Turkey’s Asset Repatriation Programme 2026 is a tax framework that enables individuals and entities to bring foreign-held wealth into the Turkish financial system at preferential tax rates and without retroactive inquiry into the source of funds. Announced on 24 April 2026 by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as part of the Türkiye Century Strong Center for Investment Program, and detailed the following day by Treasury and Finance Minister Mehmet Şimşek, the programme is positioned under the policy heading “Bring It Home” (Eve Getir). Its target audience is broad: from Turkish nationals abroad to dual-nationality investors, from Turkish-origin global business owners to foreign nationals considering relocation to Turkey under the parallel 20-year foreign income exemption.

As an Istanbul-based law firm advising international clients on cross-border wealth structuring, our team at Oznur & Partners has spent the days following the announcement working through what the programme means in practice. The questions arriving from clients are remarkably similar across jurisdictions: is this a tax amnesty, and is it worth acting before enactment?

The figures, deadlines, and procedural conditions referenced in this article rest on Article 10 of the Law Proposal Amending Certain Laws, submitted to the Grand National Assembly on 5 May 2026 (Proposal No. 2/3669), which introduces Provisional Article 19 of Corporate Tax Law No. 5520. The bill is currently before the Plan and Budget Committee, with the Industry, Trade, Energy, Natural Resources, Information and Technology Committee acting in a supporting capacity. Some details may evolve in committee. This article will be updated upon enactment and publication of implementation communiqués by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance.

Two questions arrive most frequently from clients seeking legal advice on the programme.

Question: If no retroactive inquiry will be made into the source of declared assets, is this a form of tax amnesty?

Answer: No. The 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme is not a tax amnesty; it is a regularisation framework that brings existing wealth into the formal Turkish financial system. The distinction is more than terminology: an amnesty cancels penalties for past wrongdoing, while a regularisation framework records the asset under a defined legal status in exchange for a low effective tax rate, integrating it into the Turkish financial system on a forward-looking basis. The 2026 programme therefore serves both the cleansing of the past and the securing of the future.

Question: Does it make sense to begin acting before the law is enacted, or should one wait?

Answer: Waiting for enactment is a natural reflex, but in practice the most valuable preparatory window is precisely this interval before the law enters into force. Determining the source-country tax position, reviewing the existing structure, opening lines of communication with Turkish banks, and preparing a corporate vehicle are time-consuming steps that can be completed before publication. An investor who arrives at the declaration window with these foundations already in place will benefit from the programme far more comprehensively than one who begins preparation only after the legislation is published.

⚖️ What is the 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme, and what does it change?

The 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme is a coordinated tax framework that allows cash, foreign currency, gold, securities, and other capital market instruments held abroad to be brought into Turkey and recorded in the formal financial system in exchange for a low effective tax rate. The defining features of the programme are that the source of the declared asset is not questioned by tax authorities and that no retroactive tax inspection, assessment, or penalty is applied in respect of the declared amounts. The investor pays a standard rate of 5% on the declared value, but where they commit to holding the assets in term deposits or in domestic government debt securities and lease certificates issued under Law No. 4749 for defined periods, the rate falls on a sliding scale to 0%. Once the tax is paid, the asset is transferred into Turkish bank or corporate accounts and formally integrated into the Turkish financial system.

The “Bring It Home” framing positions the programme as more than a tax measure; it is part of a broader capital attraction strategy. In his 25 April 2026 briefing, Minister Şimşek described the goal as drawing Turkish-linked wealth held abroad back into the country and consolidating Turkey’s position as a regional trade and finance hub. The framing is deliberate: the programme is not a one-off cash transfer mechanism but the first step in a coordinated structure encouraging long-term residency, tax integration, and forward-looking income planning through Turkey.

The substantive change operates on three layers. The first layer is the reduction in tax burden. Under ordinary income and wealth declaration mechanisms, the same asset transferred to Turkey would face materially higher tax exposure; the standard 5% rate, falling to 0% where assets are committed to qualifying instruments, represents a significant departure. The second layer is legal certainty: the absence of source-of-funds inquiry, the prohibition on retroactive tax inspection, and the protection against criminal tax assessment together address the structural uncertainty that has historically discouraged repatriation. The third layer is integration with the broader package: read alongside the 20-year foreign income exemption introduced in the same bill, the asset repatriation programme is not a standalone tax benefit but the entry point to a multi-year wealth planning framework.

The legislative path is now public. The intent was announced on 24 April 2026, the bill was submitted on 5 May 2026 to the Grand National Assembly, the fifteen articles include both the asset repatriation provisions in Article 10 and the 20-year exemption regime in Article 4. After committee deliberation, plenary debate, presidential approval, publication in the Official Gazette, and the issuance of implementation communiqués by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance, the programme will be fully operational.

⚖️ Why now, and who is the programme designed for?

Turkey’s introduction of an asset repatriation programme in 2026 is not an isolated tax choice but the individual-side instrument of a broader economic strategy. The Türkiye Century Strong Center for Investment Program sets out a vision of positioning Turkey as a trade and finance hub at the intersection of Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia. Drawing Turkish-linked wealth held abroad into Turkey is the personal-capital pillar of that vision; the parallel measures addressing exporters, service exporters, and free zone investors form the corporate pillar.

Four distinct profiles cluster within the programme’s intended audience. The first is Turkish nationals living abroad for extended periods and integrated into the tax systems of their host jurisdictions: the diaspora population in Germany, the Dutch second generation, Turkish professionals in the United Kingdom, and Turkish business owners across the Gulf. The second is dual-nationality investors who hold Turkish citizenship alongside another passport and have distributed wealth across multiple jurisdictions. The third is Turkish-origin global business owners who structure assets through financial centres such as Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, or London, maintain ties to Turkey, but are legally tax resident elsewhere. The fourth, distinctively positioned in the 2026 package, is foreign nationals considering Turkish residency or citizenship by investment, for whom the programme functions as a tool to consolidate their wealth structure ahead of relocation.

These groups overlap in some respects but face different legal regimes and require differentiated planning. A long-term resident in Germany subject to the German social security system faces different exit-side considerations than a Turkish-origin investor managing a private banking relationship in Switzerland. The first must contemplate German exit taxation (Wegzugsbesteuerung); the second is more concerned with Swiss wealth tax disclosure. A British resident transitioning out of the United Kingdom’s reformed residency-based regime faces different timing pressures than a Gulf-based investor with no exit-side tax obstacle. For each profile, the practical effect of Turkey’s framework must be evaluated against the source-country regime and the individual’s personal status.

