German Dual Citizenship Military Service: What the 2026 Wehrpflicht Rules Mean for US Citizens

A question many US families ask once a German claim looks possible: if my son turns out to be German, can Germany draft him?

It is a fair question, and the answer that circulates in English-language forums is usually wrong in one specific way. People read that military service obligations are "suspended" for Germans living abroad and conclude that the obligation does not exist at all.

That is not what the statute says. German law uses the word ruht (lies dormant), and a dormant obligation is still an obligation. It is simply not being enforced while certain conditions hold.

This article walks through what the Wehrpflichtgesetz (the Military Service Act) in its version of December 22, 2025, effective January 1, 2026, actually provides for a German citizen who lives in the United States. It also covers the one rule in this area that can genuinely affect a citizenship claim: §28 StAG, which concerns service in a foreign army.

Before any of that matters, though, there is a prior question. Obligations attach to German citizens, so the first thing to establish is whether you are one.

The liability rule is short and it does not contain a geographic escape clause. Under §1 (1) WPflG, men from the age of 18 who are Germans are liable for military service, including those with permanent residence abroad, where they hold a German passport or a certificate of citizenship.

Read that carefully. Permanent residence in Pennsylvania does not remove a man from the scope of the provision. Holding a second nationality does not either.

This is why the citizenship question comes first. If no German citizenship was ever transmitted down your family line, none of these rules reach you. If it was transmitted, they do, in the dormant form described below.

Most of the families we work with sit in one of five situations. The ordinary descent rule of §4 StAG passes citizenship from parent to child, but that chain breaks more often than people expect. The forensic anchor in almost every file is a single fact: did the German ancestor naturalize abroad, and when, relative to the birth of the next person in the line?

A child born before the parent's naturalization may still have acquired German citizenship at birth, which points toward a determination under §30 StAG. A child born after it acquired nothing, because the parent had already lost the status under §25 RuStAG 1913 or, for earlier emigrants, the ten-year rule of §21 RuStAG 1870. Where a historical gender-based discrimination also sits in the line, the declaration procedure under §5 StAG may repair it, with declarations due by August 19, 2031. Where the loss came from Nazi persecution, Article 116(2) GG and §15 StAG apply with no statutory deadline at all.

Our overview of the five pathways to German citizenship by descent sets out how each route is documented.

Here is the provision that gets mistranslated. Under §1 (2) WPflG, the liability for military service lies dormant as long as the person's permanent residence and the basis of his life are abroad, and as long as facts justify the assumption that he intends to remain abroad.

Three elements sit in that sentence, and all three matter. Permanent residence abroad. The economic and personal basis of life abroad. And circumstances supporting the assumption that this will continue.

The Bundeswehr describes the same conditions in its public guidance on Musterung and the questionnaire, noting that the obligation lies dormant where permanent residence and the basis of life are abroad and facts justify the assumption that the person intends to keep that arrangement.

The dormancy is not unconditional. §1 (3) WPflG lists situations in which it does not apply, for instance where someone moves his residence abroad during ongoing military service. Someone who relocates to Germany moves out of the dormancy condition, because his residence and the basis of his life are no longer abroad.

So the honest formulation for a German citizen in the United States is this: the obligation exists and currently lies dormant. It is not abolished, and it is not personally waived.

There is a second layer, and it is the one that makes the practical answer reassuring in 2026 without requiring anyone to misread §1 (2).

Outside the Spannungsfall (state of tension) or the Verteidigungsfall (state of defence), there is currently no obligation to perform basic military service under §2 (2) and (3) WPflG. A needs-based conscription, a Bedarfswehrpflicht, would require a further act of the Bundestag under §2a WPflG.

That is a legislative condition, not an administrative discretion. No ministry can switch conscription on by decision; parliament would have to legislate.

For a reader in the United States, the two layers combine like this. The statutory liability reaches Germans abroad. The liability lies dormant while residence and the basis of life are abroad. And in the current legal situation, no one in Germany is being called up for basic service anyway.

None of those three statements is a guarantee about the future, and we do not present them as one. They are the law as it reads in the version effective January 1, 2026.

The part of the 2026 framework that produced the most confusion abroad is the questionnaire. Many American readers heard that Germany was sending out forms and assumed that a German passport would put them on a mailing list.

Two separate rules apply. First, outside the Spannungsfall or Verteidigungsfall, the questionnaire and the Musterung (medical and administrative screening) apply only to men born after December 31, 2007, under §2 (4) WPflG. In a state of tension or defence, that birth-cohort limit falls away.

Second, the Federal Foreign Office states that for Germans permanently resident abroad, the Wehrerfassung (registration for military service) lies dormant. According to its consular guidance on military service, no questionnaires are sent to them and there is no duty to answer one. Someone who moves back to Germany is registered subsequently and may receive one then.

