A tax debt, a precautionary attachment, a payment order or an ongoing tax examination is not, on its own, a ground for stopping a person leaving Turkey. Under Article 23(5) of the Constitution, a citizen’s freedom to leave the country may be restricted only by a judge’s decision because of a criminal investigation or prosecution, and the provisions that once allowed exit restrictions for tax debts were annulled by the Constitutional Court or repealed by Law No. 6111. In a fake invoice file, a travel ban arises as a judicial control measure in a criminal investigation or prosecution under Tax Procedure Law (TPL) Art. 359 (Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) Art. 109(3)(a)). During the investigation it is ordered by the criminal judge of peace at the prosecutor’s request, and during the prosecution by the court. Whether it should continue must be reviewed at least every four months, and in cases outside the jurisdiction of the high criminal courts, judicial control may last no more than two years, extendable by one year where necessary (CCP Arts. 110(4) and 110/A). This guide explains the conditions of the ban, its duration, temporary exemption for business travel, requests to lift it, objection, the position of foreign managers, and gives a model petition. It reflects the law in force on 27 October 2026.
- Short answer: when can a travel ban be imposed?
- Why a tax debt is not a ground on its own
- Travel bans in a criminal investigation (CCP Art. 109)
- Who decides and how long it lasts
- How the lawfulness of the ban is tested
- Judicial control, arrest and proportionality
- Tax measures and criminal measures are separate
- Lifting, temporary exemption and objection
- Temporary exemption for business travel
- Breach of the ban and access to the file
- Foreign directors and expatriate managers
- Step-by-step plan for a manager
- Model petition
- How Hukukçular Evi can help
- Frequently asked questions
- Related guides
Contact Hukukçular Evi Ankara
For managers of exporting companies and of companies with foreign shareholders, a travel ban causes commercial loss separate from the criminal file. We prepare requests to lift the ban and for temporary travel permission, and we work in English with foreign directors and group legal teams. Hukukçular Evi Ankara: +90 554 648 37 15
A tax debt does not create a travel ban. The words in Passport Law Art. 22 allowing passports to be refused to persons reported as owing tax were annulled by the Constitutional Court (E.2007/4, K.2007/81; Official Gazette, 8 December 2007). The exit restriction later added to Law No. 6183 as Art. 36/A was repealed by Law No. 6111. A tax debt, a precautionary attachment or a payment order does not by itself prevent departure; if there is an obstacle, it comes from a judge’s decision in a criminal investigation or prosecution.
Short answer: when can a travel ban be imposed?
A fake invoice file proceeds on two separate tracks, tax and criminal. A travel ban is possible only on the criminal track and only by a judge’s decision.
Travel ban by situation
| Situation | Travel ban | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Overdue tax debt, payment order | Cannot be imposed | Constitution Art. 23(5); Constitutional Court E.2007/4, K.2007/81; Law 6183 Art. 36/A (repealed) |
| Precautionary attachment or precautionary assessment | Cannot be imposed; these measures concern assets | Law 6183 Arts. 13, 17 |
| Tax examination or KURGAN letter | Cannot be imposed; these are administrative steps | Constitution Art. 23(5) |
| Criminal investigation under TPL Art. 359 | Can be imposed as judicial control, at the prosecutor’s request, by decision of the criminal judge of peace | CCP Arts. 109(3)(a), 110(1) |
| Prosecution (criminal case) under TPL Art. 359 | Can be imposed or continued by the court | CCP Art. 110(3) |
The distinction also decides where to apply to have the ban lifted. A tax office or the tax administration cannot impose a travel ban and cannot lift one. The application goes to the criminal judge of peace who made the decision or to the court hearing the case.
Why a tax debt is not a ground on its own
Turkish law once allowed exit restrictions for tax debtors, but their legal basis was removed first by a Constitutional Court decision and then by legislative amendments. The rule in force today is the one added to Article 23(5) of the Constitution by the 2010 constitutional amendment: a citizen’s freedom to leave the country may be restricted only by a judge’s decision because of a criminal investigation or prosecution.
How tax-debt travel bans were removed
| Year | Development | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 2007 | The words in Passport Law Art. 22 on refusing passports to tax debtors were annulled | Constitutional Court E.2007/4, K.2007/81; Official Gazette, 8 December 2007 |
| 2008 | An exit restriction for unsecured public receivables was added to Law No. 6183 | Law No. 5766; Law 6183 Art. 36/A |
| 2010 | The Constitution was amended so that the freedom to leave can be restricted only by a judge’s decision because of a criminal investigation or prosecution | Constitution Art. 23(5) |
| 2011 | Law 6183 Art. 36/A was repealed | Law No. 6111, Art. 165 |
No provision currently in force imposes a travel ban on persons with tax debts above a particular amount. The routes open to the tax administration for a debt are measures directed at assets, such as security, precautionary attachment and enforced collection. Those measures are explained in our guide on precautionary attachment in Turkish fake invoice cases.