It is equally important to identify whom the programme is not primarily designed for. Lifelong Turkish residents who have built wealth within the Turkish tax system are not the architectural target of this package. Domestic assets that fall outside formal accounting records may still be declared under paragraph 3 of Provisional Article 19, but the broader economic logic of the programme is the attraction of foreign capital. For purely domestic readers, the more appropriate frameworks are general wealth structuring, succession planning, and corporate restructuring rather than asset repatriation per se.

This is precisely why international investors increasingly ask: which Turkish lawyers are best positioned to advise on cross-border asset repatriation? The answer is not a single specialism but a coordinated capacity: Turkish tax law, the source-country tax regime, and the relevant double tax treaties read together; bilingual or trilingual communication; and continuity in handling international files over time. Our team at Oznur & Partners works at this intersection and structures advisory engagements around all three dimensions in parallel.

Eligible Assets Under the Programme

The 2026 programme distinguishes between two categories of declarable assets: those held abroad and those held within Turkey but not recorded in the taxpayer’s statutory accounting books.

The foreign-held category is the principal focus of the programme. Under paragraph 1 of Provisional Article 19, the following are within scope:

• Cash: Holdings denominated in Turkish lira or foreign currency
• Foreign currency: All foreign-currency deposits in non-Turkish banks and financial institutions
• Gold: Physical gold and gold accounts held abroad
• Securities and other capital market instruments: Shares, bonds, investment funds, and equivalent capital market instruments

The domestic category, governed by paragraph 3, covers the same asset classes where they exist within Turkey but are absent from the taxpayer’s statutory books:

• Cash held within Turkey, in lira or foreign currency
• Gold held within Turkey
• Foreign currency, securities, and other capital market instruments not recorded in formal accounts

Real estate is notably absent from both lists. Paragraph 1 defines the scope as “cash, gold, foreign currency, securities, and other capital market instruments”; immovable property is not included. An investor holding foreign real estate cannot declare the property directly under the programme. The practical workaround is sale of the property in the source country and declaration of the resulting cash or securities, but this approach carries its own source-country tax consequences (capital gains, exit taxation in jurisdictions that apply it) that must be evaluated independently before any disposal.

Valuation of declared assets is a procedurally significant step. Cash holdings are typically valued at the exchange rate prevailing on the declaration date; gold is commonly valued at the Central Bank reference rate; securities are valued either at market price or by independent valuation report. The bill text grants the Ministry of Treasury and Finance the power to determine the form of declaration and the documentation to be used in implementation; the precise valuation methods will be confirmed in the implementation communiqués following enactment.

Tax Rate Structure: Standard Rate and Term-Instrument Discount

The applicable tax rate under the 2026 programme is a sliding matrix that depends on two variables: the structure in which the declared asset will be held, and the date of declaration. Under the standard declaration, where the asset is placed into an ordinary bank or brokerage account, the rate is 5%. Where the investor commits to hold the asset in a term deposit, in domestic government debt securities (DİBS), or in lease certificates issued under Law No. 4749 for defined periods, the rate falls progressively, reaching 0% at the longest commitment.

Table 1: Tax rate matrix under Provisional Article 19, paragraph 6

Table 2: Timing surcharge

This structure presents the investor with two distinct decisions. The first is the holding structure: whether the declared asset will be held in liquid form for immediate use, or committed to a defined-term instrument. An investor who commits to a five-year holding in domestic government debt securities can declare at a 0% rate; an investor who needs immediate liquidity pays the 5% standard rate. The second decision is timing: declarations made before 31 July 2027 follow the matrix in Table 1, but declarations in the 1 January to 31 July 2027 window attract a half-point surcharge.

The mechanics of collection are routed through the financial sector. The bank or brokerage receiving the declaration withholds the applicable tax at source, files a return as the legally responsible party with the relevant tax office by the fifteenth day of the month following the declaration, and pays the tax within the same period. The investor does not remit the tax directly to the tax authority; the bank acts as the collection agent.

Three variables tend to drive the rate decision in practice. The first is the investor’s near-term liquidity requirement: where access to the asset is needed quickly, the standard 5% rate is the only realistic option. The second is the investor’s confidence in the long-term position of the Turkish financial system: a five-year commitment to government debt securities is both the rate-zeroing benefit and the longest illiquidity period. The third is alignment with the broader investment structure: portfolios already configured around long-duration fixed-income positions, particularly within a holding company architecture, sit naturally with the zero-rate option.

Important note: The rates and dates set out in this section are based on the text of Provisional Article 19 as submitted to the Grand National Assembly. Committee deliberations may produce changes in either the rate matrix or the timing structure. This article will be updated upon enactment and the publication of implementation communiqués by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance.

The Two-Month Transfer Rule

The most operationally critical condition in Provisional Article 19 is the time limit between declaration and physical transfer. Under paragraph 2, an asset declared from abroad must be transferred into a Turkish bank or brokerage account opened in the investor’s name, or physically brought into Turkey, within two months of the declaration date. Where assets are physically brought into Turkey, the supporting documentation is a declaration to the Customs Administration; the Customs Administration in turn reports these declarations to the Revenue Administration (Gelir İdaresi Başkanlığı) by the end of the month following receipt.

For domestic assets falling under paragraph 3 of the same article, the structure is even tighter. Domestic assets absent from statutory books must be deposited with a Turkish bank or brokerage on the declaration date itself. The two-month window applies only to foreign-held assets; domestic declarations require simultaneous deposit.

These deadlines are not procedural details but substantive conditions of the protections offered by the programme. Paragraph 9 is explicit: where the declared asset is not transferred to Turkey or deposited with a Turkish bank or brokerage within the prescribed period, where the declared tax is not paid on time, where commitments are not honoured, or where any other condition of the article is not met, the investor loses the protection against tax inspection set out in paragraph 8. The legislation contains an important nuance in this regard: in such cases, the unaccrued taxes are collected together with default interest, but without the standard tax loss penalty. The legal cost of missing the window is therefore quantifiable, but the loss of protection against retroactive inspection is the more material consequence. Paragraph 10 further provides that no amendment of declarations is permitted after the declaration period closes.

The practical implication is that the two-month window is not a buffer for preparation; it is an execution window. Banking coordination, KYC documentation, source-country transfer procedures, and where applicable a Turkish corporate vehicle must be in place before the declaration is filed. An investor who files the declaration first and addresses the operational logistics afterwards risks the window closing before the transfer can be completed within the standards expected by Turkish banking compliance.

This is why the most valuable preparation period is the interval before the law enters into force. Both the rate advantage and the procedural safety of the two-month window depend on infrastructure being ready at the moment of declaration.

Two-Year Capital Lock for Corporate Declarants

Paragraph 4 of Provisional Article 19 imposes a structural condition on declarants who maintain statutory accounting books, primarily Turkish-resident individuals and companies registered under Tax Procedure Law No. 213. Taxpayers maintaining books on the balance sheet basis must record declared assets under a special fund account in the liabilities section of the balance sheet. This fund account cannot be withdrawn from the business for two years from the declaration date and cannot be used for any purpose other than capital injection during that period. After two years, the fund may be withdrawn without affecting taxable income or, for corporations, distributable profit. If the business is liquidated within the two-year window, the fund is not subject to additional taxation; the investor accessing the asset through liquidation does not incur a further tax burden.

The two-year capital lock reflects the legislation’s “contribution to capital” logic. If declared assets entered the corporate balance sheet and immediately circulated freely, the policy goal of strengthening the capital structure of the receiving entity would not be achieved; the lock is the legislative mechanism preserving that goal.

For taxpayers maintaining books on the simpler self-employment income or business account basis, the procedure is more streamlined. These assets are recorded separately in the books, are not taken into account in the determination of period income, and may be withdrawn from the business after two years from the declaration date without affecting taxable income.

The capital lock does not apply to individual investors without statutory bookkeeping obligations. Paragraph 5 expressly provides that individuals who are not registered for income or corporate tax (the typical profile of a non-resident diaspora investor or a foreign national newly considering Turkey) benefit from the article’s provisions without the bookkeeping and special fund conditions of paragraph 4, provided they meet the transfer and deposit conditions of paragraph 2. The two-year lock is therefore a matter for corporate-route declarations, not for personal-route declarations.

In practice, two parallel architectures emerge. For individual investors, the process is a streamlined declaration-transfer-tax sequence with no multi-year lock. For investors using a corporate vehicle, the two-year fund lock becomes a structural consideration that should inform the choice of corporate type and the broader investment plan well before the declaration is filed. The choice between these two routes is often the first strategic question in our client engagements.

The “No Source-of-Funds Inquiry” Protection: Scope and Boundaries

The most distinctive legal feature of the 2026 programme is the protection against inquiry into the source of declared assets. Paragraph 8 of Provisional Article 19 provides that no tax inspection or tax assessment will be conducted in respect of the declared amounts. This protection encompasses four specific dimensions: the tax authority will not inquire into the origin of the declared asset, will not conduct retroactive tax inspections in respect of it, will not issue assessments against it, and will not pursue criminal tax proceedings on its basis.

The legislation reinforces this protection in a more concrete way. Where a tax inspection initiated on independent grounds, or a finding by an assessment commission, identifies an unreported tax base, and the inspector concludes that the unreported base arises from the same assets covered by the declaration, two outcomes are possible. If the declared amount equals or exceeds the identified shortfall, no assessment is made on the shortfall. If the shortfall exceeds the declared amount, an assessment is made only on the difference. Where an inspection or commission finding identifies a shortfall arising from sources other than the declared assets, the declared amounts are not credited against that shortfall and assessment proceeds in the ordinary manner.

This architecture means that the protection is not a hypothetical safeguard but a concrete legal shield that operates even within ongoing inspections. An investor facing inspection on unrelated grounds retains the protection in respect of declared amounts up to the value declared.

The boundaries of this protection are equally important to understand. The programme is a tax-law instrument, not a criminal-law instrument. Protection within the tax framework does not extend to obligations under criminal law or under the financial crime regime. Paragraph 8 contains explicit textual safeguarding: “measures required under other legislation are not affected by this provision.” Turkey’s Financial Crimes Investigation Board (MASAK) regime, the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist-financing framework, and predicate offence provisions continue to operate independently of the declaration. Where an asset falls within the scope of the AML/CFT regime, declaration under the programme does not extinguish the criminal liability associated with it; the MASAK regime is precisely the “other legislation” referenced in paragraph 8.

In practice this means that the assets declared under the programme must come from a legally clean origin. Long-standing foreign business income, capital gains accumulated in a foreign investment account, inherited wealth, and earnings from professional activity abroad are the natural targets of the programme. By contrast, assets connected to serious tax evasion, predicate offences, or activity falling within the MASAK framework do not gain a protective layer through the programme; for such files, the legal advisory work must be structured on a far broader basis, and the declaration question is a secondary one.

For investors evaluating the programme, two distinctions are essential. The first is between tax liability and criminal liability: the programme addresses the former, not the latter. The second is between Turkish law and source-country law: Turkey’s protection does not affect the investor’s obligations to the source-country tax authority. A German-resident Turkish citizen’s German tax obligations continue independently of any registration the asset receives in Turkey. The programme is therefore not a protective umbrella, but a legal instrument with clearly defined boundaries.

For investors integrating asset repatriation with longer-term wealth structuring, the related guides on Turkish inheritance law and Turkish investment legal services on this site set out the parallel layers within which a declaration is best positioned. The real value of the programme often emerges only when read alongside these adjacent frameworks.

Integration with the 20-Year Foreign Income Exemption

The strategic value of the 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme becomes clearer when read alongside the 20-year foreign income exemption introduced by Article 4 of the same bill. Article 4 adds repeated Article 20/D to Income Tax Law No. 193, providing that individuals deemed resident in Turkey, where they have not had a registered domicile or tax liability in Turkey during the preceding three calendar years, are exempt from income tax on foreign-sourced income and earnings for a period of twenty years. Although the asset repatriation programme and the 20-year exemption are formally separate measures, their target audience and economic logic are aligned. The repatriation programme addresses existing wealth held abroad: how to bring foreign assets into Turkey at a low effective rate and with legal certainty over their historical position. The 20-year exemption addresses future income: ensuring that, once relocated, the individual’s foreign-sourced earnings remain outside Turkish tax for two decades. Together, past and future are planned under a single legal architecture.

Table 3: Parallel structure of the two regimes

In practice, the two regimes are sequenced. The investor first declares existing foreign wealth under the asset repatriation programme at the appropriate rate (5% standard, 0% to 4% with term commitments) and transfers it into a Turkish bank or corporate account. With this step, the past is regularised: the asset is recorded, its source is not subject to inquiry, and the risk of retroactive inspection is removed. The investor then establishes Turkish residency and, provided the three-year non-residency condition is met, enters the 20-year exemption regime. Foreign-sourced income remains outside Turkish tax for two decades.

