ADMD/Mavioglu & Alkan Law Office

The Legal Regime of Crypto Assets in Turkey and the Role of Regulatory Institutions   ADMD Law Firm   Sudenaz Tunç   In recent years, with the rapid development of digital technologies, financial markets have also undergone a radical transformation; one of the most notable elements of this transformation has been crypto assets. Crypto assets, which came to the forefront worldwide with the emergence of Bitcoin in 2009, have created alternatives to traditional financial instruments in many areas such as investment, payment, and storage thanks to their decentralized structure and distributed ledger technology. However, this new type of digital asset has created significant uncertainties and regulatory gaps from a legal perspective due to its technical and economic characteristics.   These shortcomings have led to significant debates in legal doctrine regarding the legal nature of crypto assets. Different opinions have been put forward as to whether the legal nature of crypto assets can be classified as money, securities, property, or receivables; in particular, uncertainty has arisen as to whether crypto assets can be classified as “intangible property” (digital value without physical existence) in terms of the Law of Obligations and Civil Law. Additionally, there is a need for clear regulations regarding legal safeguards for investor protection and the supervisory powers of public authorities.   As a result of these needs, Law No. 7518 on the Regulation of Crypto Assets (“Law”) was published in the Official Gazette dated July 2, 2024 and numbered 32590 and entered into force. With this Law:   Crypto Asset Service Providers (“CASP”) have been granted legal status, Licensing and supervisory authority has been granted to the Capital Markets Board (“CMB”), A segregation obligation has been introduced to protect investors' assets, Administrative and criminal penalties have been established to prevent unauthorized activities.   The law has shaped not only the regulatory role of the CMB, but also the positions of institutions such as MASAK, BDDK, TCMB, Takasbank, and the Revenue Administration in the crypto asset market.   Thanks to this multi-actor model, the crypto ecosystem is being integrated into the financial system while providing legal security for users.  In this new era driven by digitalization, the ability of legal systems to produce innovative and flexible solutions will serve not only technology but also social trust.   DEFINITION AND LEGAL STATUS OF CRYPTO ASSETS   The technical structure of crypto assets has made it difficult to align them with concepts found in traditional legal systems. Created using cryptography-based distributed ledger technology, these assets do not fully fit into traditional categories such as money or securities due to their decentralized structure and digital nature. As a result, there has been prolonged uncertainty regarding the definition of crypto assets in legal literature and practice.   The first official definition of crypto assets in Turkey was made by the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (“CBRT”) in its Regulation on the Prohibition of the Use of Crypto Assets in Payments dated April 16, 2021 and numbered 31456. defining such assets as “non-tangible assets created virtually using distributed ledger technology or similar technology, which are not classified as fiat currency, book money, electronic money, payment instruments, securities, or other capital market instruments.” However, this definition remained within a narrow framework limited to payment law. This gap has been filled by the Law. Pursuant to Article 1 of the Law, crypto assets:   “Crypto asset: Intangible assets that can be created and stored electronically using distributed ledger technology or similar technology, distributed over digital networks, and that can represent value or rights.” This definition is noteworthy in three key respects:   The technical structure of crypto assets (distributed ledger technology) has been explained, It has been clearly stated that they are intangible assets, It has been emphasized that they are distinct from financial instruments defined in the current legal system.   With the definition provided in the law, the legal nature of crypto assets is now more clearly established as an “independent type of digital asset,” preventing them from being confused with electronic money, securities, or fiat currency.   However, academic debates over whether crypto assets are property or rights to receivables have not been completely resolved. From a civil law perspective, for an asset to be considered property, it must have material substance, whereas crypto assets exist only in the digital realm. For this reason, the view that crypto assets are “intangible property” (non-material property) has gained widespread acceptance.   The definition of crypto assets in this way has legal consequences such as property rights, seizure and bankruptcy, inheritance and disposal, and liability. Although there is now clarity regarding the definition of crypto assets, many legal areas still require development at the application level. Concrete examples of this development include the III-35/B.1 and III-35/B.2 circulars published by the Capital Markets Board (CMB) in the Official Gazette dated March 13, 2025, and numbered 32840. These circulars clearly regulate the conditions regarding the minimum capital amount, managerial qualifications, information system infrastructure, and internal control mechanisms for CASPs applying for a license. Additionally, the areas of activity that can be carried out without obtaining an operating license and the timelines for the transition process have also been determined.   THE ROLE AND POWERS OF THE CAPITAL MARKETS BOARD   In addition to defining crypto assets in Turkish legislation, the Law clearly assigns the CMB the task of regulating and supervising this new digital market. Thus, crypto asset service providers have been defined within the capital market regime for the first time and placed under the supervision of a public authority. Pursuant to Article 3 of the Law: “The establishment of crypto asset service providers, the granting of operating licenses, the suspension of their activities, merger and acquisition transactions, and their dissolution are subject to the approval of the Board.”   In addition, Articles 4 and 7 of the Law grant the CMB the following powers:   To issue secondary regulations regarding the activities of service providers, To determine eligibility conditions, To impose administrative fines, To intervene in unauthorized activities.   Article 9 of the Law stipulates that foreign crypto platforms providing services to persons residing in Turkey are also subject to CMB approval. In this context: “Reports may be made to the Information and Communications Technology Authority regarding foreign-based platforms operating without permission from the Board, and access restrictions may be imposed.” This provision aims to restrict the activities of foreign exchanges targeting users in Turkey but operating without a license, and to redirect competition toward licensed and regulated platforms.   The most notable case involving crypto assets in Turkey is the fraud case against Faruk Fatih Özer, founder of the Thodex exchange, who is accused of defrauding 400,000 users. The case continued after Özer was arrested in Albania and extradited to Turkey in 2021, raising serious public awareness about the lack of oversight of cryptocurrency platforms.   The CMB's new area of authority is not limited to regulation; it also targets public safety, capital market integrity, and investor protection. In particular, the losses suffered on domestic exchanges such as Thodex have clearly demonstrated the systemic risk posed by unregulated crypto markets. In this context, the CMB:   Prohibiting organizations without operating licenses from conducting transactions, Imposing custody requirements to protect investor assets, Imposing penalties such as fines and license revocation on platforms that violate the rules.   The CMB has been granted the authority to license, supervise, and, when necessary, impose sanctions on crypto asset service providers in the same manner as traditional brokerage firms. The aim is to ensure that the crypto market develops in a transparent and accountable manner under the supervision of public authorities.   CRYPTO ASSET SERVICE PROVIDERS (CASP)   One of the most important innovations introduced by the Law is the legal definition of all actors operating in the crypto asset market as “Crypto Asset Service Providers (CASP)” and their subjection to CMB supervision. This definition both grants legal identity and places crypto service providers under regulation on a similar level to traditional capital market institutions. Pursuant to Article 1 of the Law, a Crypto Asset Service Provider is defined as: “Platforms, institutions providing crypto asset custody services, and other institutions designated to provide services related to crypto assets, including the initial sale or distribution of crypto assets, in accordance with regulations issued under this Law.”   