

A Turkish company is sold and historical customs debts appear after closing. Learn whether the company, buyer, seller, former shareholder or director may be responsible and how SPA indemnities affect the risk.
A foreign investor may acquire a Turkish company believing that all major liabilities have been identified during due diligence. Months or years after closing, however, Turkish Customs may conduct a post-clearance audit or secondary review and issue additional customs duties and penalties relating to imports completed before the acquisition.
This risk is particularly important in 2026 because the Ministry of Trade continues intensive post-clearance and secondary-control reviews of historical customs transactions. In July 2026, the Ministry reported TRY 28.7 billion in additional assessments and penalties resulting from such controls over the preceding two-and-a-half-year period.
The central question becomes:
Who bears an old customs debt discovered after the company has been sold?
There is no single answer.
The analysis depends primarily on whether the transaction was a share sale or asset sale, which legal entity imported the goods, when the customs debt arose, whether the company remains the customs debtor, whether shareholders or legal representatives can face statutory secondary liability, and what the share purchase agreement says about historical customs liabilities.
The correct approach is:
Identify the transaction structure → identify the customs debtor → determine the historical import period → verify the assessment → review the company’s collection exposure → analyze shareholder and director liability separately → review SPA warranties and indemnities → preserve objection rights → pursue contractual recovery where appropriate.
This distinction is fundamental.
In a share deal, the buyer acquires shares in the existing company.
The company itself normally continues to exist as the same legal entity after closing.
Therefore, changing the company’s shareholders does not by itself erase historical customs liabilities of that company.
An asset deal requires a different analysis because the buyer may have acquired selected business assets rather than shares in the customs debtor.
Suppose:
Company A imported goods in 2024.
In 2026, its shareholders sell 100% of Company A to a foreign investor.
Customs subsequently audits Company A’s 2024 imports.
The company that made the historical customs declarations still exists.
The fact that its ownership changed does not automatically eliminate the company’s customs exposure.
Although the new shareholder did not personally make the old customs declarations, acquiring the company means acquiring an entity whose assets may be affected by historical liabilities.
If Company A must pay TRY 20 million in old customs duties and penalties, the economic value of the buyer’s investment may decline accordingly.
This is why customs due diligence is important in share acquisitions.
Historical customs problems can emerge after closing through:
The Ministry of Trade continues to conduct extensive historical reviews of customs declarations.
For every assessment, determine:
Do not simply categorize the liability as “pre-closing” because the assessment was issued after closing.
Example:
Import: October 2024
Company acquisition: January 2026
Customs audit: August 2026
Additional assessment: September 2026
The assessment is new, but the underlying customs transaction predates the acquisition.
That distinction can be decisive under the SPA.
Before arguing about whether buyer or seller should pay, determine whether Customs is correct.
Review:
A seller indemnity dispute should not distract the company from challenging an incorrect customs assessment.
The company’s contractual claim against the seller does not suspend customs procedures.
If Customs issues an additional assessment or penalty, the company must independently protect the applicable administrative and judicial deadlines.
A buyer should not spend weeks negotiating with the seller while the company’s customs objection period expires.
Locate provisions covering:
The SPA may determine the ultimate economic allocation between buyer and seller.
This distinction is essential.
Customs law asks: Who owes the public debt?
The SPA asks: Who must ultimately bear the economic loss between buyer and seller?
Customs authorities are not necessarily bound by the buyer and seller’s private allocation of liability.
Suppose the SPA states:
“Seller shall indemnify Buyer for all customs liabilities relating to periods before Closing.”
That provision may create a strong contractual recovery claim.
But it does not necessarily mean Customs must pursue the seller instead of the company.
The company may still need to address the public debt first and pursue contractual reimbursement separately.
The SPA may contain warranties stating that:
A later historical assessment may potentially constitute a warranty issue.
Where due diligence identifies a particular customs risk before closing, parties often negotiate a specific indemnity.
For example:
“Seller shall indemnify Buyer for all liabilities arising from the tariff classification of Product X for imports made before Closing.”
Such wording can substantially reduce later disputes over risk allocation.
The seller may argue that the buyer knew about the risk.
Review:
A properly disclosed risk may be treated differently under the SPA from an undisclosed liability.
Whether the buyer knew or should have known about the customs issue can affect contractual claims depending on the SPA wording and governing law.
Do not assume that identifying a risk during due diligence automatically destroys an indemnity claim—or that it automatically preserves one.
Read the agreement.
An SPA may impose separate deadlines for:
The customs assessment may still be challengeable while the contractual indemnity deadline is approaching.
Monitor both timelines.
A valid indemnity claim may require notice containing:
Do not send only an informal email saying:
“Customs found a problem.”
Some SPAs allow the seller to:
Ignoring these provisions can create a second dispute.
A settlement decision may affect contractual recovery.
Before settling, determine whether the SPA requires:
The company should coordinate customs strategy and M&A strategy.
The company remains the primary entity to analyze.
However, where qualifying public receivables cannot be collected, or are understood to be uncollectible, from a limited company, Article 35 of Law No. 6183 provides for shareholder liability proportionate to capital shares.
This creates additional complexity after a share sale.
Article 35 contains specific rules concerning share transfers.
The current statutory text provides that, for qualifying pre-transfer public receivables, transferors and transferees may be jointly responsible under the share-based liability framework. It also addresses situations where the shareholders differ between the time the public receivable arose and the time it became payable.
Accordingly, the statement:
“I sold the company, so old customs debts can never affect me”
may be incorrect for a former limited-company shareholder.
Official Revenue Administration guidance states that limited-company shareholder pursuit under Article 35 requires the public receivable to be wholly or partially uncollectible, or understood to be uncollectible, from the company after the relevant collection process.