Travel bans in a criminal investigation (CCP Art. 109)
In an investigation into an offence, where the grounds for arrest in CCP Art. 100 exist, the suspect may be placed under judicial control instead of being arrested; judicial control may also be applied where the law prohibits arrest (CCP Art. 109(1)–(2)). Judicial control means subjecting the suspect to one or more obligations, and the first of them is not leaving the country (CCP Art. 109(3)(a)). The same paragraph also lists regularly reporting to places designated by the judge at stated intervals (Art. 109(3)(b)) and depositing a security set by the judge with regard to the suspect’s means (Art. 109(3)(f)).
Conditions for a travel ban
| Condition | Content | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Criminal investigation or prosecution | An investigation under TPL Art. 359 or a case brought on that basis must exist | Constitution Art. 23(5); CCP Art. 109(1) |
| Strong suspicion | Concrete facts showing strong suspicion of an offence | CCP Arts. 100(1), 109(1) |
| Ground for arrest | Concrete facts showing suspicion of flight or concealment, or of tampering with evidence | CCP Arts. 100(1)–(2), 109(1) |
| Judge’s decision | During the investigation, the criminal judge of peace at the prosecutor’s request; during the prosecution, the court | CCP Arts. 110(1), 110(3) |
Tax offences are not among the catalogue offences in CCP Art. 100(3) for which a ground for arrest may be presumed. In a fake invoice file, a suspicion of flight or of tampering with evidence must therefore be shown by concrete facts, not by a presumption attached to the offence. The suspect’s settled address, family, the company he or she runs, attendance at the statement on his or her own initiative and the submission of documents are the main facts to put forward in that assessment.
Who decides and how long it lasts
A suspect may be placed under judicial control at any stage of the investigation at the prosecutor’s request by decision of the criminal judge of peace (CCP Art. 110(1)). During the prosecution, the same powers are exercised by the court hearing the case (CCP Art. 110(3)). The law also limits the duration of judicial control and requires it to be reviewed.
Duration and review of judicial control
| Topic | Rule | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Periodic review | Whether the obligation should continue is decided at intervals of no more than four months: during the investigation by the criminal judge of peace at the prosecutor’s request, during the prosecution by the court of its own motion | CCP Art. 110(4) |
| Cases outside the high criminal courts | No more than two years; in necessary cases, with reasons, one further year | CCP Art. 110/A(1) |
| High criminal court cases | No more than three years; may be extended with reasons, within the overall limits in the article | CCP Art. 110/A(2) |
| Children | The periods are halved | CCP Art. 110/A(3) |
Because the maximum prison term for the offences in TPL Art. 359 is eight years, these cases are heard by the criminal courts of first instance, and the two-year limit applies as a rule. If the file also involves an offence within the jurisdiction of the high criminal courts, such as an organisation allegation, the three-year limit may come into play. Whether the limit has been reached should be calculated from the date the ban was first imposed, and the file should be checked to see whether the four-monthly reviews have been made.
How the lawfulness of the ban is tested
A travel ban is lighter than arrest, but it restricts a fundamental freedom and is subject to statutory conditions. In a request to lift it or in an objection, the following questions should be asked in order.
Questions for review
| Question | What to look at | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Is there strong suspicion? | Does the file contain only findings about the seller, or also facts showing that the suspect knew the invoices were fake? | CCP Art. 100(1) |
| Is the suspicion of flight concrete? | Does the decision rely only on the nature of the offence, or does it identify a concrete fact pointing to flight? | CCP Art. 100(2) |
| Does a risk of tampering with evidence remain? | If the documents were taken during the examination and the statements are complete, does that suspicion continue? | CCP Art. 100(2) |
| Have the four-monthly reviews been made? | Are there reasoned decisions on continuing the measure in the file? | CCP Art. 110(4) |
| Has the maximum period passed? | Have two years, or three with an extension, passed since the first decision? | CCP Art. 110/A(1) |
In fake invoice investigations, filing a public case is suspended until the result of the tax examination is notified to the prosecutor (TPL Art. 367(3)), so the investigation can take a long time. A measure that continues unchanged for months while the examination report is awaited is a central argument at each four-monthly review.
