Tax Crime Investigation Against Foreign Investors in Turkey: Search, Seizure and Defense 2026

Foreign investor facing a tax crime investigation in Turkey? Learn how search and seizure procedures, company records, computers, bank accounts, digital evidence, false invoice allegations and defense strategies work under Turkish law in 2026.

A foreign investor in Turkey may first encounter a tax problem through what appears to be an ordinary administrative process: a request for documents, a tax inspection, a supplier investigation, a risk-analysis notice or questions concerning particular invoices.

The situation can become substantially more serious if authorities consider that the facts may involve a tax crime.

The investor may then face a criminal investigation involving prosecutors, searches of company premises, seizure of documents or digital devices, examination of accounting records, banking evidence and potentially measures concerning assets.

For foreign investors, the most important principle is to distinguish three stages:

Tax risk or inspection → Criminal suspicion → Criminal investigation and coercive measures.

They are not the same thing.

A tax-risk signal does not itself prove tax evasion. Indeed, Turkey’s Tax Inspection Board expressly states that risk signals generated by its KURGAN system do not, by themselves, establish that a transaction is false or that the taxpayer used a false document.

Once a criminal investigation begins, however, the defense must address not only the underlying tax allegation but also the legality, scope and evidentiary consequences of any search and seizure.

Why Can a Foreign Investor Face a Tax Crime Investigation in Turkey?

Foreign investors can become involved through allegations concerning:

• False invoices
• Misleading invoices
• Concealed accounting records
• Failure to produce books and documents
• Undeclared transactions
• Manipulated accounting entries
• Transactions with allegedly fictitious suppliers
• Circular financial movements
• Unexplained corporate payments
• Transactions involving related companies
• Allegedly fictitious goods or services

Tax crime investigations frequently develop from a much larger examination of a supplier, customer, intermediary or corporate group.

The fact that a foreign investor’s company appears in that network does not automatically establish personal criminal responsibility.

Foreign Investment Does Not Create Criminal Liability by Itself

A foreign investor may be:

• Sole shareholder
• Minority shareholder
• Board member
• Managing director
• Passive investor
• Authorized signatory
• Ultimate beneficial owner
• Parent-company representative

These positions should not be treated as interchangeable.

The investigation should determine the individual’s actual role.

A passive foreign shareholder who had no operational authority over accounting or procurement presents a different factual situation from a shareholder-director who personally created fictitious suppliers and approved disputed transactions.

Tax Liability, Corporate Responsibility and Personal Criminal Liability Must Be Separated

This distinction is fundamental.

A Turkish company may face additional tax assessments.

The company may have used a disputed invoice.

A supplier may be considered suspicious.

But those facts do not automatically establish that every foreign shareholder or director committed a criminal offence.

The criminal investigation should determine:

Who performed the act?

Who authorized it?

Who knew about it?

Who controlled the relevant process?

What evidence links the foreign investor personally to the alleged offence?

How Can a Tax Crime Investigation Begin?

A typical sequence may be:

Supplier investigation → Risk analysis → Tax inspection → Disputed transactions → Tax crime findings → Prosecutor involvement → Criminal investigation.

Another case may begin through:

Banking evidence → Corporate investigation → Accounting records → Suspected tax offence.

The precise route matters because it determines what evidence already exists when the foreign investor first becomes aware of the investigation.

2026 Tax Enforcement Is Increasingly Data-Driven

This is particularly important for foreign-owned businesses.

Turkey’s Tax Inspection Board currently operates KURGAN, a transaction-focused risk-analysis system that uses large-scale data analysis to identify potentially risky transactions.

The Board describes KURGAN as a risk-analysis and early-warning mechanism rather than an inspection or sanction in itself. It can generate information requests and field checks concerning the commercial reality of transactions.

In August 2026, the Tax Inspection Board reported that 34,315 taxpayers had received information requests in one phase of its false-document monitoring program based on historical KURGAN risk outputs. The Board expressly emphasized that a KURGAN risk signal alone does not prove that a transaction is false.

