When divorce involves significant wealth, one of the first questions is often not what assets exist in Turkey, but what may exist abroad.
A bank account in Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, the United Arab Emirates or another jurisdiction may contain savings accumulated during marriage, investment proceeds, salary income, company distributions or funds transferred shortly before divorce.
A common misconception is that money placed in a foreign bank automatically falls outside the reach of a Turkish matrimonial property claim.
That is not correct.
If Turkish matrimonial property rules apply to the spouses, the location of a bank account does not, by itself, determine whether the money is acquired property or personal property. The more difficult question is usually evidentiary: How can the existence of the account be proven, how can the records be obtained from abroad, and what happens if the money was withdrawn before the divorce action?
This article explains the practical legal framework for foreign bank accounts in Turkish matrimonial property litigation.
1. The First Question Is Not “Where Is the Bank?” but “Which Law Governs the Matrimonial Property Regime?”
Before calculating a foreign bank account, the applicable law must be identified.
This point becomes particularly important in marriages involving different nationalities, spouses who lived abroad when they married or couples who have relocated between countries.
Under Article 15 of Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, spouses may expressly choose, for matrimonial property matters, one of their national laws or the law of their habitual residence at the time of marriage.
Where no choice has been made, the applicable law is determined in sequence by reference to:
the spouses’ common national law at the time of marriage;
if there is no common national law, their common habitual residence law at the time of marriage;
and, if neither exists, Turkish law.
A special rule applies to the liquidation of immovable property, for which the law of the country where the property is located applies. A foreign bank account, however, is not an immovable property asset and therefore falls within the general matrimonial property analysis.
Accordingly, it should not automatically be assumed that the Turkish Civil Code applies merely because the divorce takes place in Turkey.
For many Turkish couples, however, Turkish law will govern. In that case, the statutory regime of participation in acquired property becomes central.
2. Is Money in a Foreign Bank Account Acquired Property?
Under Article 219 of the Turkish Civil Code, acquired property generally consists of assets obtained for consideration during the continuation of the matrimonial property regime.
This includes employment income, certain social security payments, compensation for loss of working capacity, income from personal property and assets replacing acquired property.
Article 222 adds an extremely important evidentiary rule: unless proven otherwise, all assets of a spouse are presumed to be acquired property.
The country in which the money is deposited does not change this classification.
For example, assume a Turkish spouse works in Germany during the marriage and saves EUR 300,000 from salary income in a Frankfurt bank account.
The fact that:
- the salary was earned abroad,
- the employer was German,
- the account is held in Germany, and
- the money never entered Turkey
does not, by itself, turn those savings into personal property.
If Turkish matrimonial property law applies, salary accumulated during the matrimonial property regime will generally constitute acquired property.
The same principle may apply to money held in:
Swiss private banking accounts;
UK investment accounts;
US brokerage-linked cash accounts;
UAE bank accounts;
European fintech accounts;
foreign currency deposits;
investment funds;
securities accounts;
and certain financial assets held through foreign institutions.
The analysis focuses primarily on when and how the property was acquired, not simply where it is located.
3. When Would Foreign Bank Money Be Personal Property?
Not every foreign bank balance must be divided.
Article 220 of the Turkish Civil Code provides that certain assets constitute personal property, including property owned before the matrimonial property regime began, property received through inheritance or other gratuitous acquisition, moral damages and assets replacing personal property.
Consider a spouse who had USD 500,000 in a US bank before marriage.
If that spouse can establish that the balance existed before the matrimonial property regime began and can trace the funds, the principal amount may qualify as personal property.
The situation becomes more complicated when the account generates income during the marriage.
Under Turkish law, income generated from personal property is generally acquired property, unless the spouses have validly agreed otherwise within the limits permitted by law.
Therefore, a lawyer should never stop at the question:
“Was the account opened before the marriage?”
The real investigation should be:
How much money existed before the relevant matrimonial regime?
What happened to that money?
Was additional employment income deposited?
Were investments purchased and sold?
Was interest generated?
Were dividends received?
