Category: Turkiye

  • The Buzz in Turkey: Interview with Zeynep Cakmak of the Cakmak-Gokce Avukatlik Burosu

    Zeynep Cakmak, the Managing Partner of Turkey’s Cakmak-Gokce Avukatlik Burosu, sighs when she’s asked if there are any important developments in Turkey at the moment. “I would hope the answer is no,” she says, “but it’s yes. There are so many hot topics in Turkey at the moment.”  

    “The first,” Cakmak says, “is the impact on business of all the terrorist attacks — with the January 1st attack at the Reina nightclub in Istanbul which killed dozens of people being the most recent and dramatic — starting with people not wanting to come to Turkey.” Cakmak reports that almost all meetings with foreign clients are often be held outside of Turkey, now, due to a general reluctance to visit the country. “This is not contributing to investment,” she says, reporting hyper-caution across the board.  

    “The economy, in parallel, is not going in the right direction,” according to Cakmak. The exchange rate got very close to 4 lira to the dollar before backing off a bit the past few weeks, she reports, calling that “very high.” According to Cakmak, “this has an inevitable impact on foreign denominated loans and intra-bank loans.” Interest rates remain low, she says, despite pressure to raise them. According to Cakmak, this presents “a real dilemma,” as raising them risks turning off potential borrowers, while keeping them artificially low in these circumstances brings consequences of its own. 

    In addition, Cakmak reports, the major rating agencies, Fitch, S&P, and Moody’s have downgraded Turkey’s credit ratings over the last four months.

    Finally, she says, the planned Constitutional Reform is a source of some controversy as well, as on February 10 President Erdogan signed a constitutional reform bill passed by Turkey’s parliament approving a new constitution to create an executive presidency. The changes would enable the president to issue decrees, declare emergency rule, appoint President secretaries to replace ministers and top state officials, and dissolve parliament – amendments that opposition parties say strip away balances to the president’s current powers. A referendum on the bill is tentatively planned for April 16. Cakmak says she’s not sure how it will affect investment, as some believe it will reassure foreign investors of the country’s stability, while others are concerned it will do just the opposite.  

    The unfortunate affect of this turmoil on the commercial law firm market, Cakmak reports, is inevitable. She reports seeing firms across the market pursue “two types of strategies to align ourselves themselves with the market: One is layoffs and one is adjusting salaries.” These steps “are not just about cost-cutting,” she reports, “but an attempt to regain control of a fluid situation.” Both have already started, she reports, and it’s a difficult time for lawyers to find new jobs. On the other hand, she notes, this represents beginning of a new era for the law firms; those who manage the situation well now will gain a very good position in the future when things start picking up again.

    Cakmak insists not all is gloomy, of course. “I don’t want to sound too pessimistic,” she says. “Turkey is still a dynamic market, and the foreigners who come here still say it’s like nothing has happened. Life goes on, people are still trying to do business, major projects are not put on hold, government is applying measures to keep momentum of economy an investment environment and thus people still have hope.” The country’s turbulent history provides grounds for optimism, she believes. “Because we’re used to it — we’re immune to the shock.” Indeed, she says, “some new businesses are coming in, and there’s Project Finance work, some interest in Renewables, and PPP/Infrastructure projects in the pipeline.”  

    “It’s not like things have stopped, no one gives up” Cakmak concludes. “This is the unique character of this country, which is also the source of its power.”

  • Details of Movable Pledge Revealed

    The Turkish collateralization system was recently updated through the introduction of the Law No. 6750 on Movable Pledges (the “Movable Pledge Law”).

    Under the Movable Pledge Law, the Ministry of Customs and Trade (the “Ministry”) is authorized to provide for the implementing regulations and, on December 31, 2016, the Ministry introduced the following regulations:

    • Regulation on the Movable Pledge Registry published in the Third Issue of the Official Gazette No. 29935;
    • Regulation on the Perfection and Enforcement of Movable Pledge in Commercial Transactions and  published in the Third Issue of the Official Gazette No. 29935; and
    • Regulation on the Valuation of Movable Assets in Commercial Transactions published in the Third Issue of the Official Gazette No. 29935.

    The new regulations, along with the Movable Pledge Law, are effective as of January 1, 2017.