This distinction can be important in criminal defense:

Risk indicator ≠ established offence.

What Happens During a KURGAN-Related Field Check?

Current Tax Inspection Board guidance states that field teams may seek evidence concerning whether a transaction was genuine.

Depending on the transaction, officials may seek to determine whether:

• Purchased goods physically exist
• Goods were subsequently sold
• Goods were returned
• Goods were consumed in manufacturing
• Inventory corresponds with the transaction

The stated objective is to collect evidence concerning the commercial reality of transactions before or during broader inspection processes.

A foreign investor should therefore treat apparently routine document and inventory questions seriously.

When Does the Matter Become a Criminal Investigation?

Tax inspection and criminal investigation are legally distinct processes.

Where findings are considered to fall within criminal tax provisions, the matter can develop into a criminal investigation involving the public prosecutor.

At that point, authorities may seek criminal-procedure measures to preserve or obtain evidence.

Depending on the circumstances, this can include:

• Search of premises
• Seizure of documents
• Seizure or examination of digital material
• Collection of banking evidence
• Expert examination
• Witness and suspect statements
• Measures concerning relevant assets where statutory requirements are met

Each measure has its own legal requirements.

Search of a Foreign-Owned Company’s Premises

One of the most disruptive developments is a search of the company’s office, factory, warehouse or other business premises.

A search is not merely a tax inspector asking to inspect company books.

A criminal-procedure search is a coercive investigative measure.

The defense should immediately determine:

Who authorized the search?

Which investigation does it concern?

Which premises are covered?

What offence is being investigated?

What objects or evidence are being sought?

What was actually taken?

Search Does Not Mean Guilt

A search indicates that authorities are investigating and seeking evidence.

It is not a conviction.

Foreign executives should avoid reacting as though the search itself proves the allegations.

The company’s response should instead focus on:

• Legal basis
• Scope
• Documentation
• Preservation of rights
• Accurate inventory of seized material
• Continuity of business operations
• Subsequent legal review

What Should a Foreign Investor Do During a Search?

Do not physically obstruct officials carrying out a lawful measure.

At the same time, the company should carefully document what occurs.

Important matters include:

• Time officials arrived
• Identity and authority of officials
• Decision or order relied upon
• Premises searched
• Rooms searched
• Devices taken
• Documents taken
• Copies made
• Statements requested
• Time search ended

The investor or company should obtain and preserve the official records produced during the operation where legally available.

Do Not Destroy Evidence When Authorities Arrive

Never attempt to:

• Delete emails
• Destroy invoices
• Remove servers
• Wipe computers
• Hide accounting records
• Destroy mobile phones
• Remove physical files
• Instruct employees to delete communications

Such conduct can create additional evidentiary and legal problems.

Scope of the Search Matters

Suppose the investigation concerns transactions with Supplier X during 2025.

During the search, authorities obtain materials from the company’s accounting department.

The defense should later examine whether the material collected was within the lawful scope of the investigative measure and whether the search and seizure complied with applicable procedural requirements.

This can be particularly important where highly sensitive corporate information unrelated to the suspected offence is captured.

Seizure of Company Documents

Tax crime investigations can involve large volumes of corporate material.

Potentially relevant records include:

• Invoices
• Accounting books
• Contracts
• Purchase orders
• Delivery notes
• Bank documents
• Warehouse records
• Customs records
• Supplier files
• Corporate resolutions
• Internal correspondence

A seizure should be documented carefully.

The defense should know exactly what authorities possess.

Prepare a Seized-Evidence Inventory

After the search, create an internal table:

Item	Description	Location Taken From	Business Importance
Laptop 1	Finance manager laptop	Finance office	Accounting access
File 1	Supplier X contracts	Archive	Disputed transactions
Drive 1	Accounting backup	Server room	Company accounts
Phone 1	General manager phone	Executive office	Corporate communications

This helps the defense identify what evidence may later appear in the investigation file.

It also helps the company assess operational disruption.