Therefore, the company’s own collection position remains central.
If Article 35 becomes relevant, obtain:
Do not automatically apply today’s ownership percentage to an old customs liability.
A shareholder may also have been:
Shareholder liability and legal-representative liability arise under different statutory rules.
Official collection guidance distinguishes Article 35 limited-company shareholder liability from liability of legal representatives under repeated Article 35.
If the seller or seller-appointed executive was the company’s legal representative during the historical customs period, separate legal-representative rules may become relevant.
But this should not be confused with the seller’s contractual indemnity obligation.
There may therefore be three separate layers:
Company customs liability
Statutory personal liability
SPA contractual liability.
An ordinary shareholder of a joint-stock company should not automatically be treated under the limited-company shareholder rule.
If authorities seek personal payment from a former or current shareholder, the precise statutory basis must be identified.
If the buyer purchased only:
rather than shares in the company, do not automatically assume the buyer inherited every historical customs debt.
The structure of the asset transfer and any applicable statutory succession rules must be reviewed separately.
An asset acquisition can sometimes involve more than isolated asset purchases.
Determine:
The label “asset deal” is not enough.
The buyer may still hold part of the purchase price in:
If a historical customs liability arises, determine whether the buyer can claim against those funds.
Large M&A transactions may include warranty and indemnity insurance.
Review whether:
Prompt notification may be essential.
Some SPAs define “Tax” broadly enough to include customs duties.
Others treat customs separately.
Read the definitions carefully.
An indemnity may cover the principal customs duty but dispute may arise over:
Check the definition of “Loss.”
Suppose the buyer discovers a historical customs issue but fails to challenge an obviously incorrect assessment.
The seller may later argue that the buyer failed to mitigate its loss.
Document why each customs decision was taken.
After an acquisition, do not discard the target company’s old:
Historical assessments may emerge years after the original imports.
Former owners and executives may possess knowledge concerning:
Obtain this information promptly after the assessment appears.
Separate:
Imports before closing
from
imports after closing.
Then identify whether the same customs practice continued after acquisition.
This matters because the buyer may have its own post-closing exposure.
If the buyer continued the same problematic customs practice after closing, the exposure may need to be divided.
For example:
2024–2025 imports: seller period
2026–2027 imports: buyer-controlled period.
The contractual and public-law analysis may therefore differ by declaration.
If a genuine customs problem is identified, review current declarations.
Do not continue an incorrect practice merely because buyer and seller are arguing about historical liability.
Prospective compliance and historical defense should be coordinated.
Calculate:
Additional duties
Penalties
Late-payment charges
Professional costs
Potential contractual losses.
This allows management to assess whether litigation, settlement or indemnity recovery is commercially appropriate.
Some transactions contain:
A customs liability may potentially interact with these mechanisms depending on the SPA.
If the seller intentionally concealed a known customs investigation or falsified customs compliance information, the issue may go beyond an ordinary warranty claim.
The evidence and governing law should be reviewed separately.
The target company remains exposed to customs deadlines and enforcement.
Even where the seller has promised full indemnification, the buyer should ensure that the target company protects its administrative and judicial rights.
Track One — Customs
Challenge the assessment, penalties and collection measures.
Track Two — M&A
Notify the seller, preserve indemnity rights, access escrow and pursue contractual recovery.
Both tracks should run simultaneously.
For import-heavy targets, due diligence should review:
Customs should not be treated merely as a minor tax checklist item.
The recommended sequence is:
Identify whether the transaction was a share or asset deal
→ obtain the customs assessment
→ identify historical declarations
→ verify the customs merits
→ protect objection deadlines
→ separate pre-closing and post-closing imports
→ review the SPA
→ identify warranties and indemnities
→ send contractual notice
→ review shareholder and director liability separately
→ check escrow and insurance
→ coordinate the customs defense with the seller claim
→ correct future customs practices where necessary.
No. In a share acquisition, the company generally continues as the same legal entity. Historical customs liabilities can therefore remain with the company even though its shareholders have changed.
Yes. Historical declarations can be reviewed through post-clearance and secondary-control procedures. The Ministry continues substantial historical customs review activity in 2026.
Not automatically. The company, shareholder and legal-representative positions must be distinguished. The transaction structure and corporate form are critical.
Potentially. Article 35 of Law No. 6183 contains specific rules concerning limited-company shareholders and share transfers, including qualifying pre-transfer public receivables.
No automatic conclusion should be made. Company liability, limited-company shareholder liability and legal-representative liability require separate analyses.
That may create a contractual indemnity claim against the seller, but it does not necessarily prevent Customs from pursuing the company or another person who is statutorily liable.
Potentially, depending on the wording of the SPA, indemnity, warranties and definition of recoverable losses.
That depends on the assessment, enforcement stage, SPA and commercial circumstances. An incorrect customs assessment should not automatically be paid merely because an indemnity exists.
The buyer should review warranty, indemnity, disclosure and potentially misrepresentation remedies under the governing law.
Treating the issue only as an M&A dispute. The target company must protect its customs-law deadlines while the buyer separately preserves its contractual rights against the seller. Missing the customs objection deadline can materially increase the loss even where the buyer has a strong indemnity claim.
Post-acquisition customs disputes may involve:
Historical customs debts
Post-clearance audits
Share purchase agreements
Customs warranties
Seller indemnities
Former shareholder liability
Director liability
Customs penalties
Escrow and holdback claims
and cross-border M&A disputes.
Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign investors, international buyers, sellers and multinational companies when historical Turkish customs liabilities emerge after a company acquisition.
Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in challenging historical customs assessments, determining corporate and personal liability, reviewing SPA warranties and indemnities, preserving claims against sellers and coordinating customs litigation with post-acquisition contractual disputes.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey