An invitation to explain (izaha davet) in tax is a procedure regulated in Article 370 of the Tax Procedure Law (Vergi Usul Kanunu, VUK) that gives the taxpayer an opportunity to explain a preliminary finding pointing to a tax loss. In an ordinary invitation to explain, the period for the explanation is 30 days from service of the letter. If the explanation is found sufficient, it may prevent a tax audit or referral to the assessment committee (takdir komisyonu) as regards the finding concerned; if it is found insufficient, it starts the stage of correcting the return and benefiting from the reduced tax loss penalty (vergi ziyaı cezası), under certain conditions.
This article focuses on which documents a person or company that receives an invitation letter should prepare, which time limit to follow and how to assess the next step. An invitation to explain is not a tax amnesty that closes all past periods. Risks outside the period, tax type and transaction stated in the letter must be assessed separately.
Under what conditions does an invitation to explain apply?
Under VUK Article 370, before a tax audit begins or the matter is referred to the assessment committee, the competent authority makes a preliminary finding on the basis of indications pointing to a tax loss. It is also one of the statutory conditions that no informant report (ihbar) on the same matter was received up to the date of the preliminary finding. Accordingly, not every request for information is automatically treated as an invitation to explain.
A taxpayer's filing a petition on his or her own initiative to be invited to explain does not oblige the administration to follow this route. The process runs through the acts of the competent preliminary finding and explanation evaluation commission. Whether the voluntary disclosure route should be considered for an omission that the taxpayer noticed on his or her own is a different matter.
How is the legal nature of the letter determined?
Besides the title of the document, its legal basis, the issuing unit, the subject of the preliminary finding, the period, the method of response and the service date must be examined. Under VUK Article 148, a request for information, the production of books during an audit, and an invitation to explain under Article 370 give rise to different obligations. A response to one letter may not stand in for a response to another.
The first task should be to keep the incoming letter and the service record, determine the last day, and preserve the relevant accounting records. In electronic service, the date on which the document is read and the date on which it is legally deemed served may not be the same. The time calendar should not be built on an SMS or email notification alone.
Within how many days must an invitation-to-explain letter be answered?
An explanation, written or oral, may be given within 30 days from service of an ordinary invitation-to-explain letter. It is important that an oral explanation be recorded in minutes and that its content be checked. The implementation guide of the Revenue Administration (Gelir İdaresi Başkanlığı, GİB) also describes the transactions for which an explanation may be submitted through the Digital Tax Office (Dijital Vergi Dairesi); the channel and technical conditions shown in the specific letter must be followed.
An explanation made in time is evaluated by the commission within 45 days at the latest. This evaluation period is not a preparation period added to the taxpayer's 30-day period for explanation. Nor does the lapse of 45 days automatically mean that all the allegations have been accepted.
| Stage | Start of the period | Basic action |
|---|---|---|
| Explanation in response to an ordinary invitation | Service of the invitation letter | Explanation and supporting documents within 30 days |
| Evaluation of the explanation | Making the explanation in time | The commission's evaluation within 45 days at the latest |
| Correction following an insufficient explanation | Service of the result letter | Required return and payment conditions within 30 days |
| Preliminary finding letter on forged or substantively misleading documents (SMİYB) | Service of the separate preliminary finding letter | The special 30-day route under VUK Article 370/b |
This table separates the ordinary process from the special process concerning the use of a forged or substantively misleading document. It cannot be assumed that every file contains two separate 30-day periods. In calculating the periods, the service procedure and the relevant time-limit provisions must be assessed together.
How is the explanation and document file prepared?
A good explanation does not consist merely of the sentence "our records are correct." It must show which transaction gave rise to the difference identified in the preliminary finding, how that transaction was reflected in the books and how it connects to the tax return. The administration's data and the taxpayer's record should be compared on the same period, currency and amount basis, with VAT either included or excluded on both sides.
Every claim should be matched with a document
For example, where a preliminary finding treats all bank receipts as sales revenue, the claims of loan drawdowns, loans given by a partner, refunds, transfers between accounts or money held in trust must each be documented separately. A bank receipt alone does not always explain the nature of a transaction; its connection to a contract, an accounting entry, counterparty information and a refund document should be established. This example is hypothetical; it does not mean that every bank movement is outside tax.
It is useful for the explanation file to contain a short chronology of events, a response to each item in the preliminary finding, a reconciliation table by period and numbered attachments. Why a document is relevant should be stated clearly. If there are data errors, such as the same invoice appearing in two different lists, the duplicate lines should be shown, not just the total difference.
How are contradictory explanations avoided?
The explanations submitted by company management, the accounting unit and the attorney should rest on the same set of records. It is risky to make a firm claim without reviewing the returns previously filed and the petitions submitted to the administration. Presenting a document that does not exist as though it did, or creating a document contrary to the facts afterwards, cannot be a method of defense.
If a document has not yet been obtained, the institution from which it was requested and what the existing records prove should be stated. Waiting for a document does not by itself extend the period. The delivery receipt, the list of attachments and the record showing that the file reached the administration should be kept.
What are the consequences if the explanation is accepted or found insufficient?