    What these regulations bring

    Registry, TARES and perfection

    • The Ministry, or an institution authorized by the Ministry, will establish the movable pledge registry (the “Movable Pledge Registry”). In this respect, the Ministry entered into an agreement with the Union of Turkish Notaries (the “Union”) and conferred the Union with the authority to establish the Movable Pledge Registry. Accordingly, the Union established the Movable Pledge Registry and notaries will be authorized to carry out the registration formalities. The Ministry will be responsible for supervising the Union. The Movable Pledge Registry is not operational as of the date of this alert.
    • The movable pledge registry system (Taşınır Rehin Sicil Sistemi) (“TARES”) (accessible at www.tares.org.tr) has been established and will enable the tracking and publicity of all records related to movable pledges.
    • All pledge agreements under the Movable Pledge Law and any amendment thereto must be registered with the Movable Pledge Registry. Parties to a pledge agreement must execute the agreement, either in writing before a notary or electronically through e-signature, and submit it to TARES.
    • Parties are exempt from any tax, duty or fee for transactions conducted at the Movable Trade Registry, including the drafting of pledge agreements and the registering of such agreements with the Movable Pledge Registry.
    • The notary will examine the validity of legal conditions and minimum required content for the perfection of movable pledges. The Movable Pledge Registry records are publicly available and therefore enforceable against third parties. However, in case the Movable Pledge Registry’s records do not contain the minimum required content, those records and legal consequences related to them will not be enforceable against third parties.
    • There are certain restrictions to the freedom of contract in favor of the pledgors. Parties cannot incorporate provisions restricting the pledgors’ right to dispose or sub-pledge the movable asset or their right to assign a subsequent pledgee.
    • If a pledgor transfers a pledged movable to a new owner who undertakes the debt, the pledgee must notify the pledgor in writing within one year following the transfer in order to reserve its right to pursue the pledgor. Otherwise, the pledgor will be discharged.
    • The relevant parties who successfully prove their interest are entitled to request the movable pledge records either electronically or through the notaries.
    • A movable pledge will be released and removed from the Pledged Movable Registry when requested by (i) the pledgee upon the payment of debt; (ii) the pledgor with sufficient documents indicating the payment of debt ;and (iii) the court. After a movable pledge is released and removed, the Movable Pledge Registry will keep the records for 20 years.

    Scope of pledge

    • If the secured obligations can be calculated, the value of the pledged assets cannot exceed 120% of the total debt.
    • Commercial enterprise pledges now include all movable and immovable assets allocated to the commercial enterprise whereas, under the abrogated Law No. 1447 on Commercial Enterprise Pledge, including the immovable assets in the scope of a commercial enterprise pledge was not possible.
    • The statute of limitations will cease with the registration of the relevant pledge agreement with the Movable Trade Registry.

    Enforcement

    • In case the debtor defaults on the secured obligations, the pledgee is entitled to:
      • with an exception to the Lex Commissoria, request the transfer of ownership of the movable assets to itself within seven days from the default event;
      • assign its receivables to a third party or asset management company; and
      • use, lease, or allow third parties to make use of licenses relating to movable assets whose ownership cannot be transferred.
    • If the value of the secured obligations is higher than the pledged asset’s value, the pledgee may request the transfer of ownership of the pledged asset by setting off 90% of the pledged asset’s value against the secured obligations. The pledgee may initiate enforcement proceeding as per the general provisions of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code for the remaining receivables. On the other hand, if the value of the secured obligations is less than the pledged asset’s value, the pledgee may request the transfer of ownership of the pledged asset by paying the difference.
    • The provisions of the Movable Pledge Law and the Regulation on the Perfection and Enforcement of Pledge in Commercial Transactions are not applicable to ongoing cases and execution proceedings initiated prior to the provisions’ entry into force.

    Valuation

    • The parties of the pledge agreement can agree on the valuation of the movable assets to be pledged or valuation can be requested from a competent court. If the Parties cannot agree on the valuation of the movable assets, the competent court shall assign an expert authorized by the Banking Regulatory and Supervisory Authority.
    • The parties are entitled to object to the valuation of the authorized experts within three business days. In this case, the court assigns another authorized expert. The second valuation shall be final and binding on the parties. The parties may only request a revaluation two years from the final valuation.
    Conclusion 

    The details of the much anticipated new pledge regime are now available. Movable pledging will become a real collateralization option once the Movable Pledge Registry begins its operations.