The inheritance dimension is among the most consequential elements of this integration. Article 2 of the bill amends Article 16 of the Inheritance and Gift Tax Law (Law No. 7338) to set the inheritance tax rate at 1% for transfers occurring while the deceased was benefiting from the repeated Article 20/D regime. Compared with German inheritance tax, which can reach 50% on substantial estates, with US federal estate tax exposure on global assets above the exemption threshold, or with the United Kingdom’s 40% inheritance tax, the 1% Turkish rate represents a category change rather than an incremental adjustment. For multi-generational wealth planning, the asset repatriation programme, the 20-year regime, and the 1% inheritance tax operate together as a single integrated framework.

The alternative, where the two regimes are not integrated, illustrates the value of coordinated planning. An investor who uses only the asset repatriation programme without establishing Turkish residency captures a one-time tax advantage but continues to earn future income within the source-country tax regime. An investor who plans the two regimes together captures three layers in a single architecture: existing wealth at 0% to 5%, future income tax-free for twenty years, and intergenerational transfer at 1%. The strategic difference is significant.

For a more complete treatment of the 20-year exemption, including eligibility criteria and the inheritance dimension, our parallel guide on Turkey’s 20-year tax exemption for returning residents sets out the framework in detail.

Choosing the Receiving Vehicle: Personal Account or Corporate Structure

The choice of legal vehicle to receive the declared asset is one of the first strategic questions in any repatriation file. An asset can be transferred directly to an individual bank account, but for declarations above a certain scale, or where forward planning is part of the brief, a corporate structure is the more common and frequently more rational choice. The detailed mechanics of Turkish company formation are covered separately on our site; here we focus on the strategic logic of vehicle selection in the asset repatriation context.

Three primary vehicle types frame the decision. A limited liability company (Limited Şirket, LLC) is the most common choice for small to mid-sized declarations: low formation cost, simple management structure, flexible capital arrangements. A joint stock company (Anonim Şirket, JSC) is preferred for larger capital structures, where share transferability and potential future public listing are relevant: more institutional governance through a board of directors, share register, and audit framework. A holding company structure is appropriate where multiple operating companies will sit beneath a single parent, where multi-generational wealth transfer is a primary consideration, or where intra-group tax optimisation is part of the long-term plan.

Five variables typically drive the vehicle decision. The first is the scale of the declared asset: smaller portfolios sit well within an LLC, while larger portfolios and family wealth planning often require a JSC or holding architecture. The second is the forward plan: whether the investor intends to grow the asset within Turkey, to use Turkey as a platform for further outbound investment, or to build a succession structure, each leads to a different optimal vehicle. The third is the inheritance architecture: an investor with children or a spouse in different jurisdictions may find that a holding structure integrates more flexibly with cross-border succession planning. The fourth is tax residency intent: where the investor plans to enter the 20-year exemption regime, the corporate vehicle should be configured to align with that regime. The fifth is the two-year capital lock: an investor declaring through a corporate vehicle should evaluate the two-year fund restriction in advance against the planned timeline for accessing the asset.

The formation sequence proceeds along familiar lines. Shareholding structure is determined first: who the founders will be, how shares will be allocated, where management rights will sit. Capital structure is then designed: whether the entire declared asset will be committed as paid-in capital, or whether part will be structured as shareholder loans. The articles of association are drafted, defining business activities, governance, and decision-making mechanisms. Registration is completed through MERSİS, trade registry filings, tax office registration, social security registration, and bank account opening. These steps can all be initiated before enactment, and given that company formation typically takes two to four weeks, beginning during the legislative interval is precisely how an investor positions to file a declaration immediately upon enactment.

The most frequent practical question at this stage is: how are foreign-held assets actually moved into Turkish corporate accounts? The mechanics depend on the form of transfer. For wire transfers, the investor instructs their source-country bank to remit funds via SWIFT to the Turkish corporate account; the receiving Turkish bank applies its KYC and customer due diligence procedures and requests source-of-funds documentation, which forms the basis of the MASAK compliance file. For physical transport of cash, foreign currency, or gold, a customs declaration is filed at the Turkish border, serving as supporting documentation under paragraph 2 of Provisional Article 19; the Customs Administration then reports the declaration to the Revenue Administration. In both channels, the formal declaration is made to the bank or brokerage, the rate-determining holding structure (standard immediate disposition, or term-instrument commitment) is selected, and the bank withholds the applicable tax and remits it to the tax office by the fifteenth day of the following month. At each step, the source-country may apply its own exit taxation or reporting obligations; a coordinated legal team across both jurisdictions is the practical minimum.

MASAK Compliance and the Banking Side

The legal protections built into the 2026 programme operate within the tax framework, but the banking compliance environment runs on a parallel track. Turkish banks, as part of Turkey’s adherence to international financial standards, apply KYC and customer due diligence (CDD) procedures to every incoming transfer. Even where a transfer is being made under the asset repatriation programme, the bank may request documentation regarding the source of the funds, may seek additional information at account opening, and may require pre-approval for large-value transfers. These procedures operate independently of the tax-side regime.

In practice, this means that source documentation should be assembled before the transfer, not afterwards. Foreign bank account statements demonstrating the historical accumulation of the asset, records showing the formation of the holding (such as long-term investment account statements, inheritance documentation, share transfer records), and source-country tax filings or residency certificates form the standard evidentiary file for compliance review. Anticipating the bank’s evidentiary requirements before the transfer is initiated reduces both timing risk and rejection risk on the banking side.

The MASAK dimension introduces a further layer. Turkey’s anti-money-laundering framework, set out in the Law on the Prevention of Laundering Proceeds of Crime, operates to prevent illicit funds from entering the formal financial system; its operation is independent of the 2026 asset repatriation programme. Paragraph 8 of Provisional Article 19 confirms this independence in legislative form: “measures required under other legislation are not affected by this provision.” Even where an asset is protected on the tax side, where its source falls within the MASAK framework, the receiving bank retains its obligation to file a suspicious transaction report. Establishing the legal cleanliness of the source in the source country, before the transfer is initiated, is therefore essential to ensuring the banking process proceeds without complication.

In practice, a three-step coordination sequence is the standard approach. The first step is a pre-transfer consultation with the Turkish bank to clarify the structure of the transfer, the expected amount, the source country, and the account opening procedure; this consultation typically clarifies the bank’s documentation requirements in advance. The second step, in parallel, is engagement with a tax adviser or legal counsel in the source country to address exit taxation, reporting obligations, and source-side bank procedures; large-value transfers from Germany, for example, may require notification to the Federal Central Tax Office. The third step is filing the asset repatriation declaration with the Turkish tax authority within the prescribed timing, and ensuring the supporting documentation is complete.

