I. Introduction
For companies and enterprises resident in Turkey, export transactions are not limited solely to the completion of customs exit. Pursuant to Law No. 1567 on the Protection of the Value of Turkish Currency, the framework of Customs Law No. 4458, and the Export Circular of the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey dated 16.01.2020; export proceeds must be brought into the country within the procedures and timeframes prescribed by the legislation. Furthermore, the collection related to the relevant export transaction must be certified through the banking system to ensure the “closing of the export account.” This obligation constitutes one of the fundamental elements of exporters’ compliance with foreign exchange legislation.
In practice, although the concept of “repatriation of export proceeds” is often perceived as merely the transfer of payment to Turkey, there is actually a two-fold area of compliance: (i) the collection and repatriation of the proceeds within the statutory period, and (ii) ensuring the proper closure of the account before the bank by accurately matching the collection with the relevant customs declaration and its items. Therefore, the fact that the proceeds have been physically collected does not, by itself, eliminate the risk of sanctions at all times; partial collections, return/discount applications, assignment of receivables or factoring transactions, and payment methods such as offset/barter, as well as discrepancies between documentation and declaration closure, may be evaluated as non-compliance during the “closing” process.
On the other hand, it is observed that in the recent period, exporters have encountered consecutive and cumulative administrative fines based on aggregate determinations regarding multiple export transactions. These sanctions, in addition to creating a significant financial burden on firms selling abroad, also exert serious compliance pressure on banking and operational processes. Although the possibility of judicial review against administrative fines exists theoretically, it is frequently observed in practice that applications made before the Criminal Courts of Peace (Sulh Ceza Mahkemeleri) do not always produce an effective result, and objections are often rejected, particularly in technical discussions regarding account closure and certification.
II. Scope of the Law and Obligations Imposed on Exporters
Under the foreign exchange regulations enacted pursuant to Law No. 1567, exporters resident in Türkiye are required to repatriate receivables arising from export transactions within the time limits and procedures stipulated by law and to document such repatriation through the banking system in a traceable manner.
Article 3 of Law No. 1567 provides that persons who fail to repatriate export receivables within the prescribed period shall be subject to an administrative fine equal to 5% of the fair market value of the amount required to be brought into Türkiye. If the proceeds are repatriated before the administrative sanction decision becomes final, the fine may not exceed 2.5% of the amount repatriated.
The applicable time limit is clearly defined in the Export Circular of the Central Bank. As a general rule, export proceeds must be repatriated within 180 days from the date of actual export. While 180 days constitutes the maximum period, the principal rule is that proceeds must be transferred to Türkiye without delay following payment by the importer. If an export contract provides for a maturity exceeding 180 days from the date of actual export, the repatriation period may not exceed 90 days from the end of the contractual maturity.
The obligation extends beyond merely transferring the export proceeds to a bank. The proceeds must be collected in accordance with the permitted methods of payment under the legislation and formally accepted within the banking system through the issuance of an Export Proceeds Acceptance Certificate (İBKB). Such certificate must be issued specifically with reference to the relevant customs declaration.
Alternative collection methods including bank transfers, physical import of foreign currency, transfers through payment service providers, credit card payments, checks, and bills of exchange are regulated in detail, and each method entails separate documentation and evidentiary requirements. Accordingly, exporters are responsible not only for collecting their receivables but also for ensuring that such collection is properly recorded in compliance with the foreign exchange framework.
Certain transaction types are subject to different time limits and special procedures. For instance, in exports against advance foreign currency payment, the export must be completed within 24 months; otherwise, pre-financing provisions apply. Although limited extensions are available in cases of force majeure or justified circumstances, such claims must be substantiated with concrete written evidence. Special export categories—such as construction services abroad, consignment exports, temporary exports, and exports on credit or lease—are subject to specific regimes; however, the underlying principle remains the same: the proceeds must ultimately be brought into the Turkish economy.
In this respect, the repatriation requirement constitutes a multi-layered compliance obligation involving several interrelated administrative steps. Exporters must ensure (i) timely repatriation in accordance with the applicable time regime, (ii) formal recognition of the proceeds as “export proceeds” within the banking system and documentation through the relevant certificates (İBKB or DAB), (iii) proper matching of collections with the corresponding customs declarations to close the export account, and (iv) compliance with the special provisions applicable to exceptional or specific export types.
2.1. Exceptions
2.1.1. Countries Exempted from the Repatriation Requirement
Pursuant to Article 4/6 of the Export Circular, the obligation set forth in Article 3/1 of Communiqué No. 2018-32/48 does not apply to exports made to the countries listed in Annex-2 of the Circular. Accordingly, for exports to those countries, the requirement to transfer the proceeds to a bank following payment by the importer and within the maximum 180-day period from the date of actual export does not apply.