    By Muhsin Keskin, Partner, and Duygu Turgut, Partner, Baker McKenzie

  • Mandatory Mediation Under Turkish Labor Law

    An alternative dispute resolution method is expected to be introduced in Turkey shortly through the Draft Law on Labor Courts (“Draft Law”). The purpose of the Draft Law is to bring a functional and an effective judicial procedure for labor conflicts via mandatory mediation and to replace the current regulations. 

    I. Draft Law

    Fundamental reasons of drafting a new code for Labor Courts are specified in the preamble of the Draft law1

    The first reason is the necessity to ease the workload of labor courts in Turkey. According to the preamble, more than six hundred thousand labor lawsuits are pending before labor courts of first instance and likewise more than two hundred thousand appealed lawsuits are pending before the court of appeals as of 2015, which explicitly lengthen the litigation process. Considering that longer process means greater expense and workload as well as loss of time, many final decisions are no longer able to bring the expected justice for the parties. Therefore, introducing an alternative dispute resolution method (i.e. mandatory mediation) has promptly found its place on the agenda given that it may be able to bring order into this long standing issue.

    The second reason is that the current Law on Labor Courts No. 5521 (“LLC”) is 50 years old and although it has gone through seven amendments, it is still inadequate for current needs. Some of the articles (e.g.: articles 9 and 10) are no longer applicable whereas some of the procedures regulated under it are not compatible with the current Law of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (“LCP”) regulating the judicial process. 

    The third and final reason is that the current LLC is no longer able to meet dynamic and ever-changing demands of labor law in Turkey. The LLC in some cases fails to respond to new fields of working, technological developments and updated employee and employer relationships.

    II. Mandatory Mediation

    With the enactment of the Draft Law, many amendments (e.g. establishment and duties of courts) will come into force. Yet, mandatory mediation is apparently the most notable change as it will bring a new perspective to judicial proceedings of labor conflicts. Mandatory mediation broadly aims at shortening the judicial proceedings and easing the workload of labor courts. Additionally, as the name suggests, parties will have to apply for it before filing a lawsuit before the labor courts and can only resort to judicial process should they fail to reach an agreement at the mediation phase. 

    As per article 3/1 of the Draft Law, with respect to receivable lawsuits based on individual or collective employment agreements as well as re-employment lawsuits, applying for mediation before filing a lawsuit will be mandatory, and if a lawsuit is filed without referring to mediation, the lawsuit will be rejected on procedural grounds, for the absence of cause of action. Accordingly, the legal conclusion of disregarding the mediation phase will be deemed as the absence of cause of action.

    III. Procedure for Mandatory Mediation

    The procedure for mandatory mediation is regulated under article 3 of the Draft Law. According to this article, if the subject of the lawsuit is a receivable arising from an employment agreement or re-employment, the plaintiff shall apply to the competent mediation authority for mediation located where the counterparty’s domicile or workplace is located.

    The selection of mediator is slightly different than ordinary mediation. As per article 3/3, in the mandatory mediation process, the parties may mutually agree on one of the registered mediators. Otherwise, the mediation authority appoints a mediator ex-officio. Once the mediator is appointed, s/he gives information and invites the parties for a meeting. Negotiation for mediation shall be concluded in three weeks starting from the date of appointment. In certain circumstances, timeframe can be extended for one week. On the other hand, as per article 3/7, if either of the parties does not attend the meeting without submitting a valid excuse, legal expenses might be imposed on that party, even if the lawsuit is finalized in favor of the respective party. In addition, the statute of limitations does not run for the period between the date the plaintiff applied for mediation and the date the last minute was recorded by the mediator,.

    When the mediation procedure is complete, the mediator issues the final minute and sends a copy to the competent mediation authority. 

    IV. Mediation fees

    Two different payment methods for different scenarios are regulated under article 3/6 of the Draft Law. 

    The first scenario is applied when the parties reach an agreement before the mediator. In this case, mediation fees shall be imposed equally on the parties unless the parties agree otherwise. The calculation of fees is based on the second part of the Tariff on Minimum Mediation Fees. The fees shall not be less than two hours of mediation fee regulated under the first part.

    The second scenario is applied when the parties are unable to reach an agreement before the mediator. At this stage, fees of the first two hours of the meeting are covered by public treasury and the remaining fees are imposed equally on the parties unless the parties agree otherwise. The calculation of fees is based on the first part of the Tariff on Minimum Mediation Fees. In both scenarios, the fees are deemed as court expenses. 

    V. Conclusion                                                           

    Mandatory mediation that will come into force through the Draft Law is, in principle, a useful alternative dispute resolution solution to reduce the workload of labor courts and improve the judicial process. However given that ordinary mediation has failed to attract the attention of community so far2, it might be said that the mandatory mediation may not bring the expected result either. Even so, since the parties will have no option but to apply for mandatory mediation, this, at least, may relatively reduce the workload of labor courts. On the other hand, besides the issue of whether alternative dispute resolution should be compulsory for labor conflicts, which is certainly a controversial topic, it also incurs additional costs for the parties.

    Consequently, the Draft Law will set forth various reforms through mandatory mediation and updated articles for the Turkish labor law.

    (First published in Mondaq on February 1, 2017)

    By Gonenc Gurkaynak, Managing Partner, Can Guner, Associate, and Tugba Uluay, Associate, ELIG, Attorneys-at-Law

    1. For the access: http://www.adalet.gov.tr/Tasarilar/ (Date: 25.01.2017)
    2. Oguz OzgUr, Turk İş Hukuku’nda Alternatif Uyusmazlık Cozum Yolları, Istanbul 2016, Legal Yayıncılık, p. 60.
  • Amendments on the Application Regulation of Turkish Citizenship Law

    “Amendment Regulation on the Application Regulation of Turkish Citizenship Law” (“Amendment Regulation”) was published in the Official Gazette dated 12.01.2017 and numbered 29946 and entered into force as of its publication date.

    The Amendment Regulation stipulates that Turkish Citizenship will be given to foreigners who meet any of conditions mentioned under the provisions added to Article 20 of the Application Regulation of Turkish Citizenship Law. These conditions are provided below;

    • The detection of the Ministry of Economy that a fixed capital investment at least in the amount of USD 2.000.000 has been performed by a foreigner,
    • The detection of Ministry of Environment and Urbanization that a real estate with a value of at least USD 1.000.000 has been purchased by a foreigner on condition with an annotation on the land registration that the real estate shall not be sold within 3 years as of such purchase,
    • The detection of Ministry of Labor and Social Security that a foreigner has generated employment for at least 100 people,
    • The detection of Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency that a cash investment in the amount of at least USD 3.000.000 has been performed by a foreigner to the banks operating in Turkey on condition that such amount shall not be withdrawn for 3 years as of such investment,
    • The detection of Undersecreteriat of Treasury that State Debt Instruments have been purchased by a foreigner in the amount of at least USD 3.000.000 on condition that such amount shall be held for 3 years following such purchase.

    Accordingly, a foreigner who fulfills at least one of the criteria mentioned above which shall be detected by the relevant Ministry, the foreigner can acquire Turkish citizenship with the decision of the Council of Ministers upon the proposal of the relevant Ministry. Please also note that the effective selling rate of Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey on the day of determination shall be taken into consideration in the calculation and determination of the monetary amounts provided in the Amendment Regulation.

    By Bilge Binay Kanat, Senior Associate, and Hande Solak, Trainee Lawyer, Moral Law Firm

  • Amendments Have Been Made to the Regulation on Shopping Malls in Respect of Common Costs and Security Services

    “Regulation Amending the Regulation on Shopping Malls” (“Amendment Regulation”) has been published in the Official Gazette dated 30.12.2016 and numbered 29934 and entered into force as of its publication date.

    Accordingly, a certain number of substantial amendments and additions have been made to the “Regulation on Shopping Malls” (“Regulation”) which has been published in the Official Gazette dated 20.02.2016 and numbered 29636 and entered into force as of the publication date. 

    Aforementioned amendments have been made to Article 11 (Common Costs) and additions have been made within Article 19 (Security Services) of the Regulation.

    1. Amendments made under the “Common Costs” title of the Regulation:

    By means of the Amendment Regulation, a number of comprehensive amendments have been made to Article 11 of the Regulation which regulates the method and tariff of allocation regarding common costs. In the former state of Article 11; certain standards and thresholds were foreseen by referring to Annex-1 of the Regulation which included a number of tables and formulas where common cost contribution fees were fixed within. Along with the Amendment Regulation, allocation method of the common costs has been simplified and the entire content of Article 11 has been made compatible with the amendment. 