The same guidance makes a point worth repeating. A second nationality changes nothing in this analysis. What matters is the German citizenship, on its own terms.

Voluntary service remains possible from abroad for those who want it. That is a choice, not an obligation.

The liability is not open-ended in time. It ends as a rule at the close of the year in which the man turns 45. For officers and non-commissioned officers, and in a state of tension or defence, it runs to 60.

For women, the constitutional position is clear and narrower than people assume in both directions. Under Article 12a GG, only men may be obliged to serve in the armed forces, and women may under no circumstances be obliged to render service involving the use of arms. In the Verteidigungsfall, and under the conditions set out in that article, women may be called to civilian services in the medical and health sector.

So the accurate sentence is not "women are unaffected by everything." It is that women cannot be conscripted into armed service, with a narrow constitutional possibility of civilian medical service in a state of defence.

This brings us back to vocabulary, because it is where most English-language summaries go wrong. Ruht means dormant. Gilt nicht would mean does not apply. The Wehrpflichtgesetz uses the first word, and anyone writing about it in English should carry that distinction across rather than smoothing it into an exemption.

Our article on what changed for German and US dual citizens in 2024 covers the related reform of the multiple-nationality rules.

This is the rule in this field that can actually touch a citizenship claim, and it runs in the opposite direction from what readers expect. It is not about Germany calling you up. It is about what happens when a German joins a foreign army.

Under §28 (1) no. 1 StAG, a German loses German citizenship if he voluntarily joins the armed forces, or a comparable armed body, of a foreign state whose nationality he holds, without the consent of the Federal Ministry of Defence or the body it designates. §28 (2) sets out exceptions: minors are not covered, the loss does not occur where the person would become stateless, and it does not occur where entitlement follows from an international treaty.

The German missions in the United States address the practical case. According to their guidance for German-American dual nationals, consent is deemed granted for Germans who also hold the nationality of a NATO state and join the armed forces of such a state. The entry must not have occurred before July 6, 2011. An earlier entry is not cured by that rule.

For genealogy work this is not theoretical. It can sit anywhere in a descent chain, which is why it belongs on the checklist alongside the naturalization date of the emigrating ancestor. Whether a given case is affected depends on the specific facts and has to be examined individually.

Two balancing points belong here. On the German side, §3 (2) StAG provides that a person who has been treated as a German citizen by German authorities for twelve years, through no fault of his own, acquires German citizenship; the issuance of a certificate of citizenship, a passport, or an identity card counts as such treatment, the acquisition takes effect retroactively, and it extends to descendants who derive their status from it. On the US side, 8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(3) provides that US nationality is lost through foreign military service only where the service is voluntary and undertaken with the intention of relinquishing nationality, and where those forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States or the person serves as an officer or non-commissioned officer.

We are not aware of any German-American agreement on the military service of dual nationals, and the 1963 Council of Europe convention has not bound Germany since 2002 and never bound the United States. We therefore make no claim that such an arrangement exists.

It helps to be precise about the obligations a German passport does not create, because overstatement in either direction is what drives families to bad decisions.

On income tax, the German rule does not run on nationality at all. Under §1 (1) EStG, unlimited income tax liability in Germany follows from a residence or a habitual abode in Germany. A residence exists where someone keeps a dwelling under circumstances suggesting he will retain and use it, under §8 AO. Someone with neither residence nor habitual abode in Germany is in principle taxable only on German-source income under §1 (4) EStG, with or without a German passport. Inheritance and gift tax follow their own rules under §2 ErbStG, so none of this amounts to general tax freedom. Separately, the IRS states that US citizens are subject to US tax on their worldwide income wherever they live. A second passport does not change that, and for your own situation you should speak to a tax adviser. Athena is a genealogy and application service, not a tax firm.

On travel, the State Department states that US nationals, including dual nationals, must use a US passport to enter and leave the United States. German law separately requires Germans to carry and present a valid German passport on departure and entry under §1 PassG. The German missions put the practical rule simply: carry both, use the US passport for the United States, the German one for Germany.

On US Selective Service registration we say nothing, because this article does not cover US law on that question. A dormant German obligation says nothing about any American one, and we will not fill that gap with speculation. Our overview of the benefits and obligations of a German passport for US citizens covers the rest of the practical picture, and our article on §15 StAG and Nazi persecution claims covers the restitution route in detail.

If you may hold German citizenship by descent and you are unsure how these rules apply to you, the sensible order is status first, consequences second. A free eligibility check examines your family line, identifies which pathway could apply, and establishes whether German citizenship was transmitted at all. Only then do questions about a dormant service obligation, §28 StAG, or tax residence become concrete. You might be eligible under one of the five pathways, and you may also find that your line was blocked generations ago. Either answer is better than the guess.