According to the law, it is mandatory to obtain a license from the CMB in order to operate as a CASP. A certain transition period has been granted to organizations currently operating; companies that do not apply for a license during this period or whose applications are rejected will be considered to be operating illegally. According to the CMB's secondary regulations for 2025, CASPs must have the following characteristics: Minimum initial capital, Qualifications required of managers and partners, Information security systems, Internal control and risk management structures,   With the CMB's Communiqués No. III-35/B.1 and III-35/B.2 published in the Official Gazette dated March 13, 2025 and numbered 32840, the minimum conditions that must be met in CASP license applications have been specified in detail. In this context, the minimum charter capital for CASPs providing platform services has been set at TRY 100 million, and for institutions providing only custody services, it has been set at TRY 50 million. The aforementioned capital must be paid in full and in cash, serving as a guarantee of the company's financial adequacy at the commencement of its operations.   With regard to management and partnership structure, company executives are required to have at least five years of experience in the capital markets or finance sector; members of the board of directors and senior executives must have a clean criminal record and must not have been convicted of crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, or fraudulent bankruptcy. Additionally, partners who directly or indirectly hold more than 10% of the company's capital are also subject to a similar suitability test.   In terms of information systems and technological infrastructure, CASPs must have ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System certification, data processing centers must be located within Turkey, and backup and disaster recovery plans must be in place. Real-time monitoring and reporting infrastructure is required to protect against system interruptions, cyber-attacks, and data integrity losses. Within this framework, the CMB checks system adequacy at least once a year through independent audit organizations. In addition, it is a legal requirement for CASPs to establish internal control, internal audit, and risk management systems. Within the framework of these systems:   An electronic complaint tracking mechanism should be established for receiving and monitoring customer complaints. An independent audit report should be prepared annually. A risk matrix should be created for operational, financial, and technical risks. Internal policies, procedures, and business continuity plans should be put in writing.   All these regulations aim to prevent the misuse of investor assets and the victimization of investors in cases such as platform bankruptcy or hacking. These stricter technical requirements, particularly regarding capital adequacy and internal control systems, are aimed at ensuring the transparent and reliable development of the crypto asset market in Turkey, including institutional investors.   One of the most critical provisions of the Law is the obligation of CASPs to store their customers' crypto assets separately from their own assets. In this context: “Customer assets cannot be seized by the service provider's creditors; they cannot be included in the assets to be distributed in the event of bankruptcy.” This regulation aims to ensure investor security and prevent the recurrence in Turkey of examples such as cryptocurrency exchange bankruptcies abroad (e.g., FTX).   CASPs are also considered “obligated parties” under MASAK regulations. In this context:   Identity verification , Suspicious transaction reporting, Identification of the beneficial owner, Reporting obligation within 72 hours, and other measures to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing.   In particular, MASAK Circular No. 29 dated 2025 has introduced practical control mechanisms such as withdrawal period restrictions, stablecoin limits, and transaction disclosure requirements for CASPs.   MASAK AND COMPLIANCE OBLIGATIONS   The anonymity feature of crypto assets has raised serious concerns that these assets could be used for crimes such as money laundering and terrorist financing. For this reason, the Financial Crimes Investigation Board (“MASAK”) began developing preventive regulations for crypto asset service providers in 2021; the most comprehensive step in this area was taken with the publication of General Circular No. 29 (“Circular”) in the Official Gazette No. 32940 dated June 28, 2025, which entered into force on the same day.   With this communiqué published by MASAK, crypto asset service providers have been explicitly included among the “obligated” institutions under Law No. 5549 on the Prevention of Money Laundering (“Law No. 5549”). This definition has imposed new obligations on CASPs at both the technical and legal levels.   In accordance with the Communiqué, CASPs:   Are required to implement Customer Due Diligence processes. Are obliged to monitor customer transactions on a risk-based basis and report suspicious transactions to MASAK within 72 hours at the latest. Must identify the beneficial owner of the person conducting the transaction. They are required to establish internal control mechanisms such as internal audit, training, and policy development.   Article 4 of the communiqué also introduces many new regulations related to implementation:   Withdrawal Delay Period: New users must wait at least 72 hours for their first withdrawal. Subsequent transactions must be delayed by at least 48 hours. Stablecoin Transfer Limit: A daily limit of USD 3,000 and a monthly limit of USD 50,000 have been introduced; the upper limit for high-risk transactions may be doubled. Transaction Description Requirement: Users are required to enter a description of at least 20 characters for each transfer; transactions without a description are not permitted.   Thanks to these measures, the traceability of crypto asset transactions has increased, and the aim is to prevent illegal financing activities through sudden fund transfers between platforms. With the entry into force of the Law, all CASPs licensed by the CMB are also responsible for fulfilling their MASAK obligations. Thus, the supervisory obligation has acquired both administrative (CMB) and crime-preventive (MASAK) characteristics, establishing a multi-layered compliance regime for the crypto asset market. TAKASBANK AND CENTRAL DEPOSITORY REGULATIONS   Although the framework for the storage of crypto assets is clearly regulated in the Law, there is no direct reference to Takasbank (İstanbul Takas ve Saklama Bankası A.Ş.) specifically. However, the obligation to store crypto assets belonging to investors separately from the assets of the CASP and the authority of the CMB to appoint custody institutions indicate that public institutions such as Takasbank may be involved in this area. In line with the secondary regulation authority granted to the CMB by the Law, the CMB Circular No. III 35/B.2 issued in 2025 introduced the following principles regarding custody services:   CSDs may hold customer assets on their own behalf or through a third-party custodian deemed appropriate by the CMB. Custodians are required to ensure the security of investor assets, establish contingency plans, and enter into service agreements with customers. Custody systems must be institutionally and technically competent and subject to CMB supervision.   This regulation paves the way for Takasbank to be positioned as an “authorized central depository” in the crypto asset market. Takasbank currently provides central depository and settlement services in areas such as securities, Borsa Istanbul transactions, and collateral management in Turkey.   If Takasbank is assigned to handle crypto assets, it could perform the following functions:   Storage of investor assets in a closed environment using cold wallet storage infrastructure, Execution of post-trade reconciliation and settlement processes in a centralized system, Transfer verification in over-the-counter (OTC) transactions, Development of insurance or public guarantee models for stored assets.   However, it should be noted that Takasbank has not yet been officially authorized by the CMB. Therefore, the appointment should only be considered as a potential option.   In Germany, crypto custody institutions licensed by BaFin are required to hold investor assets in legally segregated accounts and submit regular audit reports. The EU MiCA Regulation defines crypto asset custody as a service and requires platforms wishing to offer this service to obtain a separate license. In Turkey, integrating a state-backed entity like Takasbank into the custody process would both strengthen investor protection and reduce systemic risks in cases of platform bankruptcy or hacking.   TAXATION DIMENSION   Although the law has largely established a regulatory framework for crypto assets in Turkey, the taxation regime has not yet been clarified. With the law coming into force, the legal definition of crypto assets has paved the way for the establishment of a tax infrastructure by the Revenue Administration (RA).   However, there is currently no specific tax law, withholding obligation, or VAT application related to crypto assets. The basic principles that can be taken as a basis for taxation can be applied by interpretation within the framework of the provisions of the current Income Tax Law (GVK) and Value Added Tax (VAT) Law, according to the economic nature of crypto assets.   The RA has stated that income derived from crypto assets is taxable, but that there is currently no specific regulation on how and in what manner this should be declared. In response to the confusion in the public regarding crypto transaction reports submitted to banks in 2024 and 2025, the RA has clarified that the reporting obligation applies only to the relevant type of income and that automatic transaction reports alone do not create a tax liability.   