SavedAdd your journal

Journals / The Boğaziçi Law Review / 2025 / Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2

THE QUALIFICATION OF CRYPTO-ASSETS AS SECURITIES UNDER TURKISH LAW: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

TÜRK HUKUKUNDA KRİPTO VARLIKLARIN MENKUL KIYMET OLARAK NİTELENDİRİLMESİ: KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR ANALİZ

Hacer Ülkü Doğan Kaya(ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, HUKUK FAKÜLTESİ, ÖZEL HUKUK (DR))
Pages
166–189
Publication Date
2025-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The conclusion evaluates the position in Turkey in comparison to the UK, EU and US from a regulatory standpoint and identifies areas that require further clarification.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Unlike the situation in some other jurisdictions, there is no published guidance regarding when crypto-assets can be considered as securities under Turkish law.
📊
Key Findings & Data:On the other hand, it reviews the recent Turkish legislative changes, which were passed in June 2024 and provide clarifications on the issuance of securities in the form of crypto-assets, the licensing of crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), and the Turkish regulator's enforcement powers against crypto-asset activities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The conclusion evaluates the position in Turkey in comparison to the UK, EU and US from a regulatory standpoint and identifies areas that require further clarification.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Menkul kıymet olarak kripto varlıklar · Türk kripto varlık mevzuatı · sermaye piyasası hukuku

Abstract

Unlike the situation in some other jurisdictions, there is no published guidance regarding when crypto-assets can be considered as securities under Turkish law. For this reason, this study deals with the question of when crypto-assets are considered as securities under current Turkish law and the implications of such consideration. The analysis accompanies a comparative overview of the regulatory responses in some relevant jurisdictions. On the other hand, it reviews the recent Turkish legislative changes, which were passed in June 2024 and provide clarifications on the issuance of securities in the form of crypto-assets, the licensing of crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), and the Turkish regulator's enforcement powers against crypto-asset activities. The conclusion evaluates the position in Turkey in comparison to the UK, EU and US from a regulatory standpoint and identifies areas that require further clarification.

Özet

Bazı diğer hukuk sistemlerinin aksine, Türkiye’de kripto varlıkların hangi şartlar altında menkul kıymet olarak değerlendirileceğine ilişkin yayımlanmış bir rehber bulunmamaktadır. Bu nedenle, bu çalışma kripto varlıkların yürürlükteki Türk hukuku uyarınca ne durumda menkul kıymet sayıldığını ve böyle bir değerlendirmenin sonuçlarını ele almaktadır. Bu analiz, ilgili birtakım hukuk sistemlerindeki düzenleyici yaklaşımlara ilişkin karşılaştırmalı bir değerlendirme ile birlikte sunulmaktadır. Öte yandan, Haziran 2024’te kabul edilen ve kripto varlık şeklinde menkul kıymet ihraçlarına, kripto varlık hizmet sağlayıcılarının (CASP’ler) lisanslanmasına ve Türk düzenleyicisinin kripto varlık faaliyetlerine yönelik yaptırım yetkilerine açıklık getiren son Türk mevzuat değişikliklerini de incelemektedir. Sonuç bölümü, Türkiye’deki durumu Birleşik Krallık, AB ve ABD ile düzenleyici açıdan karşılaştırmakta ve daha fazla netlik kazandırılmasına ihtiyaç duyulan alanları belirlemektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kaya, H. Ü. D. (2025). THE QUALIFICATION OF CRYPTO-ASSETS AS SECURITIES UNDER TURKISH LAW: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS. The Boğaziçi Law Review, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 166–189. https://doi.org/10.69800/blr.1838778