Were personal and acquired funds mixed?
Was money transferred between several accounts?
Was an inheritance deposited into an existing salary account?
A foreign account opened before marriage can therefore contain both personal and acquired components.
The Court of Cassation has followed precisely this type of tracing approach in foreign-currency bank account cases. In a 2022 judgment, the 2nd Civil Chamber held that amounts existing before the relevant matrimonial property regime had to be identified and treated as personal property before the participation receivable was calculated.
4. The Critical Date: The Date the Divorce Action Is Filed
One of the most important rules in Turkish matrimonial property litigation is frequently misunderstood.
The matrimonial property regime does not continue until the divorce judgment becomes final for calculation purposes.
Under Article 225 of the Turkish Civil Code, where the marriage is terminated through divorce, the matrimonial property regime terminates retroactively as of the date the divorce action was filed.
For example:
Divorce action filed: 10 January 2026
Foreign bank account balance on 10 January 2026: EUR 400,000
Account balance on 10 October 2026: EUR 650,000
Divorce judgment: 15 March 2027
The starting point for identifying the assets subject to liquidation is normally the position existing on 10 January 2026.
Money deposited after termination of the matrimonial property regime does not automatically become part of the matrimonial property liquidation merely because the divorce proceedings remain pending.
This is why obtaining a statement covering the exact divorce filing date is critically important.
5. The Court of Cassation’s Approach to Bank Accounts
The Court of Cassation has repeatedly emphasised that bank accounts must be examined with reference to the date on which the matrimonial property regime terminated.
In one decision involving a bank account opened during marriage, the Court held that the money existing in the account on the divorce filing date was presumed to constitute acquired property because the spouse claiming that it was personal property had failed to prove that assertion. The other spouse was therefore entitled to participation in the residual value under Article 236.
This principle can be practically summarised as follows:
Account balance on the termination date + qualifying add-back assets – proven personal property components – relevant liabilities = amount potentially entering the residual value calculation.
The participation claim is then determined under the broader liquidation rules.
Article 236 provides, as the statutory rule, that each spouse is entitled to one-half of the other spouse’s residual value, subject to the other rules governing the liquidation.
It is therefore inaccurate simply to say:
“My spouse has EUR 1 million abroad, so I automatically receive EUR 500,000.”
The legal calculation may require tracing personal property, debts, reimbursement claims, add-back values and other matrimonial assets.
But where a EUR 1 million balance consists entirely of savings accumulated from employment income during marriage and there are no relevant adjustments, a substantial participation claim may indeed arise.
6. How Can a Foreign Bank Account Be Discovered?
This is often the most difficult part of the case.
A Turkish court does not have a universal electronic system through which it can simply type a spouse’s Turkish identification number and obtain every bank account held anywhere in the world.
Foreign banking information must generally be approached differently.
The first source is often evidence already available in Turkey.
This may include:
SWIFT transfer records;
transfers from Turkish banks to foreign banks;
credit card payments;
foreign-bank IBAN numbers;
account statements previously received by email;
tax documents;
company accounting records;
foreign salary records;
investment platform statements;
loan applications containing declarations of wealth;
documents submitted for immigration or residence permits;
messages between spouses;
foreign property purchase records;
dividend payments;
and transfers involving relatives or companies.
Even a single SWIFT transaction can be extremely valuable because it may reveal the name of the receiving bank, account holder, IBAN or account number and country.
The litigation strategy should therefore begin with tracing money leaving Turkey before attempting to obtain broad information from abroad.
7. Can a Turkish Court Request Records Directly From a Foreign Bank?
International judicial assistance may be used.
The Turkish Ministry of Justice expressly states that international civil judicial assistance can include the obtaining of information and evidence, including bank records, accounting documents, company files and commercial records.
Requests may be executed under bilateral agreements, multilateral treaties or, where no treaty exists, principles of reciprocity and international practice.
Türkiye is also a party to the 1970 Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters. The Convention provides mechanisms including Letters of Request for obtaining evidence across borders.