Turkey is in the process of aligning with the OECD's Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) system by 2025. The CARF system aims to ensure the transparent reporting of crypto transactions and international tax cooperation. Under the MICA Regulation, entities seeking a CASP license must have capital adequacy, customer protection systems, information security procedures, and audit mechanisms in place. With these regulations, platforms seeking to provide services within the EU face significant obligations (MICA Official EU Regulation Text: Regulation [EU] 2023/1114, European Parliament and Council, May 31, 2023).   During the adaptation process, under this system: Crypto platforms will be required to report user transactions to the tax authority on an annual basis, There will be automatic information exchange between Turkey and other countries.   In addition, in parallel with the EU's MiCA regulation, it is expected that crypto assets will be taxed on both a transaction and asset basis and that a declaration system will be established. Although the law does not contain direct taxation provisions, it has established a specific legal status for crypto assets through its descriptive and licensing regulations. This status is a prerequisite for integration into tax legislation. In the coming period, it is anticipated that the Ministry of Finance and the Tax Administration will elaborate on elements such as reporting principles based on the type of crypto income, withholding tax and VAT applications, and the definition of investor and platform-based obligations.   PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS   The law is not limited to definitions and licensing regulations; it also specifies in detail the penalties that will be imposed on crypto asset service providers in the event of illegal activities. These sanctions include both administrative fines and criminal penalties involving imprisonment.   Fundamental Penal Provisions Introduced by the Law   Conducting Unlicensed Activities Pursuant to Article 99/A added to the Capital Markets Law No. 6362: “Those who engage in crypto asset service provider activities without obtaining permission from the Board shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of three to five years and a judicial fine of up to five thousand days.” This regulation serves as a deterrent against individuals and organizations conducting unauthorized activities in the crypto field.   Misuse of Investor Assets and Irregularities According to Article 35/B of the Law, acts such as misuse of investors' crypto assets, transferring them to other accounts, or using them as collateral for debts may constitute breach of trust and embezzlement. In such cases, Articles 155 and 247 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 may apply.   Administrative Fines and Suspension of Activities The CMB may impose sanctions such as revocation of operating license, temporary suspension of activities, and administrative fines (up to TRY 1 million) for violations detected during its inspections. These penalties are particularly applicable in cases of failure to ensure information system security, non-compliance with reporting obligations, or violations of storage rules.   Non-compliance with MASAK Obligations In the event of non-compliance with MASAK obligations, administrative fines ranging from TRY 30,000 to TRY 50,000 up to TRY 4 million may be imposed in accordance with Article 13 of Law No. 5549. and after a warning, these fines may increase to between TRY 500,000 and TRY 1,000,000.   Furthermore, deliberately concealing suspicious transaction reports may constitute a crime under the Turkish Penal Code. The penalties imposed are intended not only to act as a deterrent, but also to ensure investor safety and market integrity. In particular, measures to prevent unlicensed activities, enhance platform transparency, and impose sanctions against the misuse of customer assets demonstrate Turkey's efforts to establish a system aligned with international standards while regulating the cryptocurrency market.   CONCLUSION   Turkey has integrated crypto assets into its legal system for the first time through legislation, thereby taking an important step toward establishing a robust and regulated infrastructure for the future of digital finance. The effective functioning of this process depends not only on the legislature but also on the coordinated efforts of administrative authorities, supervisory mechanisms, and judicial bodies. Turkey has the potential to establish a balanced structure that both ensures user security and promotes the investment environment in the digital asset market. In conclusion, significant progress has been made in Turkey regarding the legal status of crypto assets with Law No. 7518. However, there are still areas open to development, such as tax applications, platform responsibility, and international compliance. The applicability of legal regulations, developed in collaboration with actors operating in the sector, is of critical importance for both investor security and market stability.

Türkiye’de Kripto Varlıkların Hukuki Rejimi ve Düzenleyici Kurumların Rolü   ADMD Avukatlık Bürosu Sudenaz Tunç   Son yıllarda dijital teknolojilerin hızla gelişmesiyle birlikte finansal piyasalar da köklü bir dönüşüm geçirmiş; bu dönüşümün en dikkat çeken unsurlarından biri kripto varlıklar olmuştur. 2009 yılında Bitcoin’in ortaya çıkışıyla dünya çapında gündeme gelen kripto varlıklar, merkeziyetsiz yapıları ve dağıtık defter teknolojisi sayesinde yatırım, ödeme ve saklama gibi birçok alanda geleneksel finansal araçlara alternatif oluşturmuştur. Ancak bu yeni dijital varlık türü, sahip olduğu teknik ve ekonomik özelliklerle hukuk sistemleri açısından ciddi belirsizlikler ve düzenleme boşlukları doğurmuştur.   Bu eksiklikler, öğretide kripto varlıkların hukuki niteliği hakkında önemli tartışmalara yol açmıştır. Kripto varlıkların hukuki mahiyetinin; para, menkul kıymet, eşya veya alacak hakkı olarak nitelendirilip nitelendirilemeyeceği hususunda farklı görüşler ileri sürülmüş; özellikle Borçlar Hukuku ve Medeni Hukuk bakımından kripto varlıkların “gayri maddi eşya” (fiziksel varlığı olmayan dijital değer) kapsamında değerlendirilip değerlendirilemeyeceği belirsizlik yaratmıştır. Ayrıca, yatırımcıların korunmasına dair hukuki güvenceler ile kamu otoritelerinin denetim yetkileri konusunda da açık düzenleme ihtiyacı doğmuştur.   Bu ihtiyaçların bir sonucu olarak, 7518 sayılı Kripto Varlıkların Düzenlenmesine İlişkin Kanun (“Kanun”) 2 Temmuz 2024 tarihli ve 32590 sayılı Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanarak yürürlüğe girmiştir. Bu Kanun ile:   Kripto varlık kavramı açık şekilde tanımlanmış, Kripto Varlık Hizmet Sağlayıcıları (“KVHS”) hukuki statüye kavuşmuş, Lisanslama ve denetim yetkisi Sermaye Piyasası Kurulu (“SPK”)'ya verilmiş, Yatırımcıların varlıklarının korunması için ayrıştırma yükümlülüğü getirilmiş, Yetkisiz faaliyetlerin önlenmesine ilişkin idari ve cezai yaptırımlar düzenlenmiştir.   Kanun yalnızca SPK’nın düzenleyici rolünü değil; aynı zamanda MASAK, BDDK, TCMB, Takasbank ve Gelir İdaresi Başkanlığı gibi kurumların da kripto varlık piyasasındaki  konumlarını şekillendirmiştir.   Bu çok aktörlü model sayesinde kripto ekosistemi hem finansal sistemle bütünleştirilmekte hem de kullanıcılar açısından hukuki güvenlik sağlanmaktadır.  Dijitalleşmenin yön verdiği bu yeni dönemde, hukuk sistemlerinin yenilikçi ve esnek çözümler üretme yeteneği, yalnızca teknolojiye değil, toplumsal güvene de hizmet edecektir.   KRİPTO VARLIKLARIN TANIMI VE HUKUKİ STATÜSÜ   Kripto varlıkların teknik yapısı, onları klasik hukuk düzenlerinde yer alan kavramlarla   örtüştürmeyi güçleştirmiştir. Kriptografi temelli dağıtık defter teknolojisi kullanılarak oluşturulan bu varlıklar, merkezsiz yapıları ve dijital doğaları itibarıyla para, menkul kıymet gibi geleneksel kategorilere tam olarak uyum sağlamamaktadır. Bu nedenle hukuki literatürde ve uygulamada, kripto varlıkların tanımına ilişkin uzun süre belirsizlik yaşanmıştır.   Türkiye’de kripto varlıklara ilişkin ilk resmi tanım, Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası (“TCMB”) 16.04.2021 tarihli ve 31456 sayılı Ödemelerde Kripto Varlıkların Kullanılmamasına Dair Yönetmelik ile yapılmış, bu varlıklar “itibari para, kaydi para, elektronik para, ödeme aracı, menkul kıymet veya diğer sermaye piyasası aracı olarak nitelendirilmeyen, dağıtık defter teknolojisi veya benzeri bir teknoloji kullanılarak sanal olarak oluşturulan gayri maddi varlık” şeklinde tanımlanmıştır. Ancak bu tanım, yalnızca ödemeler hukukunu ilgilendiren dar bir çerçevede kalmıştır. Bu boşluk Kanun ile doldurulmuştur. Kanun’un 1. maddesi uyarınca, kripto varlıklar:   “Kripto varlık: Dağıtık defter teknolojisi veya benzer bir teknoloji kullanılarak elektronik olarak oluşturulup saklanabilen, dijital ağlar üzerinden dağıtımı yapılan ve değer veya hak ifade edebilen gayri maddi varlıkları” şeklinde tanımlanmıştır. Bu tanım, üç temel açıdan dikkat çekicidir:   Kripto varlıkların teknik yapısı (dağıtık defter teknolojisi) açıklanmıştır, Gayri maddi bir değer olduğu açıkça belirtilmiştir, Mevcut hukuk sistemindeki tanımlı finansal araçlardan ayrıldığı vurgulanmıştır.   Kanun’da yapılan tanım ile kripto varlıkların hukuki niteliği artık daha net biçimde “bağımsız bir dijital varlık   türü” olarak ortaya konmuş; elektronik para, menkul kıymet veya itibari para ile karıştırılmalarının önüne geçilmiştir.   