Foreign Business Partner Withdraws Company Money Without Permission in Turkey: Criminal Remedies 2026

A foreign business partner withdrew company money without permission in Turkey. Is it a crime? Learn about breach of trust, unauthorized bank withdrawals, shareholder disputes, company funds, criminal complaints, evidence and money recovery in 2026.

A business partner, shareholder or company director who withdraws money from a Turkish company’s bank account without the knowledge or authorization of the other partners can trigger a serious corporate and criminal dispute. However, an unauthorized withdrawal is not automatically a criminal offence merely because another shareholder did not consent.

The central questions are more specific:

Who legally owned the money?

What authority did the business partner have over the account?

Why was the money withdrawn?

Was the money used for the company or personally?

Was the withdrawal recorded in the company accounts?

Was there a shareholder loan, salary, dividend, expense reimbursement or other legitimate basis?

Did the partner conceal the transaction?

Where did the money ultimately go?

Depending on the answers, the matter may involve breach of trust, fraud, document offences, accounting or tax issues, civil liability, director liability, or primarily a shareholder dispute.

For foreign investors in Turkey, the correct approach is therefore:

Freeze the factual picture → Preserve banking evidence → Trace the money → Determine corporate authority → Identify the legal basis claimed for the withdrawal → Separate criminal conduct from a commercial dispute → Pursue appropriate recovery measures.

Is Company Money the Personal Money of the Shareholders?

No.

This distinction is fundamental.

A Turkish company has its own legal personality and its assets should not simply be treated as the personal bank balance of its shareholders.

A shareholder may economically own an interest in the company, but this does not ordinarily mean that the shareholder may withdraw company funds whenever they wish.

Accordingly:

“I own 50% of the company”

does not necessarily mean:

“I can take 50% of the money in the company bank account whenever I want.”

The company’s legal structure, corporate resolutions, contractual arrangements, distribution rules, accounting treatment and the individual’s management authority must be examined.

Example: 50-50 Foreign Partnership

Assume two foreign investors each own 50% of a Turkish company.

The company has TRY 20 million in its bank account.

One partner transfers TRY 8 million to their personal account without informing the other partner.

The other shareholder discovers the transfer several weeks later.

The first partner says:

“Half of the company belongs to me, so I was entitled to take the money.”

That explanation does not by itself resolve the legal issue.

The relevant questions include:

• Was the TRY 8 million a dividend?
• Had a dividend distribution been lawfully decided?
• Was it repayment of a shareholder loan?
• Was it salary or management remuneration?
• Was it an expense reimbursement?
• Was the partner authorized to make the transfer?
• How was the payment entered in the books?
• Did the partner conceal it?
• Was the money used personally?

Could Unauthorized Withdrawal Constitute Breach of Trust?

Potentially.

Article 155 of the Turkish Criminal Code regulates breach of trust. The offence concerns situations in which possession of property belonging to another has been transferred for safekeeping or use for a particular purpose and the person subsequently disposes of it contrary to that purpose for their own or another person’s benefit, or denies the transfer.

The provision also contains an aggravated form involving property entrusted because of a profession, trade, service relationship or authority to manage another person’s property.

This aggravated form can become particularly relevant where a director or manager was legitimately given control over company funds but allegedly used that authority for an unauthorized purpose. Turkish judicial materials continue to identify Article 155 as the Criminal Code provision governing breach of trust.

Lawful Access to the Bank Account Does Not Automatically Make the Withdrawal Lawful

This is one of the most important distinctions.

Suppose the foreign business partner is an authorized bank signatory.

They have:

• Internet banking access
• Corporate bank card
• Transfer authority
• Signature authority

Technically, the bank may therefore permit the transaction.

But banking authority and substantive entitlement to company money are different issues.

The question may become:

Was the banking authority used consistently with the purpose for which it was granted?

Example: Authorized Director Transfers Money to Personal Account

Suppose a director has unlimited banking authority because the company needs someone to pay suppliers and employees.

The director transfers TRY 4 million into a personal account.

The defense might claim:

“I was authorized to operate the account.”

But investigators may ask:

“Were you authorized to operate the account for company purposes, or were you entitled to appropriate company funds personally?”

Those are different questions.

Not Every Unauthorized Withdrawal Is Automatically Breach of Trust

The facts still matter.

Consider a shareholder who transfers TRY 1 million from the company account and claims it was repayment of a loan previously made to the company.

If genuine documents show:

Shareholder → Company: TRY 1 million loan

followed later by:

Company → Shareholder: TRY 1 million repayment,

the transaction may have a legitimate basis even if another shareholder was unaware of the repayment.