    • In the former first (1st) paragraph of Article 11 of the Regulation; which kind of tariff shall be used for the allocation of repetitive common costs (“Common Costs”) not relating to the immovable (shopping mall) in kind regarding the electricity, water, heating, maintenance and repair (not as a restoration), security services and cleaning services was stated comprehensively under Annex-1. With the Amendment Regulation which provides freedom of choice to the retailers in shopping malls and the shopping mall managements (“Parties”); it is being questioned whether there is any method for the allocation of Common Costs mutually agreed upon by the Parties. In the event that there is not any mutual agreement between the Parties; Common Costs shall be distributed in accordance with the ratio of each selling space of the retailers compared to the general selling space of the shopping mall according to the Amendment Regulation. A method mutually agreed upon by the Parties for the allocation of the Common Costs on the other hand, may only be applicable for a period of 5 (five) years at most. (Article 11/1)
    • Although the second (2nd) paragraph of Article 11 has also been amended, it does not implicate any substantial changes. Second (2nd) paragraph regulating the contribution fees payable by retailers in the shopping malls for the disbursements in relation to the services which serve the common interest such as marketing and management used to refer to the Annex-1 to produce a method for calculating the contribution fees of each retailer for the disbursements of the mentioned costs before the Amendment Regulation came into force. In accordance with the Amendment Regulation, such costs spent in the service of common interest shall be distributed in compliance with a contribution tariff provided that such tariff is determined by means of an agreement between the Parties. Unless the Parties agree otherwise by constituting an agreement; contribution fees for the disbursements stated in the second (2nd) paragraph of Article 11 shall be calculated for each retailer in accordance with the ratio of each selling space leased by retailers compared to the general selling space of the shopping mall. (Article 11/2)
    • Seventh (7th) paragraph of Article 11 is another part of the Regulation affected by the Amendment Regulation. This paragraph provides that the shopping mall management is obliged to prepare a report each year until the end of March in respect of the last year’s Common Costs and the income generated by the common areas (“Report”). The Report shall be submitted to retailers according to the Regulation. In accordance with the latest amendments to the seventh (7th) paragraph of Article 11 dealing with the context of the Report; contribution fees for the Common Costs to be collected or already have been collected from retailers, information in relation with the income generated by common areas and the payments made from the collected contributions in respect of the payment of Common Costs and Common Costs calculations made for any type of disbursements shall be included within the Report. Retailers shall be provided with the copies of documents in relation to the income generated by common areas and the payments made from the collected contributions for Common Costs in the event of a requisition by retailers of shopping mall and the shopping mall management. (Article 11/7)
    • It is also observed that the amendments made to the ninth (9th) paragraph of Article 11 are performed based on compatibility reasons. Despite the former state of the ninth (9th) paragraph which was referring to Annex-1 as well as the aforementioned paragraphs; the amended ninth (9th) paragraph states “In the event that the contribution fee for Common Costs calculated pursuant to this Article from the retailer cannot be exactly collected, the outstanding amount from the contribution fee shall be paid by owner of the workplace”. By such statement the liability of the owner of the workplace came into prominence in relation to the event of a deficient collection. (Article 11/9)
    2. Additions made under the “Security Services” title of the Regulation

    State of apprehension and fear occupying the public opinion because of the frequently occurring terrorist attacks country-wide affects the people’s social habitat and routine in a negative way and constrain people from going into crowded places such as shopping malls. New paragraphs have been added to Article 19 of the Regulation by the Amendment Regulation due to the reason of relieving the environment of apprehension and fear and reducing its negative effects on shopping malls by taking effective precautions and providing security for visitors.

    • A third (3rd) paragraph has been added to Article 19 stating that shopping mall managements are obliged to install and run “license plate recognition systems” in their shopping malls. Information obtained by using such systems shall be instantly shared with the law enforcement officers. (Article 19/3)
    • A forth (4th) paragraph has been added to Article 19 stating that under vehicle scanning systems shall be installed and ran at the controllable gates of parking places of shopping malls which are selected in terms of public safety by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. (Article 19/4)
    • By the additional fifth (5th) paragraph regulated under Article 19 with the Amendment Regulation; it is stipulated that the technical specifications, issues related to data sharing and other issues about operation of the systems that have been mentioned in the third (3rd) and forth (4th) paragraphs shall be determined by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

    By Bilge Binay Kanat, Senior Associate, and Kaan Beylen, Trainee Lawyer, Moral Law Firm

  • Law on Movable Pledge for Commercial Transactions

    The “Law on Movable Pledge for Commercial Transactions” (“Law”) numbered 6750 was published in the Official Gazette dated 28 October 2016 and numbered 29871 and will be in effect as of 01 January 2017.

