İcra Dairelerinin Katma Değer Vergisi Mükellefiyeti ve Cebrî Satışlarda Doğan Katma Değer Vergisi Uyuşmazlıklarında Yöntem

Accepting enforcement offices as value-added tax (VAT) taxpayers contradicts the principle of tax legality and the European VAT system model, which Turkey seeks to harmonize with. This approach conflicts with the Constitution, as it involves an official body providing public services being treated as a taxpayer. Although excess VAT collected in sales by enforcement offices constitutes a tax dispute, treating these offices as taxpayers raises questions about how and where this dispute should be resolved. The transaction is viewed as part of the sale, not a tax process, which contradicts the judicial structure in Turkey and the distinction between administrative (tax) and judicial courts. The key issue in avoiding competitive inequality is whether goods sold via forced sale are normally subject to VAT. Tax offices, responsible for VAT implementation, should have the authority to make this determination. Therefore, the tax administration should handle VAT-related matters, and individuals should engage directly with tax offices. The taxation process should be seen as an administrative transaction. From a procedural perspective, adopting an accrual system would allow potential disputes to be resolved in tax courts with proper reservation mechanisms, ensuring enforcement proceedings are not disrupted and the VAT issue does not invalidate the auction.