The criminal analysis should not ignore the underlying debt.

What If the Partner Claims the Money Was a Dividend?

A shareholder cannot ordinarily transform company funds into a dividend simply by describing a transfer as a dividend.

The corporate decision-making process and accounting treatment must be examined.

Preserve:

• General assembly decisions
• Financial statements
• Dividend resolutions
• Accounting records
• Bank descriptions
• Tax records

A retrospective statement that “it was my profit share” may be tested against the contemporaneous corporate documents.

What If the Money Was Salary?

A shareholder may also work as a director or employee.

Accordingly, company-to-shareholder transfers can sometimes represent legitimate:

• Salary
• Director remuneration
• Bonus
• Expense reimbursement

Check:

• Employment agreement
• Board or shareholder resolutions
• Payroll
• Accounting entries
• Previous payments
• Tax treatment

Shareholder Loan Accounts Require Particular Attention

Many closely held companies have complicated shareholder current accounts.

A shareholder may:

• Lend money to the company
• Borrow from the company
• Pay company expenses personally
• Receive reimbursements

Before alleging criminal misappropriation, reconstruct the complete account.

Do not examine only one transfer.

Trace the Money After the Withdrawal

The destination of the money can be highly informative.

Possible patterns include:

Company → Partner’s personal account

Company → Related company

Company → Relative

Company → Cash withdrawal

Company → Cryptocurrency exchange

Company → Foreign account

The next movement may help establish what actually occurred.

Personal Spending After the Withdrawal

Suppose company money enters the partner’s personal account and is immediately used to purchase:

• Personal property
• Luxury vehicle
• Holiday
• Personal investments
• Cryptocurrency

This may become relevant to an allegation that company funds were appropriated for personal benefit.

However, the complete financial and legal context should still be examined.

Transfer to Another Company Owned by the Partner

This is another common dispute.

Example:

Company A → TRY 10 million → Company B

The foreign partner controls both companies.

The other shareholder alleges that Company A’s money was diverted.

Investigators should determine:

• Was there a contract?
• Was there a genuine service?
• Was it a loan?
• Was there a purchase?
• Did Company A receive anything?
• Was the transaction recorded?
• Was it approved?

Related-party status alone does not prove criminal conduct.

Fake Consultancy Agreement

A more serious allegation may arise if the complainant says the partner created a fictitious consultancy agreement after transferring money to another controlled company.

Relevant evidence can include:

• Contract creation date
• Emails
• Deliverables
• Meetings
• Invoices
• Accounting entries
• Bank transfers
• Computer metadata

If the service genuinely occurred, preserve the evidence.

If a document was fabricated retrospectively, additional criminal issues may arise.

Never Backdate Documents to Explain the Withdrawal

Once the transfer has been discovered, do not attempt to create a paper trail artificially.

Do not:

• Backdate loan agreements
• Fabricate invoices
• Create false board decisions
• Alter accounting entries
• Manufacture expense receipts
• Delete banking communications

Such conduct can significantly worsen the legal position.

Could the Conduct Be Fraud Instead?

Possibly, depending on how the money was obtained.

Breach of trust and fraud should not be treated as identical.

In a classic breach-of-trust scenario, the person may initially obtain control over the property lawfully but allegedly later use it contrary to the entrusted purpose.

Fraud generally involves deceptive conduct used to obtain an unlawful benefit.

The facts therefore matter more than the label used in the initial complaint.

Could It Be Theft?

Again, legal characterization depends on how possession or control was obtained.

A person who already had lawful management authority over company funds presents a different factual situation from someone who obtained access to company money without authorization.

A criminal complaint should describe the facts accurately rather than forcing every case into a predetermined offence.

Could False Documents Also Be Involved?

Yes.

Suppose the partner allegedly withdraws company funds and then creates:

• False invoice
• Fake contract
• Fabricated receipt
• False corporate resolution

to justify the transaction.

The document itself may create separate legal issues.

Preserve the original electronic and paper records so investigators can determine when and how the documents were created.

What If the Partner Uses the Company’s Corporate Card?

A corporate card dispute should be analyzed transaction by transaction.

Separate:

Business expenses

from

personal expenses.

For each disputed payment, identify:

• Merchant
• Date
• Amount
• Business purpose
• Receipt
• Approval
• Accounting treatment

A statement showing TRY 500,000 of card expenditure is less useful than a transaction-level analysis.

Cash Withdrawals From the Company Account

Cash creates additional evidentiary difficulties.

If the partner withdrew cash, determine:

Who made the withdrawal?

Which branch or ATM?

What happened to the cash?

Was it entered into the company cash account?