In practice, therefore, a Turkish Family Court may request judicial assistance to obtain bank documents located abroad.
However, this should not be confused with an automatic right to receive every foreign banking record requested.
The requested state normally applies its own procedural law when executing the request. The scope of banking confidentiality, proportionality, specificity, privacy rules and procedural objections can therefore differ substantially from country to country. The Turkish Ministry of Justice likewise notes that international requests are generally executed according to the law of the requested state.
This makes the wording of the request extremely important.
A request stating:
“Please investigate whether the defendant has any assets anywhere in Switzerland”
may encounter far greater difficulties than a targeted request stating:
“Please obtain statements for account no. X held by A.B. at Bank Y covering 1 January 2024 to 15 February 2026.”
The more specific the bank, branch, IBAN, account number and relevant period, the stronger the practical chances of obtaining meaningful evidence.
8. The Spouse Can Also Be Required to Produce Documents
International judicial assistance is not necessarily the only evidentiary mechanism.
Under Articles 219 and 220 of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure, parties are required, subject to the statutory conditions, to produce documents in their possession that are relied upon as evidence. Where the court concludes that a relevant document exists and its production is necessary, procedural consequences may follow from unjustified failure to produce it.
Therefore, where evidence shows that a spouse holds a foreign account, the litigation strategy may include requesting the production of:
account-opening documents;
monthly statements;
investment statements;
portfolio summaries;
SWIFT records;
deposit agreements;
interest statements;
and transaction histories.
A spouse should not be able to neutralise a claim merely by saying:
“The bank is abroad.”
But the claimant should still provide as much identifying evidence as possible.
9. Can Automatic International Tax Information Exchange Be Used to Find the Account?
Türkiye participates in international financial account information exchange mechanisms for tax purposes.
The Revenue Administration’s guidance confirms that financial account information is exchanged internationally within the tax-information framework and explains the institutions, persons, account information and reporting mechanisms covered by the system.
However, this system should not be confused with a civil-litigation discovery database.
The fact that tax authorities may receive foreign financial information does not mean that a spouse or Family Court automatically has unrestricted access to the entire international tax-information exchange system.
Accordingly, a matrimonial property petition should not simply state:
“Obtain all CRS information concerning the defendant.”
The procedural route and confidentiality rules governing tax information require separate analysis.
From a litigation perspective, direct banking evidence and international judicial assistance usually remain more concrete tools.
10. What If the Money Was Withdrawn Before Divorce?
This is where many high-value matrimonial property cases are won or lost.
Suppose the spouse held EUR 800,000 in Luxembourg.
Three months before the divorce action, the entire balance was withdrawn.
On the divorce filing date, the account balance was EUR 0.
Does this mean the other spouse receives nothing?
Not necessarily.
Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code regulates values to be added back to acquired property.
Among other things, it covers qualifying gratuitous dispositions made shortly before the termination of the property regime and transfers made during the matrimonial property regime with the intention of reducing the other spouse’s participation claim.
Therefore, a foreign bank account cannot be analysed exclusively through the balance appearing on the divorce date.
The transaction history immediately before divorce may be even more important.
11. A Zero Balance Does Not Automatically Mean Asset Dissipation
There is an equally important warning for claimants.
The mere fact that a large amount was withdrawn before divorce does not automatically prove asset hiding.
The Court of Cassation’s 2nd Civil Chamber addressed this point clearly in its decision dated 6 November 2025.
The disputed money had been withdrawn approximately two years before the matrimonial property regime ended. The Court held that because the funds did not exist in the account at termination and the claimant had not proven circumstances bringing the transaction within Article 229, the money could not simply be included in the liquidation.
This creates an important practical distinction:
“The money existed during the marriage” is not always enough.
The claimant should attempt to establish:
where the money went;
to whom it was transferred;
when the transfer occurred;
whether there was consideration;
whether the transfer coincided with marital conflict;
whether the spouse retained economic control;
whether the recipient was a relative or connected person;
whether the stated transaction was commercially genuine;
and whether the circumstances indicate an intention to reduce the participation receivable.