If it is found on the basis of the explanation that no tax loss was caused, the taxpayer is not subjected to an audit or referred to the assessment committee on account of the preliminary finding concerned. This result is limited to the finding evaluated. Another transaction, another period or a different finding that emerges later cannot be considered to fall within the same protection.
If the explanation is found insufficient, the 30-day stage running from service of the result letter becomes important. When the statutory conditions are met, such as filing the required returns or correcting the missing and incorrect returns, and paying the overdue tax together with the explanation surcharge within the same period, the tax loss penalty is applied at the rate of twenty percent. The tax itself does not disappear.
The explanation surcharge is tied to the rate in Article 51 of Law No. 6183. In the calculation, the rates in force for the relevant periods of delay must be taken into account. Applying the rate in an old guide to all periods may not be correct. The reduced penalty does not prevent the transaction from being audited in the future or, if the conditions exist, an additional assessment.
Failing to make an explanation in time does not automatically close the file. The administration's evaluation and subsequent letters should be followed; if the return and payment conditions are not met in time, the special advantage may be lost. Where a letter has been left unanswered, it should not be assumed, without looking at the content of a result letter sent later, that the same opportunity still exists.
What is the special rule on the use of forged or misleading documents?
Acts under VUK Article 359 are, in general, outside the scope of an ordinary invitation to explain. However, Article 370/b provides, within certain limits, a special preliminary finding procedure concerning the use of forged or substantively misleading documents. This procedure is not a general protection for those who issue forged documents.
The relevant amount for 2026 is TL 870,000. The statutory criterion is that the total amount of the documents used does not exceed the limit or, even if the limit is exceeded, does not exceed five percent of the total purchases of goods and services in the relevant year. The interpretation that both conditions must be met together is incorrect. For which year and for which preliminary finding the amount applies must be determined on the file.
On a letter of this special preliminary finding, a 30-day route applies for the return and payment. The explanation and result-letter stages of the ordinary invitation to explain cannot be carried over to it unchanged. Moreover, the use of the special route should not be read as automatically removing all consequences under criminal law.
How should the relationship between the invitation to explain, voluntary disclosure and litigation be understood?
After service of the invitation letter, the voluntary disclosure (pişmanlık) under VUK Article 371 cannot be used, limited to the finding that is the subject of the invitation. For this reason, the approach of "let me not answer the invitation first, then correct through voluntary disclosure" may cause a loss of rights. On the other hand, the conditions for another tax type or a different transaction are assessed separately.
An invitation-to-explain letter is not the same act as a tax and penalty notice (vergi ve ceza ihbarnamesi). The subject of a judicial application is determined by examining the finality and enforceable effect of the act. If a tax and penalty notice is served later, it should not be assumed that the correspondence in the explanation file protects the time limit for filing a lawsuit by itself. The effect of accepting a disputed amount by return on the right to sue should also be assessed before the correction is made.
Related articles: Voluntary Disclosure and Correction in Tax: Conditions, Correcting a Return and the Risk of Losing Rights; Invitation-to-Explain Procedure: Preliminary Finding Letter, Explanation Period, Correction Return and Conditions for the Reduced Penalty; What Should Be Done When an Invitation-to-Explain Letter Arrives? Time Limits, Documents and Tax Penalty; What Is Done If a Tax Notification Is Irregular? Notice, Payment Order and Time Limit for Suit.
Conclusion
Effective preparation in an invitation to explain begins with correctly determining the service date; it continues with explaining the difference in the preliminary finding through documents and assessing each subsequent letter separately. The ordinary invitation must be separated from the Article 370/b preliminary finding, the 30-day periods must be calculated from the correct starting point, and the return and the payment must be planned together. The file should be prepared in a form that allows the attorney and the certified public accountant (mali müşavir) to work from the same records.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the time limit for responding to an invitation to explain?
In an ordinary invitation to explain, it is 30 days from service of the letter. The commission's evaluation period is not added to this period. The stages in the section "Within how many days must an invitation-to-explain letter be answered?" should be followed separately. Related explanation
If the explanation is accepted, are all years removed from audit?
No. The result is limited to the finding to which the accepted explanation relates. The scope is explained in the section "What are the consequences if the explanation is accepted or found insufficient?" Related explanation
Can a voluntary disclosure application be made after the invitation letter?
The voluntary disclosure route is closed for the finding that is the subject of the invitation. Different events are assessed under their own conditions. The section "How should the relationship between the invitation to explain, voluntary disclosure and litigation be understood?" addresses this distinction. Related explanation
Is issuing a forged document also covered by the special invitation to explain?
The limited exception concerning use does not provide general protection for the act of issuing. The conditions in the section "What is the special rule on the use of forged or misleading documents?" must be assessed together. Related explanation
Sources
- Tax Procedure Law No. 213 (213 sayılı Vergi Usul Kanunu), Articles 3, 18, 359, 370 and 371; GİB legislation publication: Source text
- GİB, Guide to the Invitation to Explain Procedure (İzaha Davet Uygulaması Rehberi), October 2025, Publication No. 573; application of General Communiqué Serial No. 519 (519 Sıra No.lu Tebliğ): Source text
- Tax Procedure Law General Communiqué Serial No. 588 (588 Sıra No.lu Vergi Usul Kanunu Genel Tebliği), 2026 amounts: Source text