Statute of limitations means the expiration of the period specified in the law for the acquisition or loss of a right. In other words, statute of limitations refers to the situation where it becomes infeasible to claim a right after a certain period of time has elapsed. When the relevant concept is analyzed from the perspective of tax law, it is seen that it has different characteristics from the statute of limitations regulating the debt-credit relationship in private law. In private law, the
statute of limitations is a concept that must be raised by the parties and is not automatically examined and taken into consideration by the judge. However, the concept of statute of limitations in tax law, as stated in paragraph 2 of Article 113 of the Tax Procedure Law No. 213 (“VUK”), shall be effective regardless of whether there is an application by the taxpayer in this respect or not.
Article 113, paragraph 2: The statute of limitations shall be effective regardless of whether the taxpayer has made an application in this respect or not.
In addition, as stated in Article 102 of the Law No. 6183 on the Procedure for Collection of Public Receivables (“ AATUHK”), in the event that the collection of the public receivable is time-barred, the taxpayer may perform the public debt at
his/her discretion. The relevant provision is provided below.
Article 102, paragraph 2: After the statute of limitations, payments made willingly by the taxpayer shall be
accepted.
Additionally, it can be said that the concept of statute of limitations in tax law is functional in terms of limiting the taxing
authority of the state in terms of time and serves the purpose of providing public benefit. In this context, there are four
different statutes of limitations in tax law: statute of limitations for levy, statute of limitations for rectification, statute of
limitations for imposing penalties, and statute of limitations for collection. Within the scope of this article, the statute of limitations for levy and collection will be addressed.
The statute of limitations for levy is regulated in the Tax Procedure Law and is applicable only to public receivables within the scope of this law. According to Article 114 of the VUK, taxes that are not levied and notified to the taxpayer within five years starting from the beginning of the year following the calendar year in which the tax receivable
accrues are subject to statute of limitations. At this point, it is noteworthy that the statute of limitations starts from the beginning of the year following the year in which the tax receivable arises. In addition, the relevant assessment made within the prescribed period will not be effective unless the taxpayer is notified of the levy. Therefore, the concept of “notification” is of great importance.
When the concept of notification is closely examined in terms of tax law, it is seen that the documents and writings that are related to taxation and create legal consequences are delivered to the taxpayer, tax responsible and other related parties in accordance with predetermined procedures and forms. In this vein, although the notification in our law is
made according to the Law on Notification No. 7201, the regulations regarding the taxation are regulated in the VUK, since the tax procedure is related to the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals.
On the other hand, there are reasons that suspend and interrupt the statute of limitations. In the event that one of the
reasons listed in the law regarding the interruption of the statute of limitations is encountered, the periods that have already been processed are annulled and the statute of limitations starts to run again from the beginning. On the other hand, in the event that there are reasons that suspend the statute of limitations, the periods cease to run and the
period continues to run from where it stopped after the reason for the suspension is no longer present.
The application of the tax office to the valuation commission for the assessment of the tax base is one of the reasons that stop the statute of limitations. The statute of limitations continues to run from the day following the delivery of the relevant commission decision to the tax office. With the Law No. 6009 on the Amendment of the Income Tax Law and Certain Laws and Decree Laws (“Law”), the provision in the second paragraph of Article 114 of the Tax Procedural Law stating that the statute of limitations cannot be longer than one year in any case in the event of an application to the
valuation commission for tax assessment has been introduced to be effective as of 01.07.2010. The Constitutional Court has annulled the provision stating that the application to the valuation commission for the determination of the tax base will suspend the statute of limitations, with its decision dated 15.10.2009 and numbered E:2006/124, K.2009/146. When the rationale for this annulment is examined, it is seen to be based on the principle of legal certainty. Legal
certainty, in turn, is ensured through clarity. In this context, the lack of clear, definite, concrete, and foreseeable determination in the law regarding the reasons for suspending the statute of limitations, the duration of suspension, and the starting date of the suspended statute of limitations was contrary to the principles of clarity and legality of taxation. Therefore, limiting the period of stay in the valuation commission to one year served to ensure clarity regarding the statute of limitations for taxation. Another important point in this context is the requirement for sometimes applying to the valuation commission solely to suspend the statute of limitations. In its decision numbered E. 2012/9726, K. 2013/5028, the 9th Chamber of the Council of State emphasized that for the statute of limitations period to be
suspended due to an application to the valuation commission, a real valuation reason must be determined, in other words, it must not be based on a fictitious valuation reason that does not actually exist, present solely for the purpose of suspending the statute of limitations.
In addition, in Article 13 of the Tax Procedure Law, cases such as serious accidents, serious illnesses and detentions that prevent the fulfillment of any of the tax obligations, disasters such as fire, earthquake and flooding that prevent the fulfillment of tax obligations, compulsory absences that occur against the will of the person, the loss of books and documents due to reasons beyond the will of the owner are listed as force majeure. The statute of limitations for tax
assessment for levy is extended only for tax liabilities that cannot be fulfilled in due time due to force majeure. the 9th Chamber of the Council of State ruled in decision numbered E. 2007/5007, K. 2007/2230, dated 07.06.2007, that the force majeure situation established by the authority in favor of the taxpayers shall not be applied in favor of the authority and shall not encompass the authority.
The statute of limitations for collection is a type of limitation period that restricts the collection of public debts to a certain period of time. According to Article 102 of the AATUHK, if a public debt is not collected within five years from the end of the calendar year in which its maturity falls, it becomes subject to the statute of limitations. The statute of limitations for the collection of state tax debt is subject to various conditions. Firstly, the stages of the taxation process,
which are:
i. Levy
ii. Notification
iii. Accrual
must be completed.
The accrued tax receivable should not have been collected within the collection limitation period.
At this point, regarding the commencement of the statute of limitations for collection, it should be emphasized that the maturity in public receivables is only in question for duly accrued and collectible receivables. The maturity of the tax is the last day of the tax payment period. If the time of payment is not specified in special laws, it is paid according
to the procedure specified by the Ministry of Finance.
While the presence of the public debtor in a foreign country, fraudulent bankruptcy and the impossibility of prosecuting the debtor are the reasons that suspend the statute of limitations for collection, all kinds of collections made as a result of payment, seizure enforcement, forced collection and follow-up procedures, notification of payment orders, notification of property declaration, acquisition and notification of increases, applications made to or by certain
persons, decision of reversal by the judicial authorities, securing the public receivable, decision of suspension of execution by the judicial authorities, and the disappearance of the tax receivable interrupt the statute of limitations for collection.
In conclusion, in terms of tax law, it should be stated that the failure to levy and collect the tax within the prescribed period will result in the statute of limitations, but there may be various reasons that stop or interrupt the statute of limitations. In addition, in terms of tax law, the statute of limitations is important for tax receivables as it is a matter
of public interest and a matter that must be taken into consideration ex officio by the judge.