12. Example: Transfer From Switzerland to Dubai Before Divorce
Assume the following facts.
A husband has CHF 1.2 million in Switzerland.
Four months before the divorce action, CHF 1 million is transferred to a Dubai account held in his brother’s name.
No loan agreement exists.
The brother has no apparent commercial relationship with him.
A month later, part of the money is used to purchase an investment in which the husband continues to exercise control.
On the divorce filing date, the Swiss account contains only CHF 50,000.
The analysis should not stop with CHF 50,000.
The CHF 1 million transfer should be investigated under Article 229.
The claimant would want to obtain:
the Swiss account statements;
the SWIFT transfer;
the Dubai receiving account information where legally obtainable;
communications with the brother;
financial records showing the source and subsequent use of the funds;
and evidence concerning the timing of the marital dispute.
If the evidence demonstrates that the transfer was designed to reduce the other spouse’s participation claim, its value may potentially be treated as an add-back item in the matrimonial property calculation.
13. What Exchange Rate Is Used for a USD, EUR, GBP or CHF Account?
Foreign currency accounts create an additional valuation problem.
Should EUR 300,000 be converted using the exchange rate:
on the date of deposit?
on the divorce filing date?
on the date the matrimonial property lawsuit was filed?
on the expert report date?
or near the judgment date?
Court of Cassation case law provides important guidance.
In its 25 April 2022 decision, the 2nd Civil Chamber held that simply awarding the participation receivable in USD was incorrect. The Court stated that the real/current Turkish lira equivalent of the foreign currency should be determined using the value close to the liquidation decision date and that the participation receivable should then be calculated accordingly.
A later decision shows the practical implementation of that approach. After remand, the court calculated a Euro amount and converted it into Turkish lira using the Central Bank exchange rate close to the judgment date; the 2024 Court of Cassation decision records that methodology.
This is particularly significant in Turkey because foreign exchange rates may change dramatically during litigation.
Suppose EUR 500,000 existed in the account when the divorce action was filed.
It would generally be problematic simply to convert EUR 500,000 using the historical Turkish lira rate applicable several years before judgment and freeze the claim at that nominal TL figure.
The purpose of the valuation rules is to reflect the relevant real value within the liquidation framework.
14. The Asset Date and the Valuation Date Are Different Concepts
This distinction is essential.
Article 228 provides that personal and acquired property are separated according to their condition at the time the property regime terminates.
Article 235 provides that acquired property existing when the regime terminates is taken into account at its value at the time of liquidation. Assets that are added back under the statutory add-back rules are valued according to the statutory rules applicable to the transfer.
Therefore:
Existence of the asset: primarily examined as of the termination of the matrimonial property regime.
Nature of the asset: determined according to its source and applicable matrimonial property rules.
Economic valuation: may be determined at the legally relevant liquidation valuation date.
These concepts should not be mixed.
15. What If Money Was Moved Between Several Foreign Accounts?
Moving money does not necessarily change its matrimonial property character.
Suppose salary savings are transferred through the following route:
Türkiye → Germany → Switzerland → United Kingdom → Dubai.
If the underlying money remains traceable, changing the banking institution or country does not by itself convert acquired property into personal property.
The investigation becomes a tracing exercise.
A useful forensic chronology may look like this:
Salary received in Germany: EUR 250,000
Transferred to Swiss account: EUR 240,000
Converted into USD: USD 265,000
Transferred to UK brokerage account: USD 260,000
Investment sold before divorce: USD 320,000
Transferred to UAE: USD 315,000
The lawyer and financial expert must determine whether these transactions represent ordinary asset management or whether the chain was designed to conceal ownership.
16. What If the Foreign Account Is in a Company’s Name?
This requires particular caution.
A company and its shareholder are legally distinct persons.
A spouse cannot automatically claim one-half of money held in a foreign corporate bank account merely because the other spouse owns the company.
Instead, the analysis may involve:
the spouse’s shareholding;
the value of the shares;
shareholder receivables;
dividends;
loans to and from shareholders;
management fees;
distributions;
and unusual transfers between the shareholder and the company.