The current Annex-2 list includes 36 countries, among them Afghanistan, Angola, Belarus, Benin, Burkina Faso, Djibouti, Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Côte d’Ivoire, Palestine, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, South Sudan, Iran, Cameroon, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of the Congo, North Korea, Cuba, Liberia, Lebanon, Mali, Moldova, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Venezuela, and Yemen.
In other words, for exports to these 36 countries, the statutory obligation to repatriate the amount stated in the customs declaration within 180 days does not apply.
2.1.2. Foreign Currency at the Free Disposal of the Exporter
Pursuant to Article 22 of the Export Circular, proceeds derived from service exports, transit trade, sales to non-residents in Türkiye against special invoices, micro-exports, and exports not exceeding USD 5,000 (or its equivalent) under a Free Zone Transaction Form are fully at the exporter’s free disposal.
For exports to the countries listed in Annex-3 of the Circular, 50% of the export proceeds is freely disposable. These countries include Azerbaijan, Algeria, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Libya, Uzbekistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine.
2.2. Write-Off Mechanism
The legislation provides certain exceptions to the repatriation obligation and allows export accounts to be written off (terkin) under specified conditions.
Pursuant to Article 28 of the Export Circular:
- Export accounts with a shortfall of up to USD 15,000 (or its equivalent) per customs declaration may be written off and closed by banks.
- Export accounts with a shortfall exceeding USD 15,000 but not exceeding USD 100,000 may be written off provided that the deficiency does not exceed 10% of the declared amount.
- Additionally, open accounts with deficiencies not exceeding USD 200,000 and limited to 10% of the declared value may be written off by the relevant Tax Office Directorate, taking into account force majeure or justified circumstances. For deficiencies exceeding USD 200,000, write-off requests are examined and resolved directly by the Ministry of Treasury and Finance.
III. Administrative Sanction Procedure, Notification Mechanism, and Administrative Fines
The sanction regime applicable to violations of the repatriation obligation is implemented through secondary legislation enacted pursuant to Law No. 1567, including Decision No. 32 and related communiqués and circulars. Failure to repatriate export proceeds within the prescribed period or to close the export account in accordance with the legislation may give rise to an administrative fine under Article 3 of Law No. 1567.
The administrative process operates through a “notification/warning” mechanism. Accounts not closed within the prescribed period are reported by the intermediary bank to the relevant Tax Office within five business days. The Tax Office then issues a formal notice granting the exporter 90 days to provide evidence that the proceeds have been repatriated. If the account is not closed and force majeure or justified circumstances are not documented, the sanction process is initiated.
If, at the end of the 90-day period, the account remains open, the Tax Office notifies the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and an administrative fine is imposed pursuant to Law No. 1567. Appeals against such administrative sanction decisions may be filed before the Criminal Judgeship of Peace under the Misdemeanors Law No. 5326 within 15 days from notification of the decision.
In practice, however, there have been instances where the Tax Office failed to duly notify the exporter or request supporting documentation before referring the matter directly to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. In this regard, a decision of the Constitutional Court dated October 14, 2025 (Application No. 2022/8951) is of particular importance. The Court held that the Tax Office must conduct a proper examination and notification procedure, including inquiries to intermediary banks, and that failure to comply with these procedural requirements renders the administrative sanction unlawful.
IV. Conclusion
The obligation to repatriate export proceeds and close export accounts under Law No. 1567, Decision No. 32, Communiqué No. 2018-32/48, and the Central Bank’s Export Circular establishes a multi-layered compliance framework for exporters in Türkiye. The mere collection of payment is not sufficient; proceeds must be repatriated within the prescribed time limits, formally recognized as export proceeds within the banking system through the issuance of the relevant certificates (İBKB/DAB), and accurately matched with the relevant customs declaration to ensure proper account closure.
Exceptions concerning specific countries, freely disposable amounts, and the write-off mechanism must be evaluated on a transaction by transaction basis, as they directly affect the scope of the obligation and the risk of sanctions.
Moreover, the administrative sanction process operating through the notification–warning mechanism may result in consecutive and cumulative fines, particularly in cases involving multiple export transactions. For this reason, exporters should not limit their risk management strategy to contesting fines after notification. Instead, they should structure collection methods, documentation flows, and banking closure processes in full compliance with the legislation from the outset, while proactively assessing available exceptions and write-off opportunities.
As confirmed by the Constitutional Court’s decision, the notification and warning procedure conducted by the Tax Office constitutes a foundational element of the sanction regime. If this procedure is not properly implemented, the legal basis of the sanction is undermined, raising concerns under the principles of legality, proportionality, and legal certainty. Accordingly, failure to repatriate export proceeds within the prescribed period should not be deemed sufficient in itself to justify sanctions; rather, each case must be assessed individually, taking into account compliance with procedural safeguards, the applicability of write-off or set-off provisions, and the presence or absence of fault on the part of the exporter.