Search and Seizure of Computers and Digital Evidence

Modern tax investigations frequently depend on digital evidence.

Authorities may encounter:

• Desktop computers
• Laptops
• Mobile phones
• External drives
• Accounting databases
• Email archives
• Enterprise systems
• Cloud-synchronized files

Digital evidence requires particular procedural safeguards because one device can contain enormous quantities of business and personal information.

The Constitutional Court’s 2026 decision concerning computer searches and seizures specifically discussed the distinctive nature of digital evidence and circumstances in which encrypted or hidden data may make on-site examination and copying impracticable, potentially creating a need for seizure and later secure examination.

Physical Seizure and Examination of Data Are Related but Distinct Issues

Foreign investors should not treat:

“The computer was taken”

and

“Every piece of information on the computer can automatically be used”

as identical propositions.

The defense should examine:

• Legal authorization
• Scope
• Device identification
• Forensic procedure
• Copying
• Integrity
• Relevance
• Handling of unrelated information
• Applicable digital-search rules

Digital evidence is particularly important in 2026 because the Constitutional Court has scrutinized the safeguards surrounding computer searches, copying and seizure.

Do Not Remotely Wipe a Seized Device

A foreign parent company may retain technical access to a Turkish subsidiary’s laptop or cloud account.

After learning that a device has been seized, someone at headquarters may think:

“We should remotely delete the confidential files.”

Do not do this.

Preservation and lawful legal challenge are entirely different from destruction or manipulation of potential evidence.

Cloud Accounts and Foreign Servers

Foreign investors often use international systems such as:

• Foreign corporate email
• Global enterprise software
• Foreign cloud servers
• Parent-company document systems
• International accounting platforms

The fact that information is accessible from a Turkish office does not necessarily mean every remote data source should be treated identically to files physically stored on a local computer.

The acquisition of remote or foreign-hosted data can raise separate questions concerning legal authority, territoriality, provider cooperation and international procedures.

The exact method by which data was obtained should therefore be identified.

Company Email Evidence

Emails can become central evidence in tax crime investigations.

For example:

“Please issue the invoice even though the goods have not arrived.”

would obviously raise different questions from:

“The shipment arrived today; please forward the delivery documents to accounting.”

Preserve the complete email chain.

Do not rely only on selected screenshots.

Context can materially change meaning.

WhatsApp and Messaging Evidence

Corporate transactions increasingly occur through messaging applications.

Relevant conversations may concern:

• Supplier selection
• Price negotiations
• Payment
• Delivery
• Invoice instructions
• Accounting
• Cash withdrawals

Again, individual messages should be considered in context.

A screenshot without the complete conversation may not tell the whole story.

Seizure of Bank Accounts and Assets

Foreign investors sometimes assume that every tax crime investigation automatically permits authorities to freeze all personal and corporate assets.

That is not correct.

Asset seizure in criminal proceedings requires a separate legal basis and satisfaction of the statutory conditions applicable to the measure.

The defense should determine:

What property is restricted?

Whose property is it?

What decision imposed the measure?

Which alleged offence supports it?

What evidentiary connection is alleged?

Is the measure limited to the suspected proceeds or broader property?

Do not confuse a tax collection measure with a criminal-procedure seizure.

They can arise under different legal frameworks.

Company Assets and Personal Assets Must Be Distinguished

A foreign investor may own shares in the company.

That does not mean:

Company property = shareholder’s personal property.

Similarly, the fact that a company is under investigation does not automatically establish that every asset belonging personally to a shareholder represents criminal proceeds.

Ownership and the alleged connection to the offence must be analyzed carefully.

Banking Evidence Can Be Both Incriminating and Exculpatory

Investigators may examine:

• Supplier payments
• Cash withdrawals
• Related-company transfers
• Shareholder payments
• International transfers
• Loan movements
• Circular payments

But banking evidence can also support the defense.

For example, it may establish:

Real supplier payment → genuine transport → actual inventory → subsequent product sale.