Was it paid to a supplier?

Is there a receipt?

Was it used personally?

Bank branch records and available camera evidence may sometimes become relevant.

Act Quickly With CCTV Evidence

If the identity of a person making an ATM or branch withdrawal is disputed, potentially relevant camera recordings should be identified quickly because retention periods can vary.

There is no safe assumption that footage will remain available indefinitely.

Internet Banking Logs

If the business partner denies making the transfer, relevant evidence may include:

• Internet banking user
• Login records
• Transaction authorization
• Device information
• Authentication records
• Approval hierarchy

A company may have dual authorization.

For example:

Finance Manager creates payment → Director approves payment.

Identify both roles.

“My Partner Had My Password”

This can create a complicated factual dispute.

Preserve evidence concerning:

• Password sharing
• Device access
• Banking authorization
• Authentication messages
• Email notifications
• Phone access

Do not automatically assume that the nominal account user personally executed every digital transaction.

Accounting Records Can Reveal Concealment

Compare the bank transfer with the books.

Was it recorded as:

• Salary?
• Loan?
• Expense?
• Supplier payment?
• Advance?
• Dividend?
• Shareholder receivable?

Or was it completely absent from accounting?

A hidden transaction may present a different evidentiary picture from a transparently recorded but legally disputed payment.

The Accounting Description Is Not Conclusive

A transfer recorded as:

“consultancy expense”

does not automatically prove a consultancy service existed.

Similarly, recording a transfer as:

“shareholder loan repayment”

does not automatically prove that the company actually owed the shareholder money.

Investigators should examine the underlying transaction.

Check Who Had Corporate Authority

Obtain the historical corporate records for the date of the transfer.

Identify:

• Directors
• Managers
• Signature authority
• Joint or individual representation
• Banking mandates
• Internal approval limits

Current authority may differ from authority at the time of the withdrawal.

What If the Partner Exceeded Internal Approval Limits?

Suppose the bank allows one director to make transfers alone, but internal company rules require board approval for transactions exceeding TRY 2 million.

A TRY 10 million transfer may therefore have been technically executable at the bank while allegedly violating internal authority.

The criminal significance of that fact depends on the broader circumstances and alleged intent.

50-50 Shareholder Deadlock

These cases frequently emerge after relationships between business partners collapse.

One partner alleges:

“He stole company money.”

The other says:

“It was repayment of money the company owed me.”

The defense and complainant should both move beyond accusations and reconstruct the financial history.

Review at Least the Previous Several Months of Transactions

A single transfer may be misleading.

For example:

January — shareholder lends company TRY 5 million

April — company repays TRY 2 million

June — company repays TRY 3 million

If only the June transfer is examined, the transaction may appear very different.

Criminal Complaint Versus Company Lawsuit

The same events may generate several legal tracks.

Depending on the facts, the company or shareholder may consider:

• Criminal complaint
• Director liability claims
• Corporate proceedings
• Recovery of company money
• Interim protective measures

These remedies serve different purposes.

A criminal complaint should not be treated as an automatic substitute for a civil recovery strategy.

Who Is the Victim: Company or Other Shareholder?

This distinction can matter.

If money belonging to the company is taken, the direct economic harm may concern the company’s assets.

The other shareholder may suffer indirectly because the value of their shareholding decreases.

The legal status of the company, shareholders and representatives should therefore be analyzed carefully when preparing proceedings.

Can a Foreign Shareholder File a Criminal Complaint in Turkey?

Foreign nationality does not prevent a person from reporting suspected criminal conduct in Turkey.

But corporate representation issues may matter where the complaint is being made on behalf of the company itself.

Determine:

• Who currently represents the company?
• Is the accused also a director?
• Is there a management deadlock?
• Who can appoint counsel for the company?

What If the Accused Partner Controls the Company?

This can create a practical problem.

Suppose the suspected partner owns 50% and is also the only registered manager.

The company may therefore have difficulty taking action through ordinary management channels.

Corporate-law remedies and the criminal process may need to be coordinated.

Preserve Bank Statements Immediately

Obtain and preserve the complete statements surrounding the disputed transactions.

Do not preserve only screenshots.

Record:

• Date
• Time
• Amount
• Sender account
• Recipient account
• Recipient name
• Transaction reference
• Description

Then trace onward movement where legally obtainable.

Preserve Corporate Documents

Important evidence can include:

• Articles of association
• Shareholders’ agreement
• Board resolutions
• General assembly resolutions
• Signature circulars
• Bank mandates
• Internal authorization policies
• Loan agreements
• Employment contracts
• Accounting records

Preserve Communications

Emails and messaging records may show why the transfer occurred.