Bununla birlikte, kripto varlıkların eşya mı yoksa alacak hakkı mı olduğu yönündeki akademik tartışmalar bütünüyle son bulmamıştır. Zira Medeni Hukuk açısından bir varlığın eşya sayılabilmesi için maddi varlık taşıması gerekirken, kripto varlıklar yalnızca dijital düzlemde varlık göstermektedir. Bu nedenle kripto varlıkların “maddi olmayan mal” (gayri maddi eşya) niteliğinde olduğu görüşü yaygınlık kazanmıştır.   Kripto varlıkların bu şekilde tanımlanması mülkiyet hakkı, haciz ve iflas, miras ve tasarruf ve sorumluluk gibi hukuki sonuçlar doğurmaktadır. Kripto varlıklar konusunda tanımsal netlik sağlanmış olmasına rağmen, birçok hukuki alan hala uygulama düzeyinde gelişim gerektirmektedir. Bu gelişimin somut örnekleri SPK’nın 13 Mart 2025 tarihli ve 32840 sayılı Resmi Gazete’de yayımlanan III-35/B.1 ile III-35/B.2 tebliğler olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Bu tebliğlerde, lisans başvurusunda bulunacak KVHS’lerin asgari sermaye tutarı, yönetici nitelikleri, bilgi sistemleri altyapısı ve iç kontrol mekanizmalarına ilişkin koşullar açıkça düzenlenmiştir. Ayrıca, faaliyet izni alınmadan yürütülebilecek faaliyet alanları ve geçiş sürecine dair takvimler de belirlenmiştir.   SERMAYE PİYASASI KURULU’NUN ROLÜ VE YETKİLERİ   Kripto varlıkların Türk Mevzuatında tanımlanmasına ek olarak, Kanun ile SPK’ya da bu yeni dijital piyasayı düzenleme ve denetleme görevi açık biçimde yüklenmiştir. Böylece kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcıları ilk kez sermaye piyasası rejimi içinde tanımlanmış ve bir kamu otoritesinin gözetimine tabi kılınmıştır. Kanun’un 3. maddesi uyarınca: “Kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcılarının kurulması, faaliyet izni verilmesi, faaliyetlerinin durdurulması, birleşme ve devralma işlemleri ile sona ermeleri Kurulun iznine tabidir.”   Ayrıca, Kanun’un 4. ve 7. maddelerinde SPK’ya; Hizmet sağlayıcıların faaliyetlerine ilişkin ikincil düzenlemeleri yapma, Uygunluk koşullarını belirleme, İdari para cezaları uygulama, Yetkisiz faaliyetlere müdahale etme yetkileri tanınmıştır.   Kanunun 9. maddesi, Türkiye’de yerleşik kişilere hizmet sunan yurtdışı kripto platformlarının da SPK iznine tabi olduğunu düzenlemektedir. Bu kapsamda: “Kuruldan izin almadan faaliyet gösteren yurtdışı merkezli platformlara ilişkin olarak Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletişim Kurumu’na bildirimde bulunulabilir ve erişim engeli uygulanabilir.” Bu hüküm, Türkiye'deki kullanıcıları hedefleyen ancak lisanssız çalışan yabancı borsaların faaliyetlerini sınırlandırmayı ve rekabeti lisanslı ve denetlenen platformlara yönlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır.   Türkiye’de kripto varlıklarla ilgili en dikkat çekici dava, Thodex borsasının kurucusu Faruk Fatih Özer’in 400 bin kullanıcıyı mağdur ettiği iddiasıyla açılan dolandırıcılık davasıdır. 2021’de başlayan süreçte Özer’in Arnavutluk’ta yakalanıp Türkiye’ye iade edilmesiyle dava devam etmiş; olay, kripto platformlarının denetimsizliğine ilişkin ciddi kamuoyu farkındalığı yaratmıştır.   SPK’nın bu yeni yetki alanı, yalnızca düzenleme değil; aynı zamanda kamu güvenliği, sermaye piyasası bütünlüğü ve yatırımcı korumasını da hedeflemektedir. Özellikle Thodex gibi yerli borsalarda yaşanan mağduriyetler, denetimsiz kripto piyasalarının taşıdığı sistemik riski somut biçimde ortaya koymuştur. SPK bu kapsamda;   Faaliyet izni olmayan kuruluşlara işlem yasağı getirme, Yatırımcı varlıklarını koruyacak saklama zorunlulukları getirme, Kurallara aykırı davranan platformlara para cezası ve lisans iptali gibi yaptırımlar uygulama yetkisine sahiptir.   SPK, Kanun ile kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcılarını tıpkı klasik aracı kurumlar gibi lisanslama, denetleme ve gerektiğinde yaptırım uygulama yetkisine sahip olmuş; böylece kripto piyasasının şeffaf, hesap verebilir ve kamu otoritesi denetiminde gelişmesi hedeflenmiştir.   KRİPTO VARLIK HİZMET SAĞLAYICILARI (KVHS)   Kanun’un getirdiği en önemli yeniliklerden biri, kripto varlık piyasasında faaliyet gösteren tüm aktörlerin “Kripto Varlık Hizmet Sağlayıcısı (KVHS)” adı altında yasal olarak tanımlanması ve SPK denetimine tabi tutulmasıdır. Bu tanım hem hukuki kimlik kazandırmakta hem de kripto hizmet sağlayıcılarını klasik sermaye piyasası kurumlarıyla benzer düzlemde regülasyon altına almaktadır. Kanun’un 1. maddesi uyarınca Kripto Varlık Hizmet Sağlayıcısı: “Platformları, kripto varlık saklama hizmeti sağlayan kuruluşları ve bu Kanuna dayanılarak yapılacak düzenlemelerde kripto varlıkların ilk satış ya da dağıtımı dâhil olmak üzere kripto varlıklarla ilgili olarak hizmet sağlamak üzere belirlenmiş diğer kuruluşları” ifade etmektedir   Kanun’a göre, KVHS olarak faaliyet gösterebilmek için SPK’dan lisans almak zorunludur. Halihazırda faaliyet gösteren kuruluşlara belirli bir geçiş süreci tanınmış; bu süre içerisinde lisans başvurusunda bulunmayan veya başvurusu reddedilen şirketlerin faaliyetleri hukuka aykırı sayılmaktadır.   SPK’nın 2025 yılına ait ikincil düzenlemelerine göre KVHS’lerin aşağıdaki niteliklere sahip olması gerekmektedir: Asgari kuruluş sermayesi, Yönetici ve ortaklarda aranan yeterlilikler, Bilgi güvenliği sistemleri, İç kontrol ve risk yönetimi yapıları, SPK’nın 13 Mart 2025 tarihli ve 32840 sayılı Resmi Gazete ’de yayımlanan III-35/B.1 ve III-35/B.2 sayılı tebliğleriyle birlikte, KVHS lisans başvurusunda karşılaması gereken asgari koşullar detaylı şekilde belirlenmiştir. Bu kapsamda, platform hizmeti sunacak KVHS’ler için asgari kuruluş sermayesi 100 milyon TL, yalnızca saklama hizmeti sunacak kuruluşlar için ise 50 milyon TL olarak belirlenmiştir. Söz konusu sermayenin nakden ve tamamen ödenmiş olması, şirketin faaliyet başlangıcında mali yeterliliğe sahip olduğunun teminatı olarak kabul edilmektedir.   Yönetim ve ortaklık yapısına ilişkin olarak, şirket yöneticilerinde en az 5 yıllık sermaye piyasası veya finans sektöründe tecrübe aranmakta; yönetim kurulu üyeleri ve üst düzey yöneticilerin adli sicil kaydının temiz olması, özellikle dolandırıcılık, zimmet, hileli iflas gibi suçlardan hüküm giymemiş olmaları zorunlu tutulmaktadır. Ayrıca, doğrudan veya dolaylı olarak şirket sermayesinin %10’undan fazlasına sahip olan ortakların da benzer uygunluk testine tabi tutulması öngörülmektedir.   Bilgi sistemleri ve teknolojik altyapı bakımından, KVHS’lerin ISO/IEC 27001 Bilgi Güvenliği Yönetim Sistemi sertifikasına sahip olmaları, veri işleme merkezlerinin Türkiye sınırları içinde yer alması, yedekleme ve felaket kurtarma planlarının oluşturulması zorunludur. Sistem kesintileri, siber saldırılar ve veri bütünlüğü kayıplarına karşı anlık izleme ve raporlama altyapısına sahip olunması aranmaktadır. SPK, bu çerçevede sistem yeterliliğini yılda en az bir defa bağımsız denetim kuruluşları vasıtasıyla kontrol etmektedir. Ayrıca KVHS’lerin, iç kontrol, iç denetim ve risk yönetimi sistemlerini kurmaları yasal zorunluluktur. Bu sistemler çerçevesinde:   Müşteri şikayetlerinin alınması ve izlenmesine ilişkin elektronik şikâyet takip mekanizması kurulmalı, Her yıl bağımsız denetim raporu hazırlanmalı, Operasyonel, finansal ve teknik risklere karşı risk matrisi oluşturulmalı, Kurum içi politikalar, prosedürler ve iş sürekliliği planları yazılı hale getirilmelidir.   Tüm bu düzenlemeler, yatırımcı varlıklarının kötüye kullanılmasını, platform iflası veya hacklenme gibi durumlarda yatırımcıların mağdur edilmesini önlemeyi hedeflemektedir. Özellikle sermaye yeterliliği ve iç kontrol sistemlerine ilişkin bu sıkılaştırılmış teknik gereklilikler, Türkiye’de kripto varlık piyasasının kurumsal yatırımcıları da kapsayacak şekilde şeffaf ve güvenilir biçimde gelişmesini sağlamaya yöneliktir.   Kanun’un en kritik hükümlerinden biri de KVHS’lerin müşterilere ait kripto varlıkları kendi malvarlıklarından ayrı olarak saklama yükümlülüğüdür. Bu kapsamda: “Müşteri varlıkları, hizmet sağlayıcının alacaklıları tarafından haczedilemez; iflas halinde dağılacak malvarlığına dahil edilemez.” Bu düzenleme, yatırımcı güvenliğini teminat altına almakta ve yurt dışında yaşanan kripto borsa iflasları (örneğin FTX) gibi örneklerin Türkiye’de tekrarlanmasını önlemeyi amaçlamaktadır.   KVHS’ler aynı zamanda MASAK mevzuatı uyarınca “yükümlü” kabul edilmektedir. Bu kapsamda:   Kimlik tespiti (KYC), Şüpheli işlem bildirimi (STR), Gerçek fayda sahibinin belirlenmesi, 72 saat içinde raporlama yükümlülüğü, gibi kara para aklama ve terörün finansmanını önlemeye yönelik önlemleri uygulamak zorundadırlar.   Özellikle 2025 tarihli MASAK Tebliği No. 29, KVHS’ler için çekim süresi kısıtlamaları, stablecoin limitleri ve işlem açıklama zorunluluğu gibi pratik denetim mekanizmaları da getirmiştir.   MASAK VE UYUM YÜKÜMLÜLÜKLERİ   Kripto varlıkların anonimlik özelliği, bu varlıkların kara para aklama ve terörizmin finansmanı gibi suçlar için kullanılmasına zemin hazırlayabileceği yönünde ciddi endişelere yol açmıştır. Bu nedenle Mali Suçları Araştırma Kurulu (“MASAK”), 2021 yılından itibaren kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcılarına yönelik önleyici düzenlemeler geliştirmeye başlamış; bu alandaki en kapsamlı adım ise 28 Haziran 2025 tarihli 32940 sayılı Resmî Gazete’de yayımlanan, aynı gün yürürlüğe giren 29 Sıra No.lu Genel Tebliğ (“Tebliğ”) ile atılmıştır.   MASAK tarafından yayımlanan bu tebliğ ile kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcıları, 5549 sayılı Suç Gelirlerinin Aklanmasının Önlenmesi Hakkında Kanun (“5549 sayılı Kanun”) kapsamında açıkça "yükümlü" kurumlar arasına dahil edilmiştir. Bu tanım, KVHS’lere hem teknik hem hukuki düzeyde yeni yükümlülükler getirmiştir.   