    The main scope of the Law is to extend the usage of the movable pledge right without delivery as a guarantee, to expand the scope of the movables that are subject to pledge, to provide the publicity for the movable pledge, to facilitate the access to financing by submitting alternative ways for foreclosure.

    While the Repealed Commercial Enterprise Pledge Law dated 1971 and numbered 1447 annulled with this Law coming into force was narrowing the execution area of the movable pledge despite the financing needs and commercial improvements in the recent years, the Law aims to expand the credit usage opportunity with a favorable regulation and to provide a wider usage area for the movable pledge. 

    The essential changes regulated with this Law numbered 6750 are as follows: 

    • According to the Law, pledge agreement will be executed between credit institutions and merchant, craftsman, farmer, producer organization, natural and legal persons who are freelancers, and between merchants and/or craftsman. The pledge agreement will be executed in written or electronically and pledge right will be validly established upon registration of this agreement. Accordingly, publicity of the movable pledge will be provided. The scope of movables that are subject to pledge regulated under the repealed law have been extended and future assets that are planned to be obtained by enterprises and acquisition of movables have been included in the elements that can be pledged. Contrary to current legislations, it has been provided with this Law to put pledge on movables in subject independently from their tradename and business name. 
    • It has been made possible to facilitate the access of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (“SME”) to finance resources and expand their credit volume. It can be noticed that the capital structure of SME mainly consists of movables, however a big part of guarantees requested by financial institutions are composed of real estates. In addition to this obstacle, SME obtain their financial resources required for their commercial transactions from credits provided by the bank. Moreover, guarantees requested in return for credits are a handicap for SME to access financing. It will be a great advantage for SME that with this Law it will be possible to prevent to put pledge on whole enterprise when movables of the enterprise are equivalent to debt. 
    • Practice of putting pledge on the enterprise using credit itself and its whole assets will be terminated. Since a limit has been regulated to pledge amount with this Law, credit institutions will be able to put pledge only on movables necessary rather than all the movables. Thus, it is aimed to have enterprises in debt maintain their commercial transactions conveniently and reduce pauses in commercial life. 
    • It will be possible for movables to be subject to more than one pledge. It will be enabled to benefit from movable which is subject to pledge in maximum capacity, since power of disposition restrictions on the pledged movables will be lifted.
    • Lastly, the first pledgee will be able to request transfer of pledged movable’s property from execution office in the situation that debts that are in the scope of this Law are not performed in due time. On one hand, the transfer of the movable’s property to the pledgee without having to apply for foreclosure has been made possible however, on the other hand it will be a matter of losing ownership right of  movable due to the pledger not performing its debt in due time.

    In brief, in addition to the current legislation in the scope of foreclosure, it has been led to the pledgee to gain the property of the pledged movable in the situation that the debt is not performed in due time with Law on Movable Pledge for Commercial Transactions numbered 6750. It is also expected that the commercial transactions of the SME shall increase and the financial resources shall enhance with the occasion of this Law.

    By Ecem Baglarlıoglu, Attorney at Law, Uğursan Yiğit Parmaksız Moral Law Firm

  • Turkish Central Bank Intervenes to Increase Liquidity

    On January 11, 2017, the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (the “Central Bank“) has reduced banks’ foreign exchange liabilities related reserve requirements by 50 basis points to provide extra liquidity to the market. The changes take effect starting from December 30, 2016.

    New FOREX reserve requirements

    The Central Bank has reduced the foreign exchange liabilities related reserve requirements by 50 basis points for each maturity bracket:  

    Maturity  New Ratios Previous Ratios
    Core Liabilities excluding deposits of foreign banks
    Up to one year 12% 12.5%
    One year or more 8% 8.5%
    Non-Core Liabilities including foreign banks deposits
    One year or less 24% 24.5%
    Two years or less 19% 19.5%
    Three years or less 14% 14.5%
    Five years or less 6% 6.5%
    More than five years 4% 4.5%
    Borrower Funds
    All 12% 12.5%
    Non-Core Liabilities excluding deposits
    One year or less 19% 19.5%
    Two years or less 13% 13.5%
    Three years or less 7% 7.5%
    Five years or less 6% 6.5%
    More than five years 5% 5.5%  
    Conclusion 

    Once again the Central Bank has used its innovative policy tools to enhance liquidity in the market by decreasing the foreign exchange reserve requirements. It is expected that the changes would provide approximately USD 1.5 billion to the market.