For example:

“Please repay my shareholder loan today.”

creates a different evidentiary issue from:

“Transfer the money before the other shareholder notices.”

Preserve complete conversations rather than isolated screenshots.

Foreign-Language Communications

Where business partners communicate in English, Arabic, Russian, German or another language, preserve the original message.

Translation should not replace the original evidence.

Slang, financial terminology and context can materially affect meaning.

What If the Partner Leaves Turkey?

A foreign partner’s departure from Turkey does not automatically end the possibility of investigation.

However, cross-border cases may become more complicated where:

• The suspect lives abroad
• Money was transferred abroad
• Foreign bank evidence is needed
• Corporate documents are held overseas

Early preservation of Turkish banking and company records can therefore be particularly important.

Money Transferred to a Foreign Bank

If company money was sent abroad, identify:

Turkish sending account → Transfer reference → Correspondent/intermediary route where relevant → Foreign beneficiary account.

International transfer does not automatically establish wrongdoing.

The commercial basis remains essential.

Money Converted Into Cryptocurrency

If the disputed money was transferred to a crypto-asset service provider, preserve:

• Exchange information
• Amount
• Asset
• Network
• Wallet address
• Transaction hash
• Date and time

A wallet address can help trace a transaction, but it does not by itself prove the identity of the human controlling it.

Can Company Assets Be Secured During an Investigation?

Turkish criminal procedure contains mechanisms allowing seizure of certain assets in investigations involving specified offences. Constitutional Court materials reproducing Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code list breach of trust under Article 155 among the offences for which the statutory asset-seizure framework can apply when its requirements are met.

This does not mean that assets are automatically frozen whenever a breach-of-trust complaint is filed.

The statutory conditions and the connection between the asset and alleged offence must still be assessed.

Asset Measures Are Not a Finding of Guilt

A provisional asset measure is not a conviction.

The Constitutional Court has emphasized more generally that interference with property must have a legal basis, pursue a legitimate public-interest objective and satisfy proportionality requirements.

Accordingly, investigative measures and ultimate criminal liability should not be confused.

What Evidence Is Strongest?

The strongest cases usually combine independent sources.

For example:

Bank statement + personal-account receipt + messages + accounting concealment + personal purchase

may tell a substantially more complete story than a shareholder’s allegation alone.

Conversely:

Bank transfer + historical shareholder loan + accounting entry + board documentation

may support a legitimate explanation.

Can the Partner Simply Return the Money?

Returning money can be relevant, but it does not automatically erase the legal history of the transaction.

Turkish criminal law contains specific provisions concerning effective remorse for certain property offences, and the precise applicability and consequences depend on the offence, timing and circumstances.

Therefore, repayment strategy should be evaluated legally rather than assuming:

“If the money comes back, the criminal case disappears.”

Do Not Threaten the Business Partner

Avoid messages such as:

“Pay immediately or I will destroy you.”

or attempts to obtain admissions through threats.

Preserve evidence and use appropriate legal procedures.

Do Not Access the Partner’s Private Accounts Illegally

A shareholder dispute does not authorize hacking:

• Email
• Bank accounts
• Phones
• Cloud accounts
• Messaging applications

Evidence collection should remain lawful.

Do Not Delete Company Records

If you are the accused partner, do not respond by deleting:

• Accounting data
• Emails
• Banking records
• Contracts
• Messages

Preservation can be as important for the defense as for the complainant.

Defense for the Accused Foreign Partner

A foreign business partner accused of taking company money should reconstruct the legal basis for each disputed transfer.

Possible evidence may include:

• Shareholder loan
• Salary entitlement
• Dividend decision
• Expense reimbursement
• Management fee
• Corporate authorization
• Genuine supplier transaction

The defense should be documentary wherever possible.

“Everyone Knew About It”

This statement alone is weak.

If the transaction was genuinely known and accepted, look for contemporaneous evidence:

• Email approval
• Board minutes
• Accounting records
• Previous similar payments
• Messages
• Financial reports

“We Always Did It This Way”

Past corporate practice can sometimes be relevant.

But previous conduct does not automatically make an unlawful transaction lawful.

Use historical transactions to explain context, not as a substitute for legal authority.

Criminal Responsibility Must Be Individualized

A criminal investigation involving a company should not automatically treat every shareholder or director as responsible for every transaction.

The Constitutional Court has repeatedly recognized the constitutional importance of individualized responsibility and concrete justification where measures affect shareholders or managers.

The evidence should identify who actually acted, authorized, knew and benefited.