Tebliğ uyarınca KVHS’ler:   Müşteri Tanıma (KYC) süreçlerini uygulamak zorundadır. Müşteri işlemlerini risk temelli izlemek ve şüpheli işlemleri en geç 72 saat içinde MASAK’a bildirmek yükümlülüğü altındadır. İşlem yapan kişinin gerçek fayda sahibinin tespit edilmesi gerekir. İç denetim, eğitim, politika oluşturma gibi iç kontrol mekanizmaları kurmakla yükümlüdür.   Tebliğin 4. maddesi ile uygulamaya dönük birçok yeni düzenleme de getirilmiştir:   Çekim İşlemi Gecikme Süresi: Yeni kullanıcılar için ilk çekimde en az 72 saat bekleme süresi uygulanması zorunludur. Sonraki işlemler için en az 48 saatlik gecikme uygulanmalıdır. Stablecoin Transfer Limiti: Günlük 3.000 USD ve aylık 50.000 USD işlem sınırı getirilmiş; yüksek riskli işlemler için üst sınır iki katına çıkartılabilir. İşlem Açıklama Zorunluluğu: Kullanıcılardan her transfer için en az 20 karakterlik açıklama girişi istenmekte; açıklama yapılmayan işlemlere izin verilmemektedir.   Bu önlemler sayesinde, kripto varlık işlemlerinin izlenebilirliği artırılmış ve platformlar arasında ani fon transferleri yoluyla yasa dışı finansman faaliyetlerinin önüne geçilmesi hedeflenmiştir. Kanun’un yürürlüğe girmesiyle birlikte SPK tarafından lisans verilen tüm KVHS’ler, aynı zamanda MASAK yükümlülüklerini de yerine getirmekle sorumludur. Böylece denetim yükümlülüğü hem idari (SPK) hem suç önleyici (MASAK) nitelik kazanmış, kripto varlık piyasasına çok katmanlı bir uyum rejimi kazandırılmıştır.     TAKASBANK VE MERKEZİ SAKLAMA DÜZENLEMELERİ   Kanun’da kripto varlıkların saklanmasına ilişkin çerçeve açıkça düzenlenmiş olsa da Takasbank (İstanbul Takas ve Saklama Bankası A.Ş.) özelinde doğrudan bir atıf yer almamaktadır. Bununla birlikte, yatırımcıya ait kripto varlıkların KVHS’nin malvarlığından ayrı olarak saklanma yükümlülüğü ve saklama kuruluşlarının görevlendirilebileceğine ilişkin SPK yetkisi, bu alanda Takasbank  gibi kamu güvenceli kurumların devreye alınabileceğini işaret etmektedir. Kanun’un SPK’ya verdiği ikincil düzenleme yetkisi doğrultusunda 2025 yılında çıkarılan III‑35/B.2 sayılı SPK Tebliği, saklama hizmetlerine dair aşağıdaki ilkeleri getirmiştir:   KVHS’ler, müşteri varlıklarını kendi nezdinde veya SPK tarafından uygun görülecek üçüncü taraf bir saklama kuruluşu aracılığıyla saklayabilir. Saklama kuruluşları, yatırımcı varlıklarının güvenliğini sağlamak, geri dönüş planlarını oluşturmak ve müşteriyle hizmet sözleşmesi yapmak zorundadır. Saklama sistemleri, SPK denetimine açık olacak şekilde kurumsal ve teknik yeterliliğe sahip olmalıdır.   Bu düzenleme, Takasbank’ın kripto varlık piyasasında “yetkilendirilmiş merkezi saklama kuruluşu” olarak konumlandırılmasının önünü açmaktadır. Takasbank, hâlihazırda Türkiye’de menkul kıymetler, Borsa İstanbul işlemleri ve teminat yönetimi gibi alanlarda merkezi saklama ve mutabakat hizmeti sunmaktadır.   Kripto varlıklar özelinde Takasbank’ın görevlendirilmesi durumunda şu alanlarda işlev görebilir:   Soğuk cüzdan saklama altyapısı ile yatırımcı varlıklarının dışa kapalı olarak saklanması, İşlem sonrası mutabakat ve netleştirme süreçlerinin merkezi sistemde yürütülmesi, Borsa dışı (OTC) işlemlerde transfer doğrulaması, Saklanan varlıklar için sigorta veya kamu teminatı modelleri geliştirilmesi.   Ancak bu noktada dikkat edilmelidir ki, Takasbank henüz SPK tarafından resmi olarak yetkilendirilmemiştir. Bu nedenle görevlendirme yalnızca potansiyel bir seçenek olarak değerlendirilmelidir.   Almanya’da, BaFin tarafından lisans verilen kripto saklama kuruluşları, yatırımcı varlıklarını hukuken ayrılmış hesaplarda tutmak ve denetim raporlarını düzenli sunmakla yükümlüdür.    AB MiCA Regülasyonu ise kripto varlık saklama hizmetini “crypto-asset custody” olarak tanımlamış, bu hizmeti sunmak isteyen platformlara ayrı lisans zorunluluğu getirmiştir. Türkiye’de de Takasbank gibi devlet destekli bir yapının saklama sürecine entegre edilmesi hem yatırımcı korumasını güçlendirecek hem de platform iflası veya hacklenme gibi durumlarda sistemik riskleri azaltacaktır.   VERGİLENDİRME BOYUTU   Kanun ile Türkiye’de kripto varlıklara ilişkin düzenleyici çerçeve büyük ölçüde oluşturulmuş olsa da vergilendirme rejimi henüz netleştirilmemiştir. Kanun’un yürürlüğe girmesiyle birlikte, kripto varlıkların hukuken tanımlanmış olması, Gelir İdaresi Başkanlığı (GİB) nezdinde bir vergi altyapısı kurulmasının önünü açmıştır.   Ancak hâlihazırda, kripto varlıklarla ilgili özel bir vergi kanunu, stopaj yükümlülüğü ya da KDV uygulaması bulunmamaktadır. Vergilendirme bakımından esas alınabilecek temel ilkeler, mevcut Gelir Vergisi Kanunu (GVK) ve Katma Değer Vergisi (KDV) Kanunu hükümleri çerçevesinde, kripto varlıkların ekonomik niteliğine göre yorum yoluyla uygulanabilmektedir.   GİB, kripto varlıklardan elde edilen gelirlerin vergiye tabi olduğunu ancak bunun nasıl ve ne şekilde beyan edilmesi gerektiğine dair henüz özel bir düzenlemenin bulunmadığını açıklamıştır. 2024 ve 2025 yıllarında bankalara yapılan kripto işlem bildirimleriyle ilgili kamuoyunda oluşan karışıklık üzerine GİB, beyan yükümlülüğünün yalnızca ilgili gelir türüne göre geçerli olduğunu, otomatik işlem raporlarının tek başına vergi borcu oluşturmayacağını belirtmiştir.   Türkiye, 2025 yılı itibarıyla OECD’nin Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) sistemine uyum sürecindedir.  CARF sistemi, kripto işlemlerinin şeffaf şekilde raporlanmasını ve uluslararası vergi iş birliğini amaçlamaktadır. MİCA Regülasyonu kapsamında ise, “Crypto Asset Service Provider” (CASP) lisansı için kuruluşların sermaye yeterliliği, müşteri koruma sistemleri, bilgi güvenliği prosedürleri ve denetim mekanizmalarına sahip olması gerekmektedir. Bu düzenlemelerle birlikte, AB içinde hizmet sunmak isteyen platformlar ciddi yükümlülüklerle karşı karşıya kalmaktadır (MİCA Resmi AB Regülasyon Metni: Regulation [EU] 2023/1114, Avrupa Parlamentosu ve Konseyi, 31 Mayıs 2023.).   Uyum sürecinde, bu sistem kapsamında: Kripto platformları kullanıcı işlemlerini yıllık olarak vergi otoritesine raporlamakla yükümlü olacak, Türkiye ile diğer ülkeler arasında otomatik bilgi değişimi yapılacaktır.   Ayrıca, AB'nin MiCA düzenlemesi ile paralel biçimde, kripto varlıkların hem işlem hem de varlık bazında vergilendirilmesi ve beyan sisteminin inşa edilmesi beklenmektedir. Kanun doğrudan vergilendirme hükümleri içermemekle birlikte, tanımlayıcı ve lisanslayıcı düzenlemeleriyle kripto varlıkları hukuken belirli bir statüye oturtmuştur. Bu statü, vergi mevzuatına entegrasyonun ön koşuludur. Önümüzdeki dönemde; Kripto gelirlerinin türüne göre beyan esasları, stopaj ve KDV uygulamaları, yatırımcı ve platform bazlı yükümlülüklerin tanımı, gibi unsurların Maliye Bakanlığı ve GİB tarafından detaylandırılması beklenmektedir.   CEZA HÜKÜMLERİ VE YAPTIRIMLAR   Kanun yalnızca tanım ve lisans düzenlemeleriyle sınırlı kalmamış; aynı zamanda kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcılarının yasalara aykırı faaliyet göstermesi durumunda uygulanacak ceza hükümlerini de detaylı şekilde belirlemiştir. Bu yaptırımlar hem idari para cezalarını hem de cezai sorumluluk içeren hapis cezalarını kapsamaktadır.   Kanun’un Getirdiği Temel Ceza Düzenlemeleri   Lisanssız Faaliyet Yürütme 6362 sayılı Sermaye Piyasası Kanunu’na eklenen 99/A maddesi uyarınca: “Kuruldan izin almaksızın kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcılığı faaliyetinde bulunanlar, üç yıldan beş yıla kadar hapis ve beş bin güne kadar adli para cezası ile cezalandırılır.” Bu düzenleme, kripto alanında izinsiz faaliyet gösteren kişi ve kuruluşlara karşı caydırıcı bir yaptırım niteliği taşımaktadır.     Yatırımcı Varlığını Kötüye Kullanma ve Usulsüzlükler Kanunun 35/B maddesine göre, yatırımcılara ait kripto varlıkların kötüye kullanılması, başka hesaplara aktarılması veya borçlar için teminat olarak gösterilmesi gibi fiiller, güveni kötüye kullanma ve zimmet suçu kapsamına girebilir. Bu durumda 5237 sayılı Türk Ceza Kanunu’nun (“TCK”) 155 ve 247. maddeleri devreye girebilir.   İdari Para Cezaları ve Faaliyet Durdurma SPK, denetimi sırasında tespit ettiği ihlaller karşısında; Faaliyet izninin iptali, Geçici faaliyet durdurma, İdari para cezası (1 milyon TL’ye kadar) gibi yaptırımlar uygulayabilir. Bu cezalar, özellikle bilgi sistemleri güvenliğinin sağlanmaması, raporlama yükümlülüğüne uyulmaması veya saklama kurallarına aykırılık gibi durumlarda devreye girer.   MASAK Yükümlülüklerine Aykırılık MASAK yükümlülüklerinin (örneğin KYC, STR, devamlı bilgi verme) yerine getirilmemesi hâlinde, 5549 sayılı Kanun’un 13. maddesi uyarınca, 30.000–50.000 TL’den başlayarak 4 milyon TL’ye kadar idari para cezası uygulanabilir; ihtar sonrası bu cezalar 500.000–1.000.000 TL’ye kadar çıkabilir.   Ayrıca, şüpheli işlem bildiriminin kasten gizlenmesi durumunda, TCK kapsamında suç oluşması ihtimali doğabilir. Getirilen ceza hükümleri, yalnızca caydırıcılık açısından değil; aynı zamanda yatırımcı güvenliğini ve piyasa bütünlüğünü sağlamak amacı taşımaktadır. Özellikle lisanssız faaliyetlerin engellenmesi, platform şeffaflığının artırılması ve müşteri varlıklarının suistimaline karşı yaptırımlar, Türkiye'nin kripto piyasasını düzenlerken uluslararası standartlarla uyumlu bir sistem inşa etmeye çalıştığını göstermektedir.     SONUÇ   Türkiye, Kanun ile kripto varlıkları ilk kez hukuk sistemine entegre etmiş; böylece dijital finansın geleceğine yönelik güçlü ve düzenli bir altyapı kurma yolunda önemli bir adım atmıştır. Bu sürecin etkin şekilde işlemesi, yalnızca kanun yapıcının değil; aynı zamanda idari otoritelerin, denetim mekanizmalarının ve yargı organlarının eşgüdüm içinde çalışmasına bağlıdır. Türkiye'nin, dijital varlık piyasasında hem kullanıcı güvenliğini sağlayan hem de yatırım ortamını teşvik eden dengeli bir yapı kurması mümkündür. Sonuç olarak, Türkiye’de kripto varlıkların hukuki statüsüne ilişkin 7518 sayılı Kanun ile önemli bir ilerleme kaydedilmiştir. Ancak, vergi uygulamaları, platform sorumluluğu ve uluslararası uyum gibi alanlarda hâlâ gelişime açık yönler bulunmaktadır. Yasal düzenlemelerin, sektörde faaliyet gösteren aktörlerle birlikte gelişerek uygulanabilirliğinin artması hem yatırımcı güvenliği hem de piyasa istikrarı açısından kritik önemdedir.