These three steps operate independently in legal terms, but together they form the only reliable path to capturing the full benefit of the programme. A failure or delay at any step does not extinguish the tax-side advantage, but it can significantly delay the transfer process and trigger additional scrutiny on the banking side. Our practice with international files follows a parallel-coordination model precisely because the cost of a sequential approach is most often a missed two-month transfer window.

Source-Country Tax Considerations and Double Tax Treaty Interaction

For investors residing abroad and considering the 2026 programme, source-country tax obligations must be evaluated independently of the Turkish framework. Turkey has signed Double Tax Treaties (DTTs) with more than 80 jurisdictions, governing the allocation of taxing rights on income; these treaties do not, however, automatically eliminate exit-side taxes that apply when an asset leaves the source country. Each investor’s source-country position must be confirmed before the Turkish-side declaration is structured.

Table 4: Source-country exit-side considerations (summary)

The above framework is a summary. Each individual case requires independent evaluation with source-country tax counsel.

The DTT dimension becomes practically relevant in the following way. A German-resident investor of Turkish origin transferring a German investment account to Turkey faces two distinct tax events: a possible exit tax obligation in Germany, triggered either by the transfer or by the residency change, and the Turkish-side asset repatriation rate. The DTT may provide credit, refund, or offset mechanisms between the two, but these are not automatic; timing and documentation control the outcome. For German cases in particular, early-stage coordination between Turkish and German tax counsel is the practical norm, not a precaution.

The United Kingdom case carries its own distinctive dynamics. The UK regime governing offshore income has undergone significant reform in recent years; the long-applied remittance basis system has been replaced by a new residency-based regime. For long-term UK residents who continue to hold offshore assets, this reform has introduced new structural questions. Where a large transfer to Turkey is contemplated, the current UK position cannot be assumed without specialist advice grounded in the reformed regime.

Transfers from the Gulf and from the United States present different dynamics again. Gulf jurisdictions, with limited income and wealth taxation, tend to present minimal exit-side tax obstacles; the focus shifts to Turkish-side banking compliance and MASAK coordination. The United States, by contrast, sits in a separate category by virtue of its citizenship-based taxation regime: a US-citizen investor of Turkish origin retains US tax obligations regardless of relocation, and parallel filings continue across multiple years. For US-citizen clients, planning must integrate US tax counsel from the outset.

The Legislative Timeline and What Can Be Done Now

The path from announcement to operational programme involves multiple stages, each with its own time horizon. Understanding the sequence is essential for the investor seeking to determine which preparatory steps can be initiated immediately and which depend on enactment.

The sequence is as follows. The first stage was the announcement: the package was unveiled by President Erdoğan on 24 April 2026 and detailed by Minister Şimşek on 25 April 2026. The second stage was the introduction of the bill: on 5 May 2026, the AK Party Group Chairmanship submitted the fifteen-article Law Proposal Amending Certain Laws to the Grand National Assembly, signed by AK Party deputies including Mustafa Oğuz (Burdur), Seydi Gülsoy (Osmaniye), Hüseyin Altınsoy (Aksaray), and Ertuğrul Kocacık (Sakarya).

The third stage is committee deliberation. The bill has been referred to the Plan and Budget Committee as the lead committee, with the Industry, Trade, Energy, Natural Resources, Information and Technology Committee in a supporting role. Details of the rate matrix, the declaration window, and the scope conditions may be refined at this stage. The fourth stage is plenary debate and the vote in the General Assembly. The fifth stage is presidential approval and publication in the Official Gazette, the point at which the legislation enters legal force. The sixth stage is the publication of implementation communiqués: paragraph 11 of Provisional Article 19 grants the Ministry of Treasury and Finance the authority to determine the form of declaration, the supporting documentation, and the procedural rules for transferring assets into Turkey and integrating them into the receiving entity.

For tracking the official legal text, the Official Gazette of the Republic of Türkiye is the definitive source; for implementation communiqués, the Revenue Administration publishes the relevant texts. The committee reports of the Grand National Assembly are useful for tracking how the bill evolves between submission and enactment.

If the bill is enacted as drafted, two dates structure the declaration window. The principal deadline is 31 July 2027, which the President may extend in increments of up to six months for a total extension of up to one year. Declarations after the original deadline, where extended, attract a one-percentage-point total surcharge on the rate matrix. Declarations between 1 January 2027 and 31 July 2027 attract a half-point surcharge. The timing structure itself is part of the incentive design: investors who complete preparation before the legislative window opens secure both the lower rates and the operational safety of the two-month transfer window.

The distinction between what can be done now and what must wait is therefore the practical centre of gravity. Steps that can be initiated before enactment: determining source-country tax position, reviewing existing legal and corporate structures, opening preliminary discussions with Turkish banks, preparing a corporate vehicle (articles of association, shareholding structure, capital framework), reviewing succession planning documents, gathering source-of-funds documentation, and modelling the interaction with applicable Double Tax Treaties. Steps that must wait for enactment: the formal declaration to the bank or brokerage, the withholding and payment of the rate-based tax, and the formal transfer of assets under the programme.

Sophisticated investors routinely ask: when is the right moment to act, before the law is enacted or after? The answer is two-layered. The formal declaration and transfer steps must wait for enactment, by definition. But the most comprehensive use of the programme requires that all preparation be complete before the declaration window opens. Source-country tax matters resolved only after enactment risk pushing the eventual transfer into a higher-rate window, with the half-point or full-point surcharge applying. The right framing is not “act now or wait” but rather “prepare now so that action upon enactment is immediate and well-founded.”

Pre-Enactment Preparation: An Eight-Step Framework

The interval before enactment is the most operationally valuable period for an investor considering the programme. Eight categories of preparation can be initiated in this window, and most of them require the kind of cross-jurisdictional coordination that does not compress easily into the post-enactment timeline.

The first step is source-country tax analysis. The investor’s tax position in their country of residence, and any obligations triggered by the transfer or by a change of residency, must be quantified. For Germany, this means modelling Wegzugsbesteuerung exposure; for the United Kingdom, evaluating the position under the reformed residency regime; for the United States, projecting the federal tax effect of any expatriation steps. These analyses, conducted with source-country tax counsel and reported to the Turkish legal team, set the parameters within which the rest of the planning operates.