20-Step Action Plan After Discovering an Unauthorized Withdrawal

1. Obtain the complete company bank statement.
2. Identify every disputed withdrawal or transfer.
3. Preserve transaction reference numbers.
4. Identify recipient accounts.
5. Determine who had banking authority.
6. Preserve available internet banking records.
7. Review signature authority.
8. Review articles of association.
9. Review shareholders’ agreements.
10. Check board and general assembly resolutions.
11. Examine shareholder loan accounts.
12. Check salary and remuneration records.
13. Review dividend decisions.
14. Compare transfers with accounting records.
15. Preserve emails and messages.
16. Trace related-company transfers.
17. Document the company’s actual loss.
18. Do not fabricate or alter documents.
19. Evaluate criminal and corporate recovery remedies separately.
20. Act promptly where funds may be transferred onward.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. My foreign business partner withdrew money from our company account without asking me. Is that automatically a crime in Turkey?

No. The transaction must be examined in context. Authority over the account, ownership of the funds, purpose of the withdrawal, corporate decisions, accounting treatment and ultimate use of the money are all relevant.

2. Can a 50% shareholder withdraw 50% of the company’s cash?

A 50% shareholding does not ordinarily mean that the shareholder personally owns 50% of each asset in the company’s bank account or may withdraw that amount whenever desired. The company has separate legal personality and corporate distribution rules must be considered.

3. Can unauthorized withdrawal constitute breach of trust?

Potentially. Article 155 may become relevant where property entrusted for a particular purpose is allegedly used contrary to that purpose for the benefit of the accused or another person. The aggravated form is particularly relevant where control arises through trade, service or authority to manage another person’s property.

4. What if my partner was authorized to use the company bank account?

Banking authority does not necessarily answer whether the particular use of company funds was substantively authorized. The purpose and limits of the authority should be examined.

5. What if the partner says the withdrawal was repayment of a shareholder loan?

Check the evidence. Historical bank transfers, loan documentation, accounting records and shareholder current accounts may establish whether the company genuinely owed the money.

6. What if the partner transferred the money to another company they own?

That transaction should be investigated. A genuine loan, purchase or service transaction may have a legitimate basis, while an unsupported transfer for personal or related-party benefit may present a different issue.

7. Can I recover the money through the criminal investigation?

Criminal proceedings may assist in identifying and securing assets in appropriate circumstances, but criminal investigation and civil recovery should not be treated as identical processes. A separate recovery strategy may be necessary.

8. Can assets be frozen in a breach-of-trust investigation?

Turkish criminal procedure includes asset-seizure mechanisms applicable to specified offences, including Article 155, where statutory requirements are satisfied. Such measures are not automatic and do not amount to a finding of guilt.

9. What if my partner has already transferred the money abroad?

Preserve the Turkish bank transfer information immediately. Cross-border tracing can become more complicated, but an international transfer does not by itself prevent investigation.

10. What should I do first if I discover company money is missing?

Secure complete bank statements, identify every disputed transaction, preserve corporate authorization and accounting records, save communications, determine where the money went and assess both criminal and corporate recovery options promptly.

2026 Legal Perspective: Company Dispute or Criminal Conduct?

The most important issue in these cases is often characterization.

A disagreement between shareholders about:

• Profit distribution
• Shareholder loans
• Management remuneration
• Company expenses
• Related-party transactions

can be fundamentally commercial.

But evidence that a person entrusted with company money intentionally diverted it for unauthorized personal or third-party benefit can create a substantially different criminal-law question under Article 155.

The fact that a person is a foreign shareholder, foreign director or foreign business partner does not change the need for an individualized analysis.

The financial trail is usually central:

Company money → Person controlling transaction → Recipient → Ultimate beneficiary → Commercial justification.

Legal Assistance for Unauthorized Company Withdrawals in Turkey

When a foreign business partner withdraws company money without permission, waiting can make recovery more difficult. Funds may be transferred through several accounts, converted into other assets or moved abroad.

At the same time, an aggressive criminal complaint without first analyzing shareholder loans, dividend rights, corporate authority and accounting records can incorrectly characterize a commercial dispute as a crime.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign investors, shareholders, directors and business partners dealing with unauthorized withdrawals, misuse of company money, breach-of-trust allegations, shareholder disputes and corporate criminal investigations in Turkey.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign clients with bank transaction analysis, criminal complaints, evidence preservation, company records, related-party transfers, asset tracing and coordinated criminal and corporate recovery strategies.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey

This publication is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Whether a particular withdrawal constitutes a criminal offence depends on the company’s legal structure, authority arrangements, purpose and destination of the transfer, corporate documentation, financial evidence, intent and the law applicable to the particular facts.