Sort of.

The Soviet occupation of their sector of German, which later became the GDR, had a deliberate policy to extract reparations in order to repair damage to the Soviet Union and to keep the German state from being a military threat. The Soviets did this in three ways. Firstly, they directly seized movable industrial assets and relocated them to the Soviet Union. They imposed a cash indemnity. Lastly they ordered goods from the GDR's planned economy delivered to the Soviet Union and paid less than full value. The net effect, in combination to the Iron Curtain itself (a much bigger discussion), was to sharply limit the East German economy.

The French, British and US occupation had a different policy. Having experienced the ineffectiveness of a cash indemnity as well as its destabilization of the world economy in the aftermath of WWI, the United States actually injected money into Germany (as part of the Marshall plan) in an effort to restore economic stability. These funds were used to buy American exports, which helped the US economy re-adjust to peacetime conditions. This approach, in combination with industrial controls imposed by the occupation, allowed the United States to control and direct to some degree the West German economy without a negative political reaction. Whether this was a primary driver of the West German economic recovery is still debated by economists. West German did pay reparations to countries like Israel, but this was a relatively small amount in comparison.

The net effects of these differences in policy did mean that the GDR paid considerably more.