The second step is structural review. How are the foreign-held assets currently held: which entities, which banks, which jurisdictions, and what succession arrangements? An asset held within a family holding has different transfer mechanics than an asset held in an individual brokerage account. Cross-border trust or foundation structures introduce a further layer of legal analysis on transferability and treatment.

The third step is initiating banking coordination. The source-country bank should be informed in advance and asked to clarify its documentation requirements for outbound transfers of the contemplated size. On the Turkish side, a preliminary discussion with the receiving bank establishes the KYC requirements, expected processing timeline, and any pre-approval thresholds. Given the two-month transfer window, banking infrastructure should be operational before the declaration is filed.

The fourth step is corporate vehicle preparation. The choice between Limited Şirket, Anonim Şirket, and a holding architecture should be made, the shareholding structure designed, the capital framework established, and the articles of association drafted. Company formation in Turkey typically requires two to four weeks; completing this work in advance allows the declaration to be filed without delay upon enactment. The two-year capital lock should be modelled into the corporate plan from the outset.

The fifth step is succession plan review. Where the asset is being moved into Turkey, succession arrangements should be revisited against the new framework. For investors who will subsequently enter the 20-year exemption regime, the practical effect of the 1% inheritance rate suggests reviewing existing wills, family wealth transfer plans, and cross-border succession structures.

The sixth step is source documentation assembly. For both banking compliance and MASAK coordination, documents establishing the historical accumulation of the asset (long-term investment account statements, inheritance records, share transfer documentation, source-country tax filings) should be gathered in advance. Reconstructing this documentation under the pressure of the two-month transfer window is significantly more difficult than preparing it during the pre-enactment period.

The seventh step is the Double Tax Treaty assessment. The interaction between Turkey’s DTT with the source country and the proposed transfer should be modelled: where credit, refund, or offset mechanisms apply, the timing and documentation requirements should be incorporated into the overall plan.

The eighth and final step is establishing the legal advisory team. Turkish tax law, source-country tax law, banking compliance, succession planning, and corporate law each require specialist input. Coordinating these disciplines under a single legal architecture is the practical condition for advancing the preparation steps in parallel rather than in sequence. This is the structure within which our team at Oznur & Partners works on cross-border repatriation files: a single coordinated process integrating Turkish tax, source-country tax, banking compliance, and succession planning under one engagement.

2026 Compared with Earlier Asset Repatriation Programmes

Asset repatriation regimes are not a new feature of Turkish tax policy. Following the 2008 global financial crisis, Turkey enacted its first comprehensive programme; subsequent programmes followed in 2013, 2016, 2018, 2019, and 2022. The 2026 programme is the ninth such regime. What distinguishes the 2026 programme from its predecessors is worth examining, because the practical value of the package depends on understanding what has changed.

Table 5: Comparison of recent asset repatriation programmes

Four points of differentiation stand out. The first is the broader articulation of legal protection: explicit statement that the source of funds will not be inquired into, explicit prohibition on retroactive assessment, explicit protection against criminal tax action, and explicit equality protection within ongoing inspections. Earlier programmes carried protections, but the 2026 text is the most comprehensive in its statutory framing, and the official communications surrounding the announcement have emphasised this point in particular.

The second is the integration of the programme with the 20-year exemption regime within the same legislative instrument. Earlier asset repatriation programmes operated as standalone tax measures: declare, pay, and revert to the ordinary regime. The 2026 programme is part of a coordinated framework that extends to future income through Repeated Article 20/D and to intergenerational transfer through the 1% inheritance tax. The same investor can plan past, future, and transfer dimensions under a single architecture.

The third is the more deliberate articulation of the target audience. Earlier programmes addressed “Turkish wealth held abroad” as a general category; the 2026 programme distinguishes between four profiles, each with different legal mechanics, source-country regimes, and decision parameters. This articulation extends from policy framing to the practical structure of advisory engagements.

The fourth is the positioning of the programme within a broader economic strategy. The “Türkiye Century Strong Center for Investment Program” framing places asset repatriation within a vision of Turkey as a regional financial centre, alongside corporate measures supporting exporters and service exporters, and the parallel residency regime drawing skilled and high-net-worth individuals to Turkey. Earlier programmes were typically presented as standalone fiscal measures; the 2026 programme is positioned as the personal-capital pillar of a broader strategic frame.

For investors who declined to participate in earlier programmes due to insufficient legal certainty, the 2026 framework offers materially stronger statutory protections. For those evaluating the programme primarily on rate, the integration with the 20-year regime offers a multi-year planning value that rate alone does not capture. The programme is best understood not as an isolated tax discount but as the entry point to a multi-year wealth structure.

Suitability and Caution: Who the Programme Fits and Who Should Approach It Carefully

The 2026 programme is broad in its target audience, but it is not the right instrument for every situation. Several profiles align naturally with the design of the programme, and several others require careful evaluation before any action is taken.

The programme aligns naturally with the following profiles. Long-term Turkish residents of European jurisdictions (Germany, Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and similar) holding accumulated wealth in their country of residence find in the programme a defined low-rate path to bringing that wealth into Turkey. These investors fall under paragraph 5 of Provisional Article 19, exempt from the bookkeeping and special fund conditions of paragraph 4 because they are not registered for Turkish income or corporate tax. Dual-nationality investors with assets distributed across jurisdictions find a new operational space within the Turkish framework. Turkish-origin global business owners holding wealth in Gulf jurisdictions or European financial centres find an entry point for Turkey-oriented wealth planning. Foreign nationals planning to enter the 20-year exemption regime benefit from the programme as a pre-residency wealth consolidation tool. Investors holding wealth within an offshore investment holding and planning Turkish family-wealth structuring can use the programme comprehensively, subject to the two-year fund lock that applies to corporate-route declarations.

Several profiles call for caution. The first is investors holding assets that fall within the scope of MASAK, predicate offences, or AML/CFT frameworks; the protections offered by the programme do not extend to criminal liability, and the declaration may, in some configurations, generate new legal exposure rather than resolving existing risk. The second is investors facing significant exit taxation in the source country, particularly large transfers from Germany under Wegzugsbesteuerung; the source-side tax cost may offset all or part of the Turkish-side benefit, and parallel planning is essential before any decision is made. The third is investors who are tax residents of Turkey throughout their lives and have built their wealth within the Turkish tax system; the architecture of the programme is not designed for them, and the more appropriate frameworks are general wealth structuring, succession planning, and corporate restructuring. The fourth is US-citizen investors of Turkish origin: the citizenship-based US tax regime continues to apply regardless of relocation, and parallel US compliance is unavoidable; planning must integrate both regimes from the outset.