Judicial control, arrest and proportionality
The law treats a travel ban as a measure that can be applied instead of arrest. Its conditions are therefore tied to those of arrest: concrete facts showing strong suspicion and a ground for arrest must exist. The law also provides that arrest may not be ordered if it would be disproportionate to the importance of the matter and to the expected penalty or security measure (CCP Art. 100(1)). The same proportionality reasoning can be relied on regarding the type and duration of judicial control applied in place of arrest.
Arrest and travel ban compared
| Topic | Arrest | Travel ban (judicial control) |
|---|---|---|
| Conditions | Strong suspicion and a ground for arrest; proportionality | The same grounds for arrest; may also be applied where arrest is prohibited |
| Decided by | Criminal judge of peace during the investigation; the court during the prosecution | Criminal judge of peace at the prosecutor’s request during the investigation; the court during the prosecution |
| Time limit | The statutory limits on detention on remand | Two years in cases before the criminal courts of first instance, plus one year where necessary |
| Breach | Not applicable | Arrest may be ordered immediately against a person who wilfully fails to comply |
Because judicial control is applied in place of arrest, a request to lift it can argue that the conditions for arrest are absent: if those conditions do not exist, the measure that replaces arrest has no basis either. The exception is where the law prohibits arrest, in which case judicial control may still be applied (CCP Art. 109(2)).
Tax measures and criminal measures are separate
In a fake invoice file, a company and its manager may face measures from the tax administration and from the criminal courts at the same time. The authorities, conditions and remedies differ, and an application against one does not affect the other.
Measures compared
| Measure | Imposed by | Directed at | Remedy and period |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security and precautionary attachment | The public creditor | Assets, receivables and bank accounts | Action in the tax court within 15 days (Law 6183 Art. 15) |
| Payment order and attachment | The collecting tax office | Enforced collection of a final receivable | Action against the payment order within 15 days (Law 6183 Art. 58) |
| Travel ban | Criminal judge of peace or the court | The suspect’s or accused’s personal liberty | Request to lift at any time; objection within two weeks (CCP Arts. 111, 268(1)) |
| Arrest | Criminal judge of peace or the court | Personal liberty | Objection and request for release |
Paying the tax debt, providing security or having a precautionary attachment lifted does not automatically remove a travel ban; equally, lifting the travel ban does not affect the tax administration’s measures against assets. The two tracks must be pursued with separate petitions before separate authorities.
Lifting, temporary exemption and objection
There are three routes against a travel ban, and they are not mutually exclusive. The suspect or accused may ask at any time for the ban to be lifted; the judge may change the obligations or grant a temporary exemption; and the decision may be challenged by objection.
Routes against a travel ban
| Route | Content | Period | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Request to lift | On the request of the suspect or accused, the judge or court decides after hearing the prosecutor | Decision within five days of the request | CCP Art. 111(1) |
| Change or temporary exemption | The judge may remove obligations in whole or in part, change them, or temporarily exempt the suspect from some of them; during the investigation, on the prosecutor’s request | At any time | CCP Art. 110(2) |
| Objection | Decisions on judicial control can be challenged; an objection to a decision of a criminal judge of peace is examined by the next criminal judge of peace | Two weeks | CCP Arts. 111(2), 268(1), 268(3)(a) |
The objection period was extended from seven days to two weeks by Law No. 7499. Because a request to lift is not subject to a time limit, it can be renewed at any time with new facts if the objection period has passed or circumstances have changed.
Temporary exemption for business travel
For managers of companies that export, or that have production, sales or shareholder links abroad, a temporary exemption for a specific trip can be sought even where full lifting of the ban is not possible. CCP Art. 110(2) expressly allows the judge to exempt the suspect temporarily from some of the obligations.
Documents to attach to a request for temporary exemption
| Document | What it shows |
|---|---|
| Trade fair registration, invitation letter or meeting correspondence | The purpose and dates of the trip |
| Outbound and return tickets and accommodation details | That the return is planned |
| The company’s export or foreign sales records | The commercial necessity of the trip |
| Residence, family and real estate records | That there is no suspicion of flight |
| Records showing compliance with earlier judicial control obligations | Respect for the measure |
The request should be made well before the trip, leaving time for the decision to be served and entered in the records. Returning on time from a trip made under a temporary exemption is a strong fact for later requests to lift the ban.