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Adıgüzel B, ‘6362 Sayılı Sermaye Piyasası Kanunu'nda Sermaye Piyasası Aracı Kavramı’ 3 TFM (2017) 1
  2. Aktaş S, ‘Hukukta Yorum Çabaları’ [Interpretative Efforts in Law] 15 EÜHFD (2011) 1
  3. Bahtiyar M, Sermaye Piyasası Hukukuna Giriş (Beta 2019)
  4. Baur DG, Hong K and Lee AD, ‘Bitcoin: Medium of exchange or speculative assets?’ (2018) 54 JIFMIM 177 Cease-and-Desist Order against Munchee Inc (Release No 10445, 11 December 2017) accessed 23 December 2025
  5. Çetin Ç, Sermaye Piyasası Hukuku Bakımından Kripto Varlıklar (On Iki Levha 2023)
  6. Demirtaş AA, Kripto Varlıkların Sermaye Piyasası Hukuku Açısından Değerlendirilmesi (Seçkin 2022)
  7. Çollak Ö and Şahan Ö, ‘Equity Capital Markets in Turkey: Regulatory Overview’ (Thomson Reuters, 1 January 2022) accessed 18 August 2023
  8. European Banking Authority (EBA), ‘Report with advice for the European Commission on crypto-assets’ (2019) accessed 23 December 2025
  9. European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), Advice on Initial Coin Offerings and Crypto-Assets (9 January 2019) accessed 23 December 2025
  10. FATF, ‘Turkey's progress in strengthening measures to tackle money laundering and terrorist financing’ (2023) accessed 23 December 2025
  11. Ferrari V, ‘The Regulation of Crypto-Assets in the EU - Investment and Payment Tokens under the Radar’ 27 MJECL (2020) 353
  12. Financial Action Task Force (FATF), ‘Virtual Assets’ accessed 23 December 2025
  13. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), ‘Guidance on Cryptoassets Feedback and Final Guidance to CP 19/3’ (July 2019) accessed 23 December 2025
  14. Goforth C, ‘Cinderella's Slipper: A Better Approach to Regulating Cryptoassets as Securities’ (2021) 17 HBLJ 271
  15. Goforth C, 'Critiquing the SEC's Ongoing Efforts to Regulate Crypto Exchanges' (2023) 14 Wm & Mary Bus L Rev 305
  16. Hacker P and Thomale C, ‘12 The Crypto-Security: Initial Coin Offerings and EU Securities Regulation’ in Philipp
  17. Hacker et al (eds), EU Financial Law (OUP 2019) accessed 23 December 2025
  18. Hacker P and Thomale C, ‘Crypto-Securities Regulation: ICOs, Token Sales and Cryptocurrencies under EU Financial Law’ (2018) 15 ECFLR 645
  19. IOSCO, ‘Regulators' Statements on Initial Coin Offerings’ accessed 23 December 2025
  20. Kaya A, ‘Amaçsal Yorum’ 4 ABD (2014) 363
  21. Levine M, ‘Ripple Is a Security and It Isn’t’ Bloomberg (14 July 2023) accessed 23 December 2025
  22. Levine M, ‘The Only Crypto Story You Need’ Bloomberg (25 October 2022) accessed 23 December 2025
  23. Mascio V, ‘Regulation of Crypto-assets under EU and US Securities Law’ (PhD Thesis, University of Bocconi 2021)
  24. Maume P and Fromberger M, ‘Regulation of Initial Coin Offerings: Reconciling U.S. and E.U. Securities Laws’ (2019) 19 CJIL 548
  25. Memiş T and Turan G, Sermaye Piyasası Hukuku (Seçkin 2022)
  26. Memorandum to the House Financial Services Committee, ‘The Future of Digital Assets: Providing Clarity for the Digital Asset Ecosystem’ (2023) accessed 23 December 2025
  27. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Directorate for EU Affairs, ‘6) Company Law’ (30 September 2019) accessed 15 August 2023
  28. PISF, ‘A Review of Cryptoasset Market Structure and Regulation in the United States’ (2023) accessed 23 December 2025
  29. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), ‘Crypto Assets and Cyber Enforcement Actions’ accessed 23 December 2025
  30. SEC FinHub, ‘Framework for “Investment Contract” Analysis of Digital Assets’ (modified 23 March 2023) accessed 23 December 2025
  31. Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA), ‘Regulatory treatment of initial coin offerings’ (29 September 2017) accessed 23 December 2025
  32. Turanboy A, ‘Kripto Paraların Ortaya Çıkmaları ve Hukukî Nitelikleri’ 35 Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi 47 accessed 23 December 2025
  33. Töremiş HE, ‘Kripto Varlıklar ve Sermaye Piyasasında Düzenleme İhtiyacı’ in Düzenleme Arayışı Çalıştayı 8-9 Temmuz 2021 (Orhan Çelik et al., eds.) (The Research Institute of Banking and Commercial Law 2022)
  34. Tevetoğlu M, Hukuki Yönleriyle Kripto Varlıklar ve Kripto Varlıkların İlk Arzı (Aristo 2021)
  35. Üzümcü R and Yıldırım Y, ‘Kripto Paraların Hukuki Statüleri ve Sözleşmeler İçerisindeki Yerleri’ 13 Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi (2022) 271
  36. Cases and Investigations
  37. SEC v WJ Howey Co 328 US 293 (1946)
  38. SEC v Telegram Group Inc et al, SDNY 19 Civ 9439 (3 January 2020)
  39. SEC v Ripple Labs Inc et al, SDNY 20 Civ 10832 (AT) (13 July 2023)
  40. SEC Cease and Desist Order against Block.one (Release no 10714, 30 September 2019) https://www.sec.gov accessed 17 August 2023
  41. SEC No Action Letter to TurnKey Jet Inc (3 April 2019) accessed 17 August 2023
  42. SEC, ‘Report of Investigation against the DAO’ (Release No 81207, 25 July 2017) https://www.sec.gov accessed 23 December 2025
  43. Case 264/14 Skatteverket v David Hedqvist [2015] ECLI:EU:C:2015:718
  44. Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) 19th Criminal Chamber E. 2018/2119 K. 2018/2119 (9 May 2018)