Law No. 7524 on the Amendment of Tax Laws, Certain Laws and Decree Law No. 375 ("Law No. 7524"), published in the Official Gazette on August 2, 2024, and made major reforms in tax legislation. This regulation has been prepared with the aim of increasing tax security, fighting against the informal economy and strengthening tax justice; and has resulted in radical changes in Law No. 6183 on the Procedure for Collection of Public Receivables ("LPL"), Law No. 193 Income Tax Law ("ITL"), Law No. 213 Tax Procedure ("TPL"), Law No. 3065 Value Added Tax ("VAT Law"), Law No. 4760 Special Consumption Tax ("SCT") and Law No.5520 Corporate Tax ("CVL"). Among these regulations, the implementation of a minimum corporate tax (Global Minimum Corporate Tax) for multinational companies and local minimum corporate tax regulations stands out to comply with international standards. Detailed information and explanations are presented below. 1.The Amendments to the Law No. 6183 on the Procedure for Collection of Public  Including Payments Made upon Court Decisions and Payment Orders within the Scope of Document Verification: According to Article 22/A-f.1, the phrase "in all kinds of payments" has been amended to "in all kinds of payments (including payments made upon court decisions and payment or execution orders of enforcement offices)." This change now requires that payments made upon court decisions and payment orders from enforcement offices be accompanied by a document stating that there is no overdue debt to the collection offices affiliated with the Ministry of Treasury and Finance. The Amendments to Law No. 193 Income Tax Law (“ITL”) a) Wage Exemption for Share Certificates Granted to Employees of Techno-Initiative Companies: With this amendment, which entered into force on August 2, 2024, Article 17 of the Income Tax Law has been revised. The portion of the fair value of share certificates granted free of charge or at a discount to employees of techno-initiative companies, which does not exceed one year's gross wage, shall be exempt from income tax.  b) New Procedure for Determining Income Tax Base for Commercial and Professional Earnings: Article 3 of Law No. 7524 introduces a new method for determining daily revenue and income tax base for commercial and professional earnings, with specific provisions for monthly and annual revenue calculations based on audit results.  c) Tax Deduction on Payments Realized on E-Commerce Platforms: Payments made by intermediary service providers and electronic commerce intermediary service providers will be subject to income tax withholding starting January 1, 2025, as per Article 94 of the Income Tax Law. The Amendments to the Law No. 213 Tax Procedure Law ("TPL") a) Conditions for Re-establishing Taxpayer Liability for Forged Document Issuance: The regulation stipulates that taxpayers who have been found liable for issuing forged documents, despite not engaging in any commercial, agricultural, or professional activities, will have their taxpayer status automatically canceled if confirmed by a tax inspection report. However, Article 5 of Law No. 7524 has revised the conditions for re-establishing taxpayer status in such cases. Before the amendment, re-establishing taxpayer status required providing collateral of at least 690,000 TL for 2024 or 10% of the total amount of the forged documents issued. The new requirement is to provide collateral equal to 10% of the total amount of the forged documents issued, with a maximum limit of 10 million TL. Article 153/A-3 has been revised to specify that individuals such as legal representatives, board members, managers, or shareholders with at least 10% interest, who are involved in issuing forged documents, must provide collateral or resign within sixty days of the tax office’s notification. Failure to do so will result in their personal assets being used to cover the tax debts. If a taxpayer starts legal proceedings to remove these individuals within the sixty-day period and provides proof, they will not be held personally liable for the debts if the status is terminated. If the status is terminated after the sixty days, any collateral will be refunded if there are no other tax debts, without needing to meet additional conditions.  b) Amendment to the Obligation to Certify Collections and Payments: Article 6 of Law No. 7524 amends Article 257 of the Tax Procedure Law (TPL) to broaden the scope of entities responsible for proving the accuracy of collections and payments. This update extends the responsibility beyond just taxpayers to include other parties involved in transactions. The changes aim to enhance data collection and monitoring of electronic commerce by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance, thus increasing the tax authorities' audit capabilities. Under the revised Article 257/7 of the TPL, new regulations have been introduced to bolster tax security in electronic commerce. These amendments impose information obligations on both individuals and entities engaged in economic and commercial activities through digital platforms, including electronic commerce intermediary service providers, Access providers, Content providers, Hosting providers, social network providers. These regulations expand the tax audit obligations for digital platforms and service providers, requiring them to report their commercial activities to the Ministry of Treasury and Finance.  c) Market Price of Precious Metals: The phrase "and precious metals" has been added to Article 263, allowing the use of stock market prices as the valuation measure for precious metals traded on exchanges.  d) Incremental Rate Application in Special Irregularity Penalty: Within the scope of the provision added to Article 344 of TPL with Article 9 of Law No. 7524, it is regulated that the tax loss penalty to be imposed due to unregistered activities shall be applied with a 50% increase. e) Increase in Irregularity Penalties: Penalties for various irregularities have been increased significantly under Article 352/1 of TPL.   TAXPAYER GROUPS For first degree irregularities (TRY) For second degree irregularities (TRY) Old Penalty Amount New Penalty Amount Old Penalty Amount New Penalty Amount Capital companies TRY 1,100 TRY 20,000 TRY 580 TRY 10,000 First class traders and self-employed persons other than capital companies TRY 660 TRY 10,000 TRY 330 TRY 5,000 Second class traders TRY 330 TRY 5,000 TRY 150 TRY 3,500 Those who are subject to income tax by declaration method and who are not subject to the above TRY 150 TRY 3,500 TRY 87 TRY 2,250 Those whose earnings are determined in simple procedure TRY 87 TRY 2,250 TRY 40 TRY 1,500 Tradesmen exempted from income tax TRY 40 TRY 1,500 TRY 23 TRY 1,000 f) Increase in Special Irregularity Penalties: Within the scope of the fight against informality, special irregularity fines imposed according to Article 353 of TPL have been increased.   SPECIAL IRREGULARITY ACTS Old Penalty Amount New Penalty Amount Failure to give or receive invoice, expense voucher, producer receipt, self-employment receipt TRY 3,400 1. Determination – TRY 10,000 2. Determination – TRY 20,000 3. Determination - TRY 30,000 4. Determination – TRY 40,000 5. Determination – TRY 50,000 For 6th and Subsequent Determinations – TRY 100,000 Total amount of penalty to be imposed for each type of document in a calendar year TRY 1,700,000 TRY 10,000,000 Failure to issue, use or keep retail sales receipt, payment recorder device receipt, entry and passenger transport ticket, delivery note, transport delivery note, passenger list, daily customer list and documents required to be issued by the Ministry of Finance TRY 3,400 1. Determination – TRY 10,000 2. Determination – TRY 20,000 3. Determination – TRY 30,000 4. Determination – TRY 40,000 5. Determination – TRY 50,000 For 6th and Subsequent Determinations – TRY 100,000 Maximum penalty amount for each determination for each type of document TRY 170,000 TRY 1,000,000 Maximum penalty amount to be imposed in a calendar year for each type of document TRY 1,700,000 TRY 10,000,000 Failure to keep the books required by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance to be kept and recorded on a daily basis, failure to record on a daily basis, failure to submit to the authorities and failure to comply with the obligation to keep and hang signs TRY 1,700 TRY 1,700 Failure to comply with the accounting standards, uniform chart of accounts, procedures and principles regarding financial statements and rules and standards regarding the production of computer programmes for accounting TRY 40,000 TRY 65,000 For each transaction for those who make transactions without using the tax number, which is obliged to be used in transactions to be made by public institutions and organizations and real and legal persons TRY 2,000 TRY 2,000 Printing house operators who do not fulfil their notification duties regarding document printing in whole or in part TRY 6,600 TRY 6,600 Maximum fine amount to be imposed in a calendar year TRY 1,300,000 TRY 1,300,000 Pursuant to Law No. 4358, the organizations which are obliged to use tax identification numbers and which do not fulfil the notifications regarding their transactions in the specified standards and time TRY 8,700 TRY 8,700 Pursuant to subparagraph (d) of Article 127 of the Tax Procedure Law, on behalf of the owner of the vehicle that does not stop despite the warning of the specially marked officer of the Ministry of Finance TRY 6,600 TRY 15,000 Lower Boundary TRY 230,000 TRY 230,000 Upper Limit TRY 2,300,000 TRY 2,300,000 g) Amendment to Stamp Tax Unpaid Papers Processing: The minimum special irregularity fine for notaries processing papers for which stamp tax has not been paid has increased from TRY 14 to TRY 40.  