Breach of the ban and access to the file
Where a suspect or accused wilfully fails to comply with judicial control obligations, the competent judicial authority may order arrest immediately, whatever the length of the sentence that could be imposed (CCP Art. 112). No travel should be planned until a decision lifting the ban or granting an exemption has been entered in the records and served.
An effective request depends on knowing the facts on which the ban rests. Defence counsel may review the file during the investigation and take copies of documents free of charge (CCP Art. 153(1)). That right may be restricted only in investigations into the offences listed in the law, by a judge’s decision at the prosecutor’s request, and the offences in TPL Art. 359 are not on that list (CCP Art. 153(2)). If the file also includes an organisation allegation, a restriction may have been ordered, and that should be checked.
Documents to look for in the file
| Document | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| The prosecutor’s request for judicial control | Shows which ground for arrest was relied on |
| The decision of the criminal judge of peace | Whether the reasons rest on concrete facts, and the date of the decision |
| The four-monthly review decisions | Whether continuation of the measure was reasoned |
| The tax crime report and the commission’s opinion | The content of the allegation; if not yet issued, the stage the investigation has reached |
Preparation for the statement is explained in our guide on giving a statement in a Turkish fake invoice investigation.
Foreign directors and expatriate managers
A judicial control obligation under CCP Art. 109(3)(a) applies to any suspect, whatever his or her nationality. For a foreign director or an expatriate manager posted to a Turkish subsidiary, a travel ban can mean being unable to return home or to the group’s head office for the duration of the measure. Three points follow from the statute.
First, the obligations in Art. 109(3) are alternatives. The judge may change them (CCP Art. 110(2)), so a request can ask, in the alternative to lifting the ban, that it be replaced by a less restrictive obligation, such as regular reporting at stated intervals when in Turkey (Art. 109(3)(b)) or a security set by the judge with regard to the suspect’s means (Art. 109(3)(f)). Second, the facts that answer a suspicion of flight for a foreign manager are different from those for a resident Turkish director: the continuing employment relationship with the group, the company’s operations in Turkey, past compliance with summonses, the group’s written undertaking to make the manager available, and the documents already in the file. Third, a director who lives abroad and is named as a suspect should decide with counsel whether to travel to Turkey for a statement, knowing that a travel ban could follow. Turkish prosecutors can seek statements from suspects abroad through mutual legal assistance under Law No. 6706, including by video link; see our guide on suspects, evidence and assets abroad under Law No. 6706.
Options for a foreign manager under a travel ban
| Option | What to ask for | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Lifting the ban | Removal of the obligation for lack of strong suspicion or a concrete ground for arrest | CCP Arts. 100, 109(1), 111(1) |
| Replacing the ban | A less restrictive obligation, such as reporting or a security | CCP Arts. 109(3)(b), 109(3)(f), 110(2) |
| Temporary exemption | Permission for a specific trip with return dates | CCP Art. 110(2) |
| Objection | Review of the decision by the next criminal judge of peace or the competent court | CCP Arts. 111(2), 268 |
Step-by-step plan for a manager
A travel ban creates a commercial risk that is separate from the criminal file, particularly for managers of exporting companies and of companies with foreign shareholders. That risk should be managed alongside the criminal defence, on a documented plan.
Step-by-step plan
| Step | What to do | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Establish from the file the date, authority and reasons of the decision | CCP Art. 153(1) |
| 2 | If within the two-week period, object; if not, request lifting | CCP Arts. 111, 268(1) |
| 3 | Keep ready the documents that answer a suspicion of flight: residence, family, real estate, company records | CCP Art. 100(2) |
| 4 | Prepare the year’s travel calendar and request a temporary exemption in advance for each trip | CCP Art. 110(2) |
| 5 | Track the four-monthly review dates and submit new facts each time | CCP Art. 110(4) |
| 6 | Calculate the date on which the maximum period ends | CCP Art. 110/A |
| 7 | Run the defence on the merits and the effective repentance assessment in the same file | TPL Art. 359 |
Developments in the investigation can be used as facts in a request to lift the ban: new documents showing that the transaction was real, a decision in the tax case, or an effective repentance payment. An effective repentance payment is not an acceptance of the allegation, but whether to make one should be calculated together with the sentence reduction and the possibility of suspension; see our guide on effective repentance in Turkish fake invoice cases.
Model petition
The model below is prepared for a company director who is a suspect in an investigation into the use of fake invoices and on whom a criminal judge of peace has imposed a travel ban. The main request is to lift the ban; replacement with a lighter obligation and a temporary exemption are requested only if the main request is not granted. It is an English working draft for group review; the petition filed must be in Turkish and completed with the facts of the file.
