before services begin. | A certificate such as the ACORD 25 is issued for information only and does not change the cover. Ask what your insurer will issue and what notice it will give. |
Examples published by public US universities and a 2025 review by a US law firm. One university page was checked on 29 October 2026, the others on 16 October 2026 (see Sources). Requirements differ by contract, state and project size. The customer's contract is the only binding source.
A 2025 review by a US law firm asks how insurance requirements fit with liability caps. A high insurance requirement next to a low cap on liability is a point for your lawyer to raise. The legal assessment of the clause is not ours; we check what your policies do with it.
Where German IT liability wordings stop
German wordings are written for German law and German courts, and for a market in which an IT company sells services to other companies. The result is a policy that is sound at home and can fall short of a US clause. The six places below are where it shows.
The clause numbers refer to the GDV model wording for IT service providers (April 2007) unless stated otherwise.
Only what is described is insured
The model wording names software creation, implementation and maintenance, IT analysis and training, and network work (clauses 1.1.1 and 1.1.2). Application service providing (SaaS) and the operation of data centres are covered only if specially agreed. An activity missing from the description is, in case of doubt, not insured.
Pure financial loss is covered in listed cases
The model wording lists the cases of pure financial loss it covers (clause 3.3.3) instead of covering pure financial loss in general. A loss that is not on the list has to be checked against the wording of your own policy.
Guarantees and deadlines are excluded
The model wording excludes guarantees and other contractual extensions of liability (clause 3.4.2.2), and missed deadlines, dates and cost estimates (clause 3.4.2.9). Service credits, contractual penalties and fixed delivery dates in a customer contract therefore need a separate look.
The USA and Canada have their own rules
In the model wording, events abroad are covered only in listed cases, punitive damages are excluded, defence costs for proceedings abroad reduce the sum insured, and special deductible rules apply to the USA and Canada (clauses 1.5.1 and 1.5.2). Whether punitive damages can be insured at all depends on the US state. One insurer's published IT liability conditions (10/2025) insure worldwide, but exclude certain claims raised in US or Canadian courts or under their law, for example under the RICO and ERISA statutes.
Cyber is a different policy with its own border
The GDV cyber model wording is worldwide in principle, but it counts only claims raised in EEA states and under EEA law, and the insured event is the loss first verifiably established during the policy period. A claim raised in the USA under US law would fall outside this model wording.
Event, claim or breach
The GDV IT model is event-based (clause 3.5.1), and claims for pure financial loss can be reported up to three years after the policy ends (clause 3.2). A US contract speaks of claims-made cover, a retroactive date and a period after the end of the customer contract. Some German professional liability wordings are breach-based, and cyber wordings differ again. Map the trigger before you compare the limits.
Ask your insurer in writing whether the policy meets each line of the customer's clause: activities, territory, US courts, defence costs, deductible and trigger. A written answer is worth more than a model wording, and more than a web page, including this one.
Software is a product: what changes for Tech E&O
From 9 December 2026, Directive (EU) 2024/2853 treats software as a product for products placed on the market after that date. For IT companies this is a new route to liability, and it raises the question of which of your policies would respond if software causes injury, property damage or data loss.
The rules protect natural persons. Companies that buy your software cannot claim under the directive; their claims still run under the contract and general tort law, which is where Tech E&O applies.
For business-to-business software the main exposure stays the same: a customer's financial loss under the contract. The directive adds a second layer for injury, property damage and the loss of private data caused by software. Ask your insurer in writing which policy responds to that second layer, and whether software is treated like a product in the product liability wording.
| Point of the directive | What it says | What to check in your cover |
|---|---|---|
| Software is a product (Articles 4(1) and 2(2)) | Software counts as a product, with an exception for free and open-source software developed or supplied outside a commercial activity. | Is software named in the product liability (PHV) wording, or are only physical goods insured? Does the IT liability policy respond to injury and property damage from software? |
| Updates and upgrades (Article 11(2)) | Defects that appear later through a software update or upgrade, or through a missing safety update, can count where the update was within the manufacturer's control. | Does cover reach damage caused by an update or a missing update after delivery, and for how long after the policy ends? |
| Cybersecurity (Article 7(2)(f)) | Safety-relevant cybersecurity requirements are one of the circumstances for judging whether a product is defective. | Which of your policies responds to damage that results from a security flaw: IT liability, cyber or both? Is the loss of private individuals' data covered? |
| No contractual shield (Article 15) | The liability toward injured persons cannot be limited or excluded by contract. | The liability caps you agree with business customers do not protect you against these claims. Check your sum insured against claims that no contract can limit. |
| Components and related services (Articles 4(3), 4(4) and 8(1)(b)) | The manufacturer of a defective component, including a digital service the product needs to work, can be liable together with the manufacturer of the finished product. | If your software or service is built into another company's product, who bears the recourse claim, and is it inside your cover? |
A checklist for the conversation with your insurer, not a coverage statement and not legal advice. The official text of the directive prevails (see Sources).