    By Muhsin Keskin, Partner, and Erdal Ekinci, Head of Tax Practice, Baker McKenzie

  • The Decision on Granting State Aid to Investments on Project Basis

    The Council of Ministers Decision on “Granting State Aid to Investments on Project Basis” (“Decision”) numbered 2016/9495 was published on 26 November 2016  and it is in effect since then.

    The purpose and scope of this Decision is to determine the procedures and principles regarding the project-based supporting of investments that will fulfill the critical needs of our country that can arise in the current situation or in the future, in line with the objectives foreseen in the development plans and annual programs, that will provide the security of supply, that will reduce the foreign dependency, that will realize the technological transformation and that are innovative, intense in research and development and are with high added values.

    The below-stated support(s) that are deemed appropriate can be provided to the investments that are endorsed to be supported on project basis and contain the specific features that are stated in the paragraph above within the scope of this Decision:

    • Customs duty exemption,
    • VAT exemption,
    • VAT refund,
    • Tax reduction or exemption,
    • Employer’s national insurance contribution support,
    • Income tax withholding support,
    • Qualified personnel support,
    • Interest support or dotation support,
    • Capital contribution,
    • Energy support,
    • Public procurement guarantee,
    • Investment area assignment
    • Substructure support,
    • Granting exemption to permissions, assignments, permits, licenses and registration regulated under laws and other restrictive provisions or executing facilitating regulations for legal and administrative processes.

    In brief, it is aimed to provide specific supports to investments that may assist in improving the economy of our country in line with the state’s economic policy and other applicable regulations.

    By Ecem Baglarlıoglu, Attorney at Law, Moral Law Firm

  • Paksoy and Yurttutan Gurel Yoruker Advise on IMCD Acquisition of Feza Kimya

    Paksoy and Yurttutan Gurel Yoruker Advise on IMCD Acquisition of Feza Kimya

    Paksoy has advised IMCD N.V., a distributor of speciality chemicals and food ingredients, on its acquisition of 100% of Istanbul-based Feza Kimya Ic ve Dis Ticaret Anonim Sirketi from the Bozkurt family. De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek acted as foreign counsel to IMCD on the deal, and the Yurttutan Gurel Yoruker law firm advised the Bozkurt family.

    Feza Kimya, which focuses on the coatings and plastics markets, is a prominent market player in the sales, marketing, and distribution of speciality chemicals in Turkey.

    The Paksoy team consisted of Partner Elvan Aziz, Senior Associate Selen Terzi Ozsoylu, and Associate Gulce Saydam Pehlivan.

    The Yurttutan Gurel Yoruker team was led by Partner Sibel Manyera Yurttutan, assisted by Senior Associate Ebru Padar and Ece Ilce. Partner Gulperi Yoruker was involved in the review of the agreements and Partner Alev Gurel was involved in labor law matters.

  • Turunc Advises Peoplise on Investment from 500 Startups

    Turunc Advises Peoplise on Investment from 500 Startups

    The Turunc law firm has advised Peoplise on investment it received from 500 Startups venture capital fund. The Aksan law firm advised the investors on the matter. 

    Turkey-based Peoplise provides an integrated and video enabled digital platform for all recruitment needs. The company’s mission is “to help HR practitioners to utilize digital and analytical technologies in all steps of the talent acquisition process and create the best teams for their business with lower turn-over, higher performance as they grow.” 500 Startups is a global venture capital seed fund with a network of startup programs headquartered in Silicon Valley with over USD 300 million in committed capital across 4 main funds and 13 micro funds. The fund has invested in 1,600 technology startups all over the world since its inception in 2010, including: Twilio (NYSE: TWLO), Credit Karma, Grab, Udemy, Ipsy, TalkDesk, Intercom, MakerBot (acquired by SSYS), Wildfire (acquired by GOOG), and Viki (acquired by Rakuten). 

    The Turunc team assisting Peoplise consisted of Partner Kerem Turunc and Attorneys Didem Bengisu, Nilay Unal, and Gozde Kiran.

    From Aksan, Partner Melih Aksan worked on the matter with Orhan Erdem.