INVESTIGATION NO : 2026/…… (…………… Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office)
SUSPECT : ……………, passport / identity no. ……………
DEFENCE COUNSEL : Av. ……………
SUBJECT : Request to lift the obligation not to leave the country imposed on the suspect by decision no. …… dated …/…/2026; failing that, to replace it with a lighter obligation; and failing that, to exempt the suspect temporarily for the trip specified.
EXPLANATIONS
The client is chair of the board of directors of …………… Anonim Şirketi. An investigation under TPL Art. 359 was opened in connection with invoices the company received from …………… in 20…. The client gave a statement to the public prosecutor on …/…/2026, and the obligation not to leave the country was imposed on the same day. The obligation has continued unchanged for …… months.
1. CCP Arts. 109(1) and 100(1): there are no concrete facts showing strong suspicion
The investigation rests on findings about the seller made after the transaction dates. There is no fact in the file showing that the client knew the invoices were fake. The delivery notes, weighbridge slips and bank transfer receipts submitted by the company show that the goods were received and that the price was paid into the seller’s account. Our defence that a decision not to prosecute should be issued is reserved.
2. CCP Art. 100(2): there is no suspicion of flight or of tampering with evidence
The client has lived at the same address with his family for …… years and continues to manage the company, which employs …… people. Real estate is registered in his name. He attended the prosecutor’s office of his own accord to give his statement, and all of the company’s documents have been submitted in the tax examination and in the investigation. Since all of the evidence is in the hands of public authorities, there is no possibility of tampering with it. The decision identifies no concrete fact pointing to flight.
3. CCP Art. 110(4): the continuation of the measure must be reassessed
Whether the obligation should continue must be reviewed at intervals of no more than four months. Since the obligation was imposed, no new step has been taken in the investigation, and the result of the examination needed before a public case can be filed has not yet been notified to the prosecutor (TPL Art. 367(3)). Continuing the measure on unchanged reasons has become disproportionate.
4. CCP Arts. 110(2) and 109(3)(b) and (f): without acceptance, a lighter obligation and a temporary exemption
Without prejudice to the requests above, if the obligation is not lifted, we request that it be replaced by regular reporting at intervals the court considers appropriate, or by a security to be set with regard to the client’s means, and that, in any event, the client be exempted temporarily from the obligation not to leave the country between …/…/2026 and …/…/2026 so that he can attend the …………… trade fair in ……………. The fair registration, outbound and return tickets and the company’s export records are attached.
CONCLUSION AND REQUEST : For these reasons, we request (1) that the obligation not to leave the country imposed on the client be lifted; (2) if that request is not granted, that the obligation be replaced by regular reporting or by a security under CCP Art. 109(3)(b) or (f); and (3) in any event, that the client be exempted temporarily from the obligation between …/…/2026 and …/…/2026. …/…/2026
Defence Counsel for the Suspect
Av. ……………
ANNEXES : Residence and family records; land registry records; fair registration and tickets; the company’s export records; power of attorney.
If the request is refused, an objection may be made within two weeks (CCP Arts. 111(2), 268(1)). The petition should contain nothing that could be read as accepting the allegation; replacement and temporary exemption are requested only in case the main request is not granted.
How Hukukçular Evi can help
A travel ban in a fake invoice investigation directly affects a manager’s business life. Hukukçular Evi Ankara establishes the basis and date of the ban from the file, prepares requests to lift it and objections, tracks the four-monthly reviews and the maximum period, files requests for temporary exemption for business travel with supporting documents, and runs all of this together with the defence on the merits in the investigation. We work in English with foreign directors, expatriate managers and group legal teams. The scope of the service is described on our fake invoice defence page (in Turkish), and the lawyer’s profile is on the author page. You can reach us on +90 554 648 37 15.
Frequently asked questions
Can a person with a tax debt leave Turkey?
Yes. A tax debt is not on its own a ground for a travel ban; under Constitution Art. 23(5), a citizen’s freedom to leave may be restricted only by a judge’s decision because of a criminal investigation or prosecution.
Does a precautionary attachment or a payment order create a travel ban?
No. These are collection measures directed at assets. Law 6183 Art. 36/A, which restricted exit for tax debtors, was repealed by Law No. 6111.
Can a travel ban be imposed in a fake invoice investigation?
Yes. Where there are grounds for arrest, it can be imposed as judicial control at the prosecutor’s request by decision of the criminal judge of peace (CCP Arts. 109(3)(a), 110(1)).