Financial evidence should therefore be reconstructed comprehensively rather than viewed only as evidence against the investor.

False Invoice Cases and Search Operations

False-document allegations can be especially likely to involve extensive documentary examination because authorities may need to determine whether the underlying transactions actually existed.

The Tax Inspection Board’s current KURGAN methodology expressly focuses on transaction reality and can involve requests to show goods, subsequent sale invoices, return documentation or manufacturing records.

This means the defense should be prepared to establish:

Invoice → Supplier → Payment → Delivery → Inventory → Production or resale.

Risk Analysis Does Not Equal Criminal Proof

This deserves particular emphasis in 2026.

The Tax Inspection Board expressly states that KURGAN:

• Is a risk-analysis mechanism
• Is not itself an inspection
• Does not classify a buyer as a false-document user merely from the signal
• Does not itself impose a sanction

The Board also states that taxpayers can provide evidence demonstrating the reality of their transactions.

In August 2026, the Board again emphasized that KURGAN risk outputs alone do not establish that a transaction is false.

A criminal defense should therefore distinguish:

Algorithmic or analytical risk → Investigative evidence → Proof concerning the individual accused.

2026: Faster False-Document Investigations

Foreign investors should also be aware that tax investigations are becoming increasingly automated.

In June 2026, the Tax Inspection Board announced further integration of its report-automation system for false-document-use investigations, stating that queries, calculations, data analysis and current legislation would be integrated into automated reporting workflows.

This can shorten the period between detection of a risk and formal investigative consequences.

Document preservation should therefore begin early.

2026 Inter-Agency Focus on Tax Crime

Tax crime investigation and prosecution remain an active institutional focus.

On May 21–22, 2026, representatives of the Ministry of Justice, Court of Cassation, Tax Inspection Board, appellate judiciary, prosecutors and judges met specifically to discuss investigations and prosecutions under Articles 359 and 367 of the Tax Procedure Law, including practical problems and institutional cooperation.

This reinforces the need for foreign investors to treat a criminal tax investigation separately from ordinary tax compliance correspondence.

Search of a Foreign Investor’s Home

Where a criminal investigation extends to an individual’s residence, additional privacy interests arise.

The defense should determine:

• Exact premises authorized
• Person concerned
• Scope of the order
• Items sought
• Material seized
• Whether personal and corporate material were separated

A search of a corporate office and a search of a private residence should not be treated as though they are factually identical.

What If Personal Devices Contain Company Information?

This is common.

A foreign director’s personal phone may contain:

• Corporate WhatsApp conversations
• Company email
• Banking notifications
• Supplier contacts
• Documents

If such a device becomes part of the investigation, the defense should examine both relevance and lawful acquisition.

Do not delete material after becoming aware of the investigation.

What If Company Devices Contain Private Information?

A corporate laptop may contain:

• Family photographs
• Private messages
• Medical documents
• Personal financial information

Digital searches can therefore capture material unrelated to the suspected tax offence.

The scope, necessity and handling of unrelated data can become important procedural questions.

Search of Accounting and Financial Departments

If investigators focus on accounting, identify who had access to:

• Accounting software
• Electronic invoices
• Bank accounts
• Tax declarations
• Supplier records

Access logs and corporate authorization structures can sometimes help identify who actually performed disputed actions.

What If the Foreign Investor Was Only a Passive Shareholder?

Preserve evidence demonstrating the investment structure.

Relevant documents can include:

• Shareholders’ agreement
• Board structure
• Management delegation
• Signature circular
• Employment records
• Banking authority
• Procurement authority

The defense should demonstrate actual corporate governance rather than merely state:

“I was only an investor.”

What If the Foreign Investor Acquired the Company Later?

Historical tax crime allegations frequently create difficulties after acquisitions.

Example:

2023 — disputed invoices

2024 — alleged tax irregularity

2025 — foreign investor purchases company

2026 — criminal investigation

The investor should preserve:

• Share purchase agreement
• Due diligence materials
• Acquisition date
• Historical management records
• Disclosure schedules
• Pre-acquisition tax reports

Current ownership does not itself prove involvement in conduct occurring before the acquisition.