h) Special Penalty for Non-Compliance in Electronic Commerce: The addition to Article 355 introduces a special irregularity penalty to enhance tax security in digital media usage, including the internet, for economic and commercial activities such as advertising, sales, leasing, and electronic commerce. This penalty aims to ensure accurate reporting by imposing fines on individuals or entities that fail to meet their information obligations, either by not notifying, or by providing incomplete or misleading information regarding these obligations.  i) Increased Penalty for Unauthorized Use of POS Devices: special irregularity penalty is imposed on those who use and make others use POS devices belonging to others, those who have money transfers related to the delivery of goods or performance of services to bank accounts belonging to others and those who make others use their accounts. j) Changes in the Settlement Procedure: Taxpayers may now request reconciliation to reach an agreement on taxes and related penalties determined ex officio or administratively. k) Overtime Working Fee for Revenue Administration Personnel: Personnel performing certain duties outside normal working hours are now eligible for overtime pay, with specific limits on payment.  Amendments to Value Added Tax Law No. 3065 ("VAT Law") a) Partial Exemption for Services Provided at Ports and Airports: The amendment to Article 13 of the Value Added Tax (VAT) Law clarifies which vehicles are excluded from VAT exemptions for services at ports and airports. Specifically, vehicles used for activities such as sightseeing, entertainment, sports, amateur fishing, as well as private boats and yachts, are not considered sea transport vehicles. Consequently, VAT exemptions do not apply to services for these types of vehicles at ports and airports. Additionally, the amendment to Article 32 of the VAT Law changes the status of services provided at ports and airports for sea and air transport vehicles. These services are no longer fully exempt from VAT; instead, they are subject to partial exemption. This allows taxpayers to treat VAT incurred on such services as an expense or cost in their tax calculations. These changes aim to clarify VAT responsibilities and improve the accuracy of tax liability and deduction processes for certain vehicles and services. b) Removal of Import-Domestic Delivery Discrepancy: Exemptions for importing goods used by national security institutions have been revised, and the competitive disparity between imports and domestic purchases has been eliminated. c) VAT Inspection Without Statute of Limitations: An amendment to Article 17/4-c of the Value Added Tax (VAT) Law has been implemented, stipulating that the deductibility of VAT amounts for taxpayers who cease operations, split, or dissolve will now depend on the results of tax inspections, regardless of the statute of limitations defined in the Tax Procedure Law. This regulation became effective on August 2, 2024, the date the Law was published. d) 5-Year VAT Deduction Period: If VAT amounts cannot be deducted within five years, they may be removed from records and treated as an expense.  e) Tax Inspection Report Requirement for VAT Refunds: the main procedure in VAT refunds is linked to the tax inspection report in order to ensure that VAT refunds are made correctly and to prevent unfair VAT refunds. f) VAT Exemption for Earthquake-Related Aid: On February 6, 2023, VAT exemptions were established for certain construction projects within disaster zones affected by recent earthquakes. As of January 1, 2024, VAT will be exempt on deliveries and services related to constructing immovable properties such as residences, workplaces, schools, dormitories, hospitals, places of worship, cultural centers, and libraries. This exemption also applies to donations of these properties by foreign state institutions to public administrations with general budgets. The VAT exemption will be in effect until December 31, 2025.  Amendments to Law No. 3218 on Free Zones ("FZL") Limitation of Exemption to Export Revenues: The exemption from corporate tax for earnings derived from production activities in free zones is now limited to export revenues, with domestic sales becoming taxable. Amendments to Law No. 4760 on Special Consumption Tax ("SCT Law") Removal of Minimum Tax Amount Limitation on Tobacco Products: The President of the Republic is now authorized to levy a lump sum tax up to the minimum lump sum tax amount on certain tobacco products. Amendment to Law No. 5335 on the Revision of Certain Laws and Decree Laws New Regulation for “Kizilay” Association and Its Employees: A special regulation has been introduced for the Turkish Kizilay Society and its personnel in relation to international aid responsibilities. Amendments to Law No. 5510 on Social Insurance and General Health Insurance a) Increase in Short-Term Insurance Premium Rates: The rate has been increased from 2% to 2.25% of the insured's premium-based earnings. b) Increase in Minimum Retirement Pension: The minimum retirement pension has been raised from TRY 10,000 to TRY 12,500. c) Removal of 5-Point Incentive: The second paragraph of provisional Article 95 of the Social Security and General Health Insurance Law No. 5510, which previously stated that the Treasury would cover the 5-point portion of the SGDP employer's share for retirees under the EYT program who return to work in the private sector, has been abolished. This change will take effect on August 1, 2024.  Amendments to Law No. 5520 on Corporate Tax Law ("CVL") a) Tax Exemption for Distribution of Real Estate Gains: Funds and partnerships investing in immovable properties must distribute 50% of gains as dividends to shareholders. b) Corporate Tax Deduction for E-Commerce Payments: Starting January 1, 2025, payments made by intermediary service providers and electronic commerce intermediary service providers to facilitate contracts or orders for goods or services in electronic commerce marketplaces will be eligible for tax deductions. This applies to payments made to service providers and electronic commerce service providers operating under Law No. 6563, who have a workplace or permanent representative in Turkey. c) Corporate Tax on Build-Operate-Transfer Earnings: Corporation tax at 30% will be levied on earnings from projects within the public-private partnership model. d) Domestic Minimum Corporate Tax Application: The amendment to Article 32/C of the Corporate Tax Law requires that corporate tax under Article 32 be at least 10% of a corporation's income before discounts and exemptions. Certain items, like participation gains, emission premium earnings, and various tax exemptions, are excluded from this calculation. Taxes not collected due to reduced rates or certain investment contributions will be deducted from the minimum tax. This regulation applies to temporary tax periods and does not affect new companies for their first three accounting periods. It takes effect from January 1, 2025, for regular and special accounting periods.  Local and Global Minimum Complementary Corporate Income Tax Law No. 7524 introduces a new taxation system to ensure that large multinational enterprises with annual consolidated worldwide revenues exceeding EUR 750 million are subject to a minimum corporate tax rate of 15%. This system aligns with OECD Model Rules and Guidelines, aiming to standardize global tax practices and address discrepancies across different countries. With the introduction of Additional Article 1 to the LPPD via Article 37 of Law No. 7524, enterprises within a multinational group with worldwide consolidated revenues exceeding the specified threshold will be subject to the new tax regulations. The definitions for consolidated revenue and consolidated financial statements are based on "Acceptable Financial Accounting Standards." Additionally, the article outlines how to determine the consolidated revenue threshold if the accounting period deviates from the standard 12 months. Article 38 of Law No. 7524, along with Additional Article 2 to the Corporate Tax Law, clarifies key terms used in the "Local and Global Minimum Complementary Corporate Tax" framework. Exemptions and Exceptions: Article 39 of Law No. 7524 outlines exemptions from the local and global minimum complementary corporate income tax. It specifies that certain entities are exempt from this tax, as detailed in the first paragraph. The second paragraph extends this exemption to other enterprises and their workplaces listed, even if they are not covered by the first paragraph. Additionally, the fifth paragraph exempts earnings derived from international maritime transport activities. The sixth paragraph defines what constitutes