What conditions must be met?
Concrete facts showing strong suspicion, and a ground for arrest such as suspicion of flight or of tampering with evidence (CCP Arts. 100(1)–(2), 109(1)). Tax offences are not catalogue offences for which a ground for arrest is presumed (CCP Art. 100(3)).
How long can the ban last?
In cases outside the high criminal courts, no more than two years, plus one year where necessary with reasons (CCP Art. 110/A(1)). Its continuation must be reviewed at least every four months (CCP Art. 110(4)).
When can I ask for the ban to be lifted?
At any time. The judge or court decides within five days after hearing the prosecutor (CCP Art. 111(1)).
What is the period for objecting?
Two weeks (CCP Art. 268(1)). An objection to a decision of a criminal judge of peace is examined by the next criminal judge of peace (CCP Art. 268(3)(a)).
I need to travel for business. What can I do?
Ask the judge for a temporary exemption limited to specific dates (CCP Art. 110(2)), with documents showing the purpose of the trip and the planned return.
Can the ban be replaced by something less restrictive?
Yes, the judge may change the obligations (CCP Art. 110(2)). A request can ask for regular reporting or a security instead (CCP Art. 109(3)(b), (f)).
What happens if I leave despite the ban?
Arrest may be ordered immediately against a suspect or accused who wilfully fails to comply (CCP Art. 112).
Can the tax office lift the travel ban?
No. The ban is a judge’s decision; a request to lift it goes to the criminal judge of peace who made it or to the court hearing the case.
If I pay the tax debt, is the ban lifted?
Payment does not lift the ban automatically. An effective repentance payment and new facts about the allegation can, however, be submitted for assessment in a request to lift it.
How can I find out the reasons for the ban?
Defence counsel can review the investigation file and take copies (CCP Art. 153(1)). The offences in TPL Art. 359 are not among those for which access can be restricted (CCP Art. 153(2)).
Does the ban continue after a case is brought?
During the prosecution, the court may continue, change or lift judicial control, and must review its continuation of its own motion at least every four months (CCP Art. 110(3)–(4)).
Does the ban apply to foreign directors?
Yes. Judicial control under CCP Art. 109(3)(a) applies to any suspect regardless of nationality. A foreign director can ask for the ban to be lifted, replaced or temporarily suspended for specific trips on the same legal basis.
Related guides
- Fake Invoice Allegations and KURGAN Tax Audits in Turkey — the entry point to this series
- Called to Give a Statement in a Turkish Fake Invoice Investigation
- Effective Repentance in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
- Personal Liability of Directors and Managers in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
- Challenging a Fake Invoice Assessment in the Turkish Tax Court
- Suspects, Evidence and Assets Abroad: International Judicial Cooperation (Law No. 6706)
- Can a Foreigner Be a Board Member or Manager of a Turkish Company?
- Legal Guide for Foreign Investors in Turkey (Türkiye) 2026
- Precautionary Attachment in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
- Defence Petition in a Fake Invoice Criminal Case (in Turkish)
- Searches and Seizures in Fake Invoice Files (in Turkish)
- Fake Invoice and KURGAN Decision Tool (in Turkish)
- VAT Deduction Denied for Fake Invoices in Turkey: How the Assessment Is Calculated
- Amended Return or Defence after a KURGAN Letter in Turkey
- Supplier Due Diligence Against Fake Invoice Risk in Turkey
- Limitation Periods in Turkish Fake Invoice Cases
Important note: This guide is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice on any matter. Whether a travel ban can be lifted or replaced depends on the reasons in the decision and the facts in the file. It does not suggest that any company or person has committed an offence; the presumption of innocence applies. It reflects the law in force on 27 October 2026. Legislation and sources relied on: Constitution Art. 23(5); Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, Arts. 100, 109, 110, 110/A, 111, 112, 153 and 268, as amended by Law No. 7499; Tax Procedure Law No. 213, Arts. 359 and 367; Law No. 6183, Arts. 13, 15, 17, 36/A (repealed) and 58; Law No. 6111, Art. 165; Passport Law No. 5682, Art. 22; Law No. 6706; Constitutional Court decision E.2007/4, K.2007/81 (Official Gazette, 8 December 2007).
Is a travel ban in place?
A request to lift it can be made at any time, the objection period is two weeks, and a temporary exemption can be requested for business travel. We work in English with foreign directors and expatriate managers. Hukukçular Evi Ankara: +90 554 648 37 15