What If the Foreign Investor Was Also the Director?

Then the defense should examine the person’s actual managerial responsibilities.

Important questions include:

Did the investor select suppliers?

Did they control accounting?

Did they approve payments?

Did they sign disputed contracts?

Did they receive reports confirming delivery?

Did they communicate with the supplier?

The answer may differ transaction by transaction.

Do Not Blame the Accountant Without Evidence

A common reaction is:

“The accountant did everything.”

But the investigation may show that the accountant merely recorded invoices supplied by company management.

Determine:

• Who obtained the invoice
• Who approved it
• Who verified the transaction
• Who instructed accounting
• Who filed declarations
• Who approved payment

Responsibility should be reconstructed objectively.

Do Not Coordinate False Statements With Employees

After a search, company personnel may panic.

Do not arrange a meeting designed to create a false common version of events.

Employees and executives should not:

• Delete messages
• Alter records
• Invent deliveries
• Backdate contracts
• Manufacture invoices
• Pressure witnesses

The defense should be built from genuine records.

Preserve Exculpatory Evidence Before It Disappears

Authorities may collect evidence supporting suspicion.

The defense should independently identify evidence supporting the foreign investor.

This can include:

• Genuine transportation records
• Warehouse entries
• Customs declarations
• Supplier emails
• Installation records
• Production records
• Travel records
• Delegation documents
• Corporate authorization records

Evidence favorable to the investor can disappear through ordinary retention cycles if it is not preserved.

Search and Seizure Records Should Be Reviewed

After an operation, the defense should review available official documentation concerning:

• Authorization
• Search
• Seized property
• Digital devices
• Copies
• Returned property

Discrepancies should be identified promptly.

Chain of Custody and Digital Integrity

Where digital evidence becomes important, consider:

Which device produced the data?

When was it seized?

How was it identified?

Was a forensic copy made?

Can integrity be verified?

Is the evidence complete?

Does the material actually belong to the accused user?

The Constitutional Court’s 2026 computer-search decision underscores the distinctive evidentiary and privacy issues involved in obtaining and examining digital material.

A Device Does Not Automatically Identify the User

Suppose incriminating files are found on a company computer.

Ask:

• Was the computer shared?
• Who had login credentials?
• Was remote access possible?
• Which user account created the file?
• When was it created?
• Was it downloaded or authored locally?

File on device ≠ automatic proof that the foreign investor created it.

A Company Email Account May Be Shared

Some businesses use shared addresses such as:

finance@company

or

accounting@company

A message from such an account should not automatically be attributed to one person without examining account access and surrounding evidence.

Foreign-Language Evidence

Foreign investors frequently communicate in English, German, Arabic, Russian, Chinese or other languages.

Preserve original communications.

Do not replace originals with informal translations.

A translation can be prepared for proceedings, but the underlying message should remain available.

Words concerning:

invoice, payment, commission, delivery, cash, tax, refund

can carry materially different meanings depending on context.

What If Documents Are Legally Privileged?

Tax crime searches can sometimes capture communications with legal counsel.

Where privileged material is implicated, the issue should be identified promptly and analyzed under the procedural rules applicable to the particular material and search.

Do not assume that every communication copied during a broad digital operation can automatically be treated in the same manner.

Search Legality and Evidence Reliability Are Different Questions

An important defense distinction is:

Was the evidence obtained lawfully?

and

Does the evidence reliably prove the allegation?

These are separate questions.

A bank document may be authentic but not establish criminal intent.

A genuine email may have been interpreted outside its context.

A digital file may exist but have been created by another employee.

Both legality and evidentiary meaning should be examined.

What If the Search Exceeds Its Proper Scope?

Do not physically obstruct the operation.

Document what occurred.

The legality and scope of the search can then be examined through the appropriate legal procedures.