Four questions for your insurer
Injury and property damage from software
Does the policy respond if software causes injury or property damage, and which policy is it: general liability, product liability or the IT policy?
Private data
Is the loss or corruption of private individuals' data insured, and under which policy?
Updates after delivery
Does cover reach damage caused by an update or by a missing update after delivery, and how long does it last after the policy ends?
Software inside someone else's product
If your software is a component in another company's product, is the recourse claim of that company insured, and is the USA inside the territory?
What to have ready before you ask for quotes
A Tech E&O quote is only as good as the facts behind it. Insurers ask what you sell, to whom and on which terms. With these answers ready, the check is faster and the quotes can be compared.
What you sell, and where
Revenue by activity (software, SaaS, consulting, hosting, hardware) and by region, with the USA and Canada shown separately. Headcount, subcontractors and the cloud providers you depend on.
What you have promised
Your standard terms and any negotiated liability caps, service levels, penalties and indemnities. The insurance clause of the contract that triggered the enquiry, and your largest contract.
How you keep errors small
Testing and release routines, backups, access control and incident handling, and whether you hold a security certification. Insurers usually ask about them.
Typical application questions
- Revenue by activity and region, with the USA and Canada shown separately
- Your standard terms and negotiated liability caps and indemnities
- The cover your customers ask for, and your largest single contract
- Known incidents, claims and circumstances that could lead to a claim
- Subcontractors, cloud providers and open-source components you depend on
One claim, three triggers
The trigger decides which policy pays, and it is the point where German and US wordings differ most. The example follows one software error through three kinds of trigger. The company and the dates are invented.
Example Portal Software GmbH, 30 employees, delivers a customer portal. The company and all dates are invented to show the mechanism. They do not describe a real customer, and which policy responds in a real case depends on the wordings.
The timeline
15 March 2026: delivery
The company delivers the portal. It contains a time-zone error that nobody notices.
2 September 2026: the damage
The error causes wrong bookings, and the customer suffers a financial loss.
1 January 2027: a new insurer
The company changes its IT liability insurer. The new policy starts on this day.
12 January 2027: the claim
The customer sends a written claim for its loss.
Which policy responds
With an event-based trigger, the old policy responds, because the damage happened while it was in force. With a breach-based trigger, the old policy responds as well, because the breach, the delivery with the error, happened in March 2026. With a claims-made trigger, the new policy responds, if its retroactive date reaches back to March 2026 and the claim is reported in time.
What to do
Notify the claim to the insurer or insurers that could be responsible, and do not admit liability or settle before the insurer has agreed. Before a change of insurer, ask in writing how a known error would be treated.
Tech E&O insurance in Germany: frequently asked questions
Short answers to the questions we hear most from software and IT companies that work with US customers, and from the German firms that serve them in English.
Two ways to your Tech E&O check
Whether you want the full check or prefer to start with a short talk: either way, you will know your next steps. No obligation, no sales pitch.
Send your clause, get your gaps
Tell us what you sell and where. Send us the insurance clause of your contract and your current policy documents. We compare them point by point and show where the gaps are, in English.
15 minutes with Jan, online
No sales call, but an honest first assessment of your situation, your options and the order of the steps. Then you decide.
Pick a timeRead it all? Then request your Tech E&O check in 2 minutes.
You have seen the policy check, the US clauses and the limits of German wordings. The last step is the simplest: a few details about your company, then Jan replies personally, or you book a slot straight afterwards.
2 minutes · free · no obligation- Jan reads your answers personally before anyone gets in touch
- You get an honest first assessment: gaps, priorities and open questions
- We reply in English or German, whichever you prefer
- Your customer's insurance clause is compared with your policy wording