A further structural distinction concerns the documentary cleanliness of the asset’s origin. The protection against source-of-funds inquiry from the tax authority does not mean the source need not be evidenced anywhere. Banking compliance, source-country authorities, and the MASAK regime will all expect a traceable origin. Assets accumulated over long periods in undocumented circumstances may, in practice, present a more limited protective benefit under the programme; such files require a broader and more cautious legal evaluation than a routine declaration.

For foreign nationals evaluating the programme alongside Turkish citizenship by investment, an additional dimension emerges. Where the path to citizenship runs through a real estate or capital investment, structuring that investment under the asset repatriation programme can simplify both the legal and tax architecture and reduce the effective entry cost. The combination of citizenship, asset repatriation, the 20-year regime, and 1% inheritance tax operates as a coordinated framework rather than as four separate decisions.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

✅ What is Turkey’s 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme?

The 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme is a tax framework that allows individuals and entities to bring foreign-held cash, gold, foreign currency, securities, and other capital market instruments into Turkey at preferential tax rates and without retroactive inquiry into the source of funds. Announced by President Erdoğan on 24 April 2026 under the Türkiye Century Strong Center for Investment Program, the legal basis is Article 10 of the bill submitted to the Grand National Assembly on 5 May 2026, introducing Provisional Article 19 of Corporate Tax Law No. 5520. The bill is currently before the Plan and Budget Committee.

✅ What is the actual tax rate, and how is it determined?

The standard rate under paragraph 6 of Provisional Article 19 is 5%, applied where the declared asset is placed into an ordinary bank or brokerage account. Where the investor commits to holding the asset in term deposits, domestic government debt securities (DİBS), or lease certificates issued under Law No. 4749, the rate falls on a sliding scale: 4% for one year, 3% for two years, 2% for three years, 1% for four years, and 0% for five years. The bank or brokerage withholds the tax at source and remits it to the tax office by the fifteenth day of the month following the declaration. Declarations between 1 January 2027 and 31 July 2027 attract a half-point surcharge; declarations after the deadline, where extended, attract a one-point surcharge.

✅ Which assets can be declared under the programme?

Cash (in lira or foreign currency), foreign currency deposits, gold, securities, and other capital market instruments held abroad fall within paragraph 1 of Provisional Article 19. The same asset classes held within Turkey but absent from statutory accounting books fall within paragraph 3. Real estate is not included; an investor holding foreign real estate cannot declare the property directly. The practical workaround is sale of the property in the source country and declaration of the resulting cash or securities, but this approach carries its own source-country tax consequences and must be evaluated independently.

✅ What does “no source-of-funds inquiry” actually mean?

The protection means the tax authority will not inquire into the origin of the declared asset, will not conduct retroactive tax inspections, will not issue assessments, and will not pursue criminal tax proceedings on the basis of the declaration. Paragraph 8 also provides equality protection within ongoing inspections: where an inspection identifies an unreported tax base arising from the declared assets, no assessment is made if the declared amount equals or exceeds the shortfall. The protection is limited to the tax framework. Paragraph 8 expressly states that “measures required under other legislation are not affected by this provision,” meaning that MASAK obligations, AML/CFT rules, and predicate offence provisions continue to operate independently.

✅ How does the two-month transfer rule work?

Under paragraph 2, an asset declared from abroad must be transferred to a Turkish bank or brokerage account, or physically brought into Turkey, within two months of the declaration date. Domestic-asset declarations require simultaneous deposit on the declaration date itself. Failure to meet the deadline triggers paragraph 9: the protection against tax inspection is lost, and the unaccrued taxes are collected with default interest, although without the standard tax loss penalty. Banking arrangements, KYC documentation, and where applicable a Turkish corporate vehicle should be in place before the declaration is filed.

✅ Is a corporate vehicle required, and what is the two-year capital lock?

A corporate vehicle is not legally required; assets below a certain scale can be transferred to an individual bank account. For larger declarations, future investment plans, or succession structuring, a Limited Şirket, Anonim Şirket, or holding architecture is the more common choice. Under paragraph 4, taxpayers maintaining books on the balance sheet basis must record declared assets under a special fund account, which cannot be withdrawn from the business for two years and cannot be used for purposes other than capital injection during that period. Paragraph 5 expressly exempts individual investors who are not registered for income or corporate tax (the typical profile of a non-resident diaspora investor or foreign national) from the bookkeeping and special fund conditions.

✅ What about source-country tax obligations for residents of Germany, the UK, or other jurisdictions?

Turkey’s protection operates within the Turkish tax framework only; source-country obligations continue independently. German Wegzugsbesteuerung, the reformed UK residency regime, Dutch Box 3 considerations, US citizenship-based taxation, Canadian deemed disposition rules, and Swiss cantonal wealth taxation each apply on their own terms. Double Tax Treaties between Turkey and the source country may provide credit, refund, or offset mechanisms, but these are not automatic; timing and documentation determine the outcome. Coordinated planning with source-country tax counsel is essential before any transfer is initiated.

✅ How does the programme integrate with the 20-year foreign income exemption?

The two regimes appear in the same bill: asset repatriation in Article 10 (Provisional Article 19), and the 20-year foreign income exemption in Article 4 (Repeated Article 20/D). Used together, past wealth and future income are planned within a single framework. The investor first declares existing foreign wealth under the asset repatriation programme at the appropriate rate (0% to 5% depending on holding structure) and transfers it into a Turkish account; on relocation, where the three-year non-residency condition is met, the investor enters the 20-year exemption regime. Foreign-sourced income remains outside Turkish tax for two decades, and intergenerational transfer occurs at the 1% inheritance rate set by Article 2 of the bill.

✅ How does the 2026 programme differ from earlier asset repatriation regimes?

Four points distinguish the 2026 programme. The legal protection is articulated more comprehensively (explicit no-source-of-funds wording, explicit prohibition on retroactive assessment, equality protection in ongoing inspections). The programme is integrated with the 20-year exemption regime within the same legislative instrument. The target audience is articulated across four distinct profiles rather than as a general category. And the programme is positioned within a broader economic strategy framing Turkey as a regional financial centre, rather than as a standalone fiscal measure.

✅ When will the programme enter into force?