This is generally safer than attempting to resolve complex procedural objections through physical confrontation at the premises.

Can Seized Property Be Returned?

Property should not necessarily remain seized indefinitely merely because it was initially relevant to an investigation.

Whether particular documents, devices or assets can be returned depends on the legal basis for the measure, continuing evidentiary need, possible confiscation issues and procedural status.

The defense should periodically reassess whether continued retention remains necessary.

Business Continuity After a Search

Foreign companies may suffer operational damage when essential devices or records are seized.

Immediately determine:

• Which systems remain available
• Whether lawful backups exist
• Whether accounting can continue
• Whether payroll can be processed
• Whether tax deadlines remain
• Whether customer operations are affected

Do not use business-continuity concerns as a reason to interfere with seized evidence.

Instead, address access and return through lawful procedures.

Can a Foreign Investor Leave Turkey During the Investigation?

A criminal investigation does not automatically mean every foreign suspect is prohibited from leaving Turkey.

Whether a travel restriction exists depends on whether a specific judicial measure has been imposed.

Before international travel, a foreign suspect facing an active criminal investigation should determine the procedural status of the case and whether any judicial-control measure exists.

Tax Investigation and Immigration Status Are Separate Issues

Foreign investors may worry that a tax crime allegation automatically cancels residence or work status.

Criminal proceedings and immigration measures are separate legal processes.

The existence of an investigation should not be treated as equivalent to conviction or automatic removal.

Where an immigration measure is separately initiated, it should be assessed under the applicable immigration legislation.

First 24 Hours After a Search: 20-Step Checklist

1. Obtain information about the legal basis of the search.
2. Identify the investigation number where available.
3. Record which premises were searched.
4. Record when the search began and ended.
5. Identify officials involved.
6. Preserve copies of available official records.
7. Create an inventory of seized documents.
8. Create an inventory of seized devices.
9. Identify affected employees.
10. Preserve remaining accounting records.
11. Preserve lawful backups.
12. Do not delete emails or messages.
13. Do not remotely wipe devices.
14. Do not alter accounting records.
15. Preserve supplier and customer evidence.
16. Reconstruct relevant transactions.
17. Identify the foreign investor’s actual corporate role.
18. Separate company property from personal property.
19. Review the legality and scope of investigative measures.
20. Prepare both the substantive tax defense and criminal-procedure defense.

15 Questions the Defense Should Answer

1. What tax crime is being investigated?

Identify the precise allegation.

2. Which tax periods are involved?

Avoid treating several years as one undifferentiated accusation.

3. Which transactions triggered the investigation?

Identify invoices, suppliers and amounts.

4. Was KURGAN or another risk analysis involved?

Remember that a risk signal is not itself proof of a false transaction.

5. Was a formal tax inspection already underway?

Determine the administrative history.

6. Who authorized the search?

Examine the legal basis and procedural documentation.

7. What premises were searched?

Company, warehouse, residence or multiple locations?

8. What was seized?

Prepare an exact inventory.

9. Were computers or phones seized?

Identify users, access rights and business functions.

10. Were bank accounts or other assets restricted?

Determine the exact legal mechanism.

11. Was the underlying transaction genuine?

Reconstruct commercial reality.

12. What was the foreign investor’s role?

Shareholder, director, passive investor or operational manager?

13. Who controlled accounting and procurement?

Map internal responsibility.

14. What evidence supports the investor?

Do not focus only on prosecution evidence.

15. Is continued seizure still necessary?

Review this as the investigation progresses.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can Turkish authorities search a foreign investor’s company during a tax crime investigation?

A criminal investigation can involve search measures where the statutory conditions and required authorization are satisfied. The legality, scope and execution of the particular search should be examined individually.

2. Does a search mean the foreign investor is guilty?

No. A search is an investigative measure used to obtain or preserve evidence. It is not a criminal conviction.

3. Can computers be seized during a tax crime investigation?

Digital devices can become subject to computer-search and seizure procedures where the applicable statutory requirements are satisfied. The Constitutional Court issued an important 2026 decision addressing safeguards surrounding searches, copying and seizure of digital material.

