Wir planen langfristig, damit die Kosten sinken.

We plan long-term so that costs decrease.

Breakdown of Wir planen langfristig, damit die Kosten sinken.

• wir: we
• planen: to plan
• damit: so that
• langfristig: long-term
• die Kosten: the costs
• sinken: to decrease

Questions & Answers about Wir planen langfristig, damit die Kosten sinken.

What does damit mean here, and how is it different from deshalb?

• damit introduces a subordinate clause of purpose: “so that / in order that.” It expresses intention: We plan in such a way with the aim that costs go down.
• deshalb is a sentence adverb meaning “therefore/that’s why” and expresses a result, not a purpose. It starts a new main clause and triggers inversion.
• Compare:
  • Wir planen langfristig, damit die Kosten sinken. (purpose)
  • Wir planen langfristig; deshalb sinken die Kosten. (result)

Can I use um ... zu instead of damit here?

• Not with the verb sinken, because um ... zu requires the subject of both clauses to be the same.
• In the original, the main-clause subject is wir, but in the subordinate clause the subject is die Kosten.
• If you switch to a transitive verb and keep the same subject, it works: Wir planen langfristig, um die Kosten zu senken.

What’s the difference between sinken and senken?

• sinken is intransitive: something goes down by itself. Example: Die Kosten sinken.
• senken is transitive: someone lowers something. Example: Wir senken die Kosten.
• So your sentence correctly uses sinken because the costs are the thing that goes down.

Could I use sodass instead of damit?

• sodass (recommended spelling; so dass also accepted) expresses a result/consequence, often unintended or simply observed.
• damit expresses an intended goal.
• Both are grammatical, but nuance differs:
  • …, damit die Kosten sinken. (we aim for the costs to go down)
  • …, sodass die Kosten sinken. (as a result, the costs go down)

Why is the verb sinken at the end of the clause?

• In subordinate clauses introduced by subordinating conjunctions like damit, the finite verb goes to the end: … damit [Subject] [Rest] [Verb-final].
• Hence: … damit die Kosten sinken.

Is the comma before damit mandatory?

Yes. A comma is required before a subordinate clause introduced by damit. If you front the subordinate clause, you also keep a comma:

• Damit die Kosten sinken, planen wir langfristig.

Can I put the damit-clause first?

Yes: Damit die Kosten sinken, planen wir langfristig.

• This is a common way to emphasize the goal first; the grammar and meaning stay the same.

Where can I place langfristig in the sentence?

• Neutral: Wir planen langfristig, …
• Fronted for emphasis: Langfristig planen wir, …
• You cannot place it between subject and finite verb: ❌ Wir langfristig planen, … (violates verb-second rule)
• Alternatives: Wir planen auf lange Sicht / auf Dauer / langfristig gesehen, …

Does langfristig need an ending here (like langfristige)?

• No. Here it’s an adverb modifying planen, so it stays langfristig (no ending).
• As an adjective before a noun, it takes endings: eine langfristige Planung, langfristige Ziele.

Why is it die Kosten and why is the verb plural?

• Kosten is a plural-only noun in German (no singular), so it always takes the article die and a plural verb: die Kosten sinken.
• You can’t say die Kost sinkt.

Should I use the future tense (werden) anywhere?

• Not necessary. German often uses the present for future meaning, especially in subordinate clauses: …, damit die Kosten sinken.
• You could say Wir werden langfristig planen, … to stress a future decision, but … damit die Kosten sinken werden is uncommon; simple present is preferred.

How do I tell damit (conjunction) from damit (“with that”)?

• Conjunction damit is followed by a full clause with verb-final order: …, damit die Kosten sinken.
• Pronominal adverb damit = “with that/it” stands alone in the clause: Wir rechnen damit. / Ich arbeite damit.

Is there a nuance difference between damit die Kosten sinken and damit die Kosten nicht steigen?

• … damit die Kosten sinken aims at an actual reduction.
• … damit die Kosten nicht steigen aims at preventing an increase (holding them steady). Choose based on your intended meaning.

Can I say …, damit wir die Kosten reduzieren/senken?

Yes. That shifts from an intransitive outcome to an action you perform:

• Wir planen langfristig, damit wir die Kosten senken/reduzieren.
• Slight nuance: this emphasizes your agency in lowering costs, rather than the costs going down on their own.

Are other verbs like fallen or runtergehen okay with Kosten?

• The safest, most standard choice is Kosten sinken.
• Preise fallen is very common; Kosten fallen can be ambiguous because Kosten fallen an means “costs accrue.”
• runtergehen is colloquial; avoid it in formal contexts.

What are good synonyms for langfristig?

• auf lange Sicht, auf Dauer, mittelfristig (medium-term), dauerhaft (lasting), nachhaltig (sustainable, if that’s the idea).
• Example: Wir planen auf lange Sicht, damit die Kosten sinken.