international maritime transport activities, while the seventh paragraph provides further details on other earnings related to this activity that are also exempt. Finally, the eighth paragraph stipulates that expenses or losses related to exempt earnings cannot be deducted from other taxable income. Calculation of Adjusted Covered Taxes: Article 40 of Law No. 7524 defines tax burden as the ratio of adjusted covered taxes to total earnings. Adjusted covered taxes include current period tax expenses, deferred tax adjustments, and changes in covered taxes shown in financial statements. If a country's corporate tax rate is below 15%, deferred tax assets must be recalculated at this minimum rate. Enterprises in countries without corporate tax can apply losses multiplied by the minimum rate in future periods. The article also covers tax burden calculations for enterprise groups and the allocation of taxes among affiliated entities. Tax Burden Calculation: Specific rules apply to determine the enterprise-based gain or loss for tax purposes. Article 41 of Law No. 7524 outlines the calculation of enterprise-based gains or losses for determining tax burden proportions. It requires adjustments to the financial accounting net gains or losses of enterprises. The article includes a tax security mechanism for local and global minimum complementary corporate tax. It limits interest expenses on intra-group financing to the amount recognized as income by the lending enterprise if the borrowing enterprise's tax burden is below the minimum rate and the lending enterprise's is above it. It specifies conditions under which income from receivables waivers will not be considered for calculating enterprise-based gains or losses and provides guidelines on how to handle qualified and non-qualified tax credits in tax burden calculations. Further provisions address adjustments for arm's length transactions between affiliates and the allocation of gains or losses between head offices and their affiliates. The article also provides guidelines for calculating the tax burden essential for determining the global minimum complementary corporate tax rate. Global Minimum Complementary Corporate Tax Rate: Additional Article 6 of Law No. 7524 establishes a minimum corporate tax rate of 15% and outlines the global minimum supplementary corporate tax rate, calculated as the difference between this rate and the tax burden rate in Additional Article 5. It includes provisions for calculating the tax base, determining tax for relevant countries and subsidiaries, and adjusting for past accounting periods. The "De Minimis" rule allows for a zero global minimum supplementary corporate tax for subsidiaries below certain revenue thresholds. It also includes guidelines for safe harbors and allows for zero tax for five accounting periods under specific conditions. Taxpayer Determination: Article 43 of Law No. 7524 and Additional Article 7 of the KVK determine the taxpayer for the global minimum complementary corporate tax based on income inclusion and under-taxed payments principles. Under income inclusion, the tax is the responsibility of the ultimate or intermediate parent entity in Turkey, or a partially owned parent in Turkey if the foreign parent entities do not apply the global minimum tax. The tax is calculated based on the inclusion rate, which excludes third-party interests and earnings from transparent entities, with reductions for taxes paid by intermediate or partly owned entities in other countries. Under the inadequately taxed payments principle, Turkish subsidiaries of multinational groups, not resident in Turkey and not subject to income inclusion, must pay tax based on under-taxed payments. This tax is the difference between the global minimum tax and the income inclusion tax. The under-taxed payments percentage is calculated by comparing Turkish subsidiaries' employees and assets to those in qualifying countries, excluding investment and transparent entities, and excluding countries where tax has not been accrued in the relevant period. Taxpayer Obligations: Taxpayers must declare and pay the global minimum tax, with the taxation period generally matching the accounting period. Local Minimum Complementary Corporate Tax: With the Additional Article 9 added to the LPPD with Article 45 of Law No. 7524, the taxpayer of the local minimum complementary corporate tax is determined as "subsidiaries and joint ventures of multinational enterprise groups that are resident in Turkey". The local minimum complementary corporate tax is generally based on the accounting period, but for those with special accounting periods, that period is used. The tax amount is calculated using the global minimum supplementary corporate income tax rate, excluding certain distributions or profit-sharing amounts. This tax must be declared and paid within twelve months after the accounting period ends. If a taxpayer in Turkey from the same multinational group pays the tax, other group members are relieved of their tax declaration and payment responsibilities. However, if the tax is unpaid, other group members are jointly liable for the amount. The Ministry of Treasury and Finance can regulate various aspects of the tax, including declaration and payment processes, documentation requirements, and collection procedures. It can also determine the place of levy as needed. Mergers, Demergers, and Share Transfers: Article 47 of Law No. 7524 outlines tax rules for multinational groups involved in mergers, splits, or restructurings. If merging groups or entities with total revenues over €750 million (or its Turkish Lira equivalent) in any of the four prior accounting periods combine, the resulting group must meet Article 1's requirements for the reporting period. Similarly, groups exceeding this revenue threshold post-division must comply with Article 1’s provisions. The article covers classification for entities transitioning between groups, tax deferral for asset transfers during restructuring, and specifies how to handle global minimum complementary corporate tax in joint ventures and complex group structures Special Taxation Cases: Special rules apply to transparent enterprises and dividend-based taxation systems. Authorization: The Ministry of Treasury and Finance is authorized to determine the implementation procedures. Amendment to Law No. 5597 Law on the Changes to the Law on Exit Fee for Travelling Abroad and Various Laws Increase in Departure Fee Amount: The fee has been increased from TRY 50 to TRY 500 and will be adjusted annually based on the revaluation rate. Amendments to Law No. 25777 the Law on Administrative Procedure Redefinition of Legal Remedies: The remedies of appeal and cassation regulated by Articles 45 and 46 of the Code of Administrative Procedure have been reshaped in line with the decisions of the Constitutional Court. Prior to the amendment, the remedies of appeal and cassation were closed for tax cases, full judicial cases and cancellation cases filed against administrative actions that do not exceed a certain monetary limit. However, with the amendment of Law No. 7524; Decisions rendered by administrative and tax courts on tax cases, full remedy cases and cancellation cases filed against administrative acts are final in cases where the subject matter does not exceed thirty-one thousand Turkish Liras, and no appeal may be filed against these decisions. However, an appeal may be filed against the decisions of the regional administrative court within seven days from the day following the date of notification. In its decisions dated 13.10.2023 and 26.07.2023, the Constitutional Court cancelled these rules, stating that these rules do not clarify the date on which the monetary limits will be based. This situation had revealed that the rules did not meet the requirement of legality. With the new regulation, subparagraph (b) of Article 46 of the Law No. 2577, which was cancelled by the Constitutional Court, has been rearranged, and tax cases, full judicial cases and lawsuits filed about administrative actions with a subject matter exceeding nine hundred and twenty thousand Turkish Liras are covered. In addition, the cases exceeding two hundred and seventy thousand Turkish Liras but not exceeding nine hundred and twenty thousand Turkish Liras are defined as the cases in which a new decision is made upon the decision to lift the decision in the legal remedy of appeal. 2. Increase in Monetary Limits: The limits set forth in Additional Article 1 of the Law No. 2577 regarding the increase of the monetary limits shall be increased each year by the revaluation rate determined in accordance with the provisions of the repeated Article 298 of the Tax Procedure Law for the previous year. In addition, the monetary limits to be taken as basis in the cases where a hearing is mandatory and in the applications for appeal or appeal will be accepted as the limits on the date of the final decision. The increases in the monetary limits after the date of the final decision will not be applied in the cases that are re-examined upon the reversal decision of the regional administrative court or the Council of State. Amendments to Law No. 2690 on the Exemptions of the Turkish Atomic Energy Authority and Making Certain Regulations a) Revenues of the Turkish Energy, Nuclear, and Mining Research Organization: Revenues and budget management for the organization have been revised. b) Wages and Incentives: New regulations have been introduced for wages and incentives, with the President authorized to determine upper limits.