4. Can authorities examine company emails?

Company email can potentially become relevant evidence, depending on the legal method used to obtain it and its connection to the investigation. The defense should examine scope, authenticity, context and attribution.

5. Can all company assets automatically be frozen?

No. Search of premises and seizure of assets are distinct measures. Any restriction on assets requires its own legal basis and applicable statutory conditions.

6. Is a KURGAN warning proof that the company used fake invoices?

No. The Tax Inspection Board expressly states that KURGAN is a risk-analysis mechanism and that its risk signals do not themselves establish that a transaction is false or that a taxpayer used a false document.

7. Can a passive foreign shareholder be prosecuted merely because they own the company?

Share ownership may explain the person’s relationship with the company, but individual criminal responsibility requires examination of the person’s conduct and the evidence connecting them to the alleged offence.

8. What if the foreign investor purchased the company after the alleged tax offence?

Acquisition dates, historical management, due diligence, signature authority and operational control should be documented. Current ownership should not automatically be treated as participation in earlier conduct.

9. What should a foreign investor never do after a search?

Do not destroy documents, delete communications, remotely wipe devices, backdate agreements, fabricate evidence or coordinate false statements with employees.

10. What is the most important defense strategy?

Separate the issues. Examine the underlying tax allegation, the investor’s personal role, the reality of the commercial transactions, the evidence obtained and the legality and scope of search and seizure measures.

2026 Current Developments Foreign Investors Should Know

Turkey’s tax enforcement environment has become increasingly technology-driven.

KURGAN now analyzes transaction-level risks and can generate information requests and field checks. The Tax Inspection Board emphasizes that these outputs are risk indicators rather than findings of guilt.

The scale of this approach is significant. In August 2026, the Board reported sending information requests to 34,315 taxpayers in one false-document monitoring program based on historical KURGAN outputs.

The Board is also automating false-document investigation reports, with a June 2026 announcement describing integration of queries, calculations, data analysis and current legislation into its reporting system.

At the criminal-justice level, the Ministry of Justice reported a May 2026 inter-agency meeting involving prosecutors, judges, Court of Cassation representatives and the Tax Inspection Board specifically concerning investigations and prosecutions under Articles 359 and 367 of the Tax Procedure Law.

Foreign investors should therefore assume that suspicious tax transactions may be examined through increasingly integrated financial, tax and digital evidence.

The appropriate response is not panic or destruction of records.

It is:

Preserve evidence → Identify the exact allegation → Reconstruct the transaction → Establish individual corporate responsibility → Review search and seizure legality → Challenge unsupported conclusions with objective evidence.

Legal Assistance for Foreign Investors Facing Tax Crime Investigations in Turkey

Tax crime investigations involving foreign investors can combine tax law, criminal procedure, corporate governance, banking evidence, digital forensics and international business records.

A comprehensive defense may require answering several distinct questions:

Why was the company targeted?

Was the transaction genuinely commercial?

What evidence links the investor personally to the alleged conduct?

Was the investor operational or passive?

Were search and seizure measures lawfully authorized and properly executed?

What digital and financial evidence was obtained?

Which evidence supports the defense?

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign investors, shareholders, company directors, executives and foreign-owned companies facing tax crime investigations in Turkey.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign clients with tax crime investigations, false invoice allegations, searches of company premises, seizure of documents and digital devices, corporate responsibility analysis, prosecutor proceedings, tax inspection files and defense strategies involving commercial, banking and digital evidence.

Early legal intervention can be particularly important after a search because the defense may need to document the scope of the operation, preserve independent exculpatory evidence, reconstruct historical transactions and protect the company’s ability to continue operating while the criminal investigation proceeds.

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. Search, seizure, tax liability, criminal responsibility and available defense remedies depend on the precise allegation, applicable version of the legislation, procedural decision, evidence and individual role of the foreign investor in each case.