If the spouse uses the company as a vehicle to remove personal acquired property from the matrimonial property pool, those transfers may require separate investigation.
But the legal theory must distinguish company assets from the shareholder’s personal assets.
17. What Evidence Should Be Collected First?
In practice, a successful foreign-account case should begin before an international judicial assistance request is drafted.
The initial evidence package should, where available, identify:
- the country in which the account is believed to exist;
- the bank or financial institution;
- the account holder;
- IBAN or account number;
- SWIFT/BIC information;
- transfers from Turkish banks;
- account opening or investment documents;
- the relevant time period;
- suspected pre-divorce withdrawals;
- the source of the funds;
- evidence of employment, company income or asset sales generating the funds;
- the relationship between the spouse and any recipient of suspicious transfers.
The objective is to transform a vague allegation—
“My spouse has money somewhere abroad”—
into a legally testable allegation—
“On 17 June 2025, the defendant transferred EUR 420,000 from Bank A in Türkiye to account number X at Bank B in Germany, and records covering the period immediately before the divorce action are required to determine whether the funds remained in the matrimonial property pool.”
The second formulation is far more useful in litigation.
18. Practical Case Example
Consider the following case.
The spouses marry in 2014.
Turkish law governs their matrimonial property regime.
The husband works as an international executive.
Between 2016 and 2025, his salary and bonuses are accumulated in accounts in Türkiye and Switzerland.
In January 2026, the wife learns that substantial sums have been transferred abroad.
The divorce action is filed on 1 June 2026.
Evidence eventually shows:
Swiss account balance on 1 June 2026: EUR 700,000
Amount inherited from father and deposited into the same account: EUR 100,000
Employment savings accumulated during marriage: EUR 600,000
Assume the inheritance is sufficiently traced and proven.
The EUR 100,000 principal may be treated as personal property.
The EUR 600,000 employment-derived amount may constitute acquired property.
Subject to the complete liquidation calculation, liabilities, reimbursement issues and other assets, the wife may have a participation claim connected to the acquired component.
Now change the facts.
Suppose EUR 500,000 was transferred to the husband’s cousin one month before divorce without an identifiable commercial reason.
The Swiss balance falls to EUR 200,000.
The litigation must now investigate not only the EUR 200,000 balance but also whether the EUR 500,000 transfer qualifies as an add-back under Article 229.
That is why requesting only the account balance is often inadequate.
Transaction history is usually more important than the balance itself.
19. Practical Litigation Strategy
A strong foreign-bank-account case generally develops in five stages.
First, determine the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime.
Second, identify the foreign financial institution through domestic documents, SWIFT records, tax documents, communications or other evidence.
Third, request the account history covering a sufficiently broad period before the divorce filing date.
Fourth, classify each material amount according to its source: salary, inheritance, pre-marital savings, company distribution, investment return, gift, asset-sale proceeds or unexplained transfer.
Fifth, investigate large withdrawals before divorce separately under the add-back rules.
This method is significantly more effective than simply demanding “half of all money abroad.”
Conclusion
A foreign bank account is not automatically protected from Turkish matrimonial property litigation merely because it is held outside Türkiye.
Where Turkish matrimonial property law applies, the key questions are the same as for domestic assets:
When was the money acquired?
What was its source?
Was it acquired property or personal property?
What amount existed when the matrimonial property regime terminated?
Was money removed before divorce?
If so, why and where did it go?
Can a transfer be treated as an add-back under Article 229?
What is the correct current value of the foreign currency for liquidation purposes?
The practical difficulty lies primarily in evidence.
Foreign accounts require careful financial tracing, targeted requests for banking information and, where necessary, international judicial assistance.
For high-value cases, the most important lesson is therefore simple:
Do not look only at the balance on the day of divorce. Follow the money before, during and immediately after the breakdown of the marriage.
A bank account can be moved abroad.
The legal character of the money does not necessarily move with it.
No Responses