The intent was announced on 24 to 25 April 2026, the bill was submitted to the Grand National Assembly on 5 May 2026, and is now before the Plan and Budget Committee. Following committee deliberation, plenary debate, presidential approval, and publication in the Official Gazette, the programme will enter legal force. Implementation communiqués from the Ministry of Treasury and Finance will follow. The bill provides a declaration deadline of 31 July 2027, extendable by Presidential decree in increments of up to six months for a total extension of up to one year, with a one-point rate surcharge applying after extension.

✅ What can be done before the law is enacted?

Many preparatory steps can be initiated before enactment: source-country tax analysis, structural review of existing holdings, banking coordination, corporate vehicle preparation, succession plan review, source documentation assembly, and Double Tax Treaty modelling. Only the formal declaration, the rate-based tax payment, and the formal transfer must wait for enactment. Completing preparation before the declaration window opens is the practical condition for capturing the lowest rate and managing the two-month transfer window without complication.

✅ Are proceeds of crime or money laundering covered by the protections?

No. Assets connected to predicate offences, terrorist financing, or money laundering are outside the scope of the programme’s protections. Paragraph 8 of Provisional Article 19 expressly preserves the operation of “other legislation,” meaning the MASAK regime continues to apply independently. Where an asset falls within the AML/CFT framework, declaration under the programme does not extinguish the criminal liability associated with it; the receiving bank retains its obligation to file a suspicious transaction report. For files of this nature, a broader legal analysis is required, and the declaration question is a secondary one.

✅ Can a Turkish resident benefit from the programme?

The architecture of the programme is designed primarily to attract foreign capital, so it is not the intended fit for lifelong Turkish residents whose wealth has been earned within the Turkish tax system. Domestic assets absent from statutory accounting books may be declared under paragraph 3 of Provisional Article 19, but for a reader whose tax history is wholly Turkish, the more appropriate frameworks are general wealth structuring, succession planning, and corporate restructuring rather than asset repatriation per se.

✅ How does the programme compare for foreign nationals planning citizenship by investment?

The two regimes are structurally complementary. Citizenship by investment grants Turkish nationality based on qualifying real estate, capital, or deposit investment; the asset repatriation programme operates on declaration and rate-based regularisation; the 20-year exemption operates on residency criteria. A foreign national planning citizenship by investment, who has not been a Turkish tax resident in the prior three calendar years, can in principle structure the wealth supporting the citizenship application under the asset repatriation programme, subsequently enter the 20-year regime, and transfer wealth to the next generation at the 1% inheritance rate. The combination operates as a coordinated framework rather than as four separate decisions.

⚖️ Related Legal Resources

🔹 Tax Regimes and Foreign Income

Turkey’s 20-Year Tax Exemption for Returning Residents — The parallel regime in the same bill: twenty-year exemption on foreign-sourced income for individuals satisfying the three-year non-residency condition, paired with the 1% inheritance tax for the duration of the exemption period. The asset repatriation programme is best read alongside this regime.

2026 Turkey Tax Update for Foreign Investors — Presidential Decree No. 11257 published 30 April 2026: lower foreign participation thresholds, 100% deduction on service export income, and revised effective tax rates on outbound investment dividends.

Tax Law Practice — Cross-border tax structuring, Turkish corporate tax planning, and integration with international tax frameworks.

🔹 Investment and Corporate Structuring

Turkish Company Formation — Choice of vehicle (Limited Şirket, Anonim Şirket, holding), formation procedure, and capital structuring for receiving repatriated assets in Turkey.

Turkish Investment Legal Services — Cross-border investment structuring, due diligence, and integration of asset repatriation within broader international portfolios.

Investment Attorney in Turkey — Advisory on structuring inbound capital, investment vehicles, and the legal infrastructure of cross-border transactions.

🔹 Citizenship and Residency

Turkish Citizenship by Investment — Eligibility criteria, qualifying investment routes, and integration with the asset repatriation programme as a pre-residency wealth consolidation step.

Turkish Immigration and Residency — The relationship between residency permit, tax residency, and the path into the 20-year exemption regime.

🔹 Inheritance and Succession Planning

Turkish Inheritance Law Firm — Multi-generational wealth transfer under the 1% inheritance tax for participants in the 20-year regime, and cross-border succession structuring.

Inheritance Law Practice — Succession planning, will preparation, cross-jurisdictional inheritance structuring, and the practical effect of the 1% rate on existing estate plans.

⚖️ Conclusion

At first reading, Turkey’s 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme appears to be a tax discount on the repatriation of foreign-held wealth. In practice, the rate alone is the least interesting feature of the package. The regularisation of past wealth through the programme is one face of the same legislative architecture; the securing of future income through the 20-year regime, and the transfer of wealth to the next generation at 1%, are the other faces. What makes the 2026 framework different from its predecessors is precisely this integration: the same bill addresses past, future, and intergenerational dimensions, and an investor entering the framework at any one point gains operational access to the others.

For Turkish nationals abroad, dual-nationality investors, Turkish-origin global business owners, and foreign nationals planning relocation, the 2026 package opens a defined path to building a renewed legal relationship with Turkey. The use of that path, however, depends on the careful integration of source-country tax considerations, banking compliance procedures, succession planning, and corporate structuring. Waiting for enactment is a natural reflex, but the most valuable preparation occurs precisely in the interval before the law enters into force; investors who arrive at the declaration window with their preparation complete capture the broadest benefit the framework offers.

Our team at Oznur & Partners has structured its cross-border practice around exactly this integration. We work at the intersection of Turkish tax law, source-country tax regimes, banking compliance, succession planning, and corporate structuring. The 2026 Asset Repatriation Programme is, in our reading, not the destination but the entry point to a multi-year wealth planning architecture; we engage with it on that basis, and our advisory work is shaped to deliver the integrated outcome rather than the isolated tax benefit.

This article is prepared by the legal team at Oznur & Partners, an Istanbul-based law firm advising international clients on tax, investment, citizenship, corporate, and inheritance matters in Turkey. The content is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. The legislative package described above has been submitted to the Grand National Assembly; final scope and procedure will be determined upon enactment and the publication of implementation communiqués by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance.

Sources: Address by the President of the Republic of Türkiye at the Türkiye Century Strong Center for Investment Program, Dolmabahçe Working Office, 24 April 2026; Treasury and Finance Minister briefing at the Presidential Complex, 25 April 2026; Law Proposal Amending Certain Laws, submitted to the Grand National Assembly on 5 May 2026 (Proposal No. 2/3669); Official Gazette of the Republic of Türkiye, resmigazete.gov.tr; Revenue Administration, gib.gov.tr.