Board Members’ Financial Rights in the Context of Disguised Profit Transfers
Introduction
The concept of disguised profit transfer in joint stock companies, in its broadest meaning, covers the transfer of company assets to related parties and may occur in different ways. This concept is regulated in detail under capital markets legislation (both at the level of the law and in the secondary legislation). It is also the subject of many judicial decisions both under the scope of the good faith principle and the capital maintenance principle in the context of the general assembly resolutions of private joint stock companies.
In the decision of approval of the 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated November 2021, the Court found that the financial rights granted to the members of the board of directors, who were also the majority shareholders, were contrary to the rule of good faith, and the relevant general assembly resolution was annulled. This Newsletter will focus on whether or when the financial rights of the members of the board of directors constitute a disguised profit transfer in closed joint stock companies by focusing on Court of Cassation rulings.
It should be noted that this Newsletter article will explore the concept of disguised profit transfer from the perspective of company law, and no examination or evaluation will be made regarding tax law.
Board Members’ Financial Rights
Article 394 of the Turkish Commercial Code numbered 6102 (“TCC”), regarding the financial rights of the members of the board of directors, states that “Members of the board of directors may be paid attendance fees, wages, bonuses, premiums[1] and a share from the annual profit, provided that the amount is determined by the articles of association or the decision of the general assembly”. More than one type of financial right might be determined for the members of the board.[2]
The wording of Article 394 of the TCC contains two important differences, when compared to Article 333 of the repealed Commercial Code numbered 6762 (“Repealed Code”). The first of these is, while only a fee per meeting (attendance fee) was mentioned as financial right in the Repealed Code, Article 394 of the TCC lists different forms of financial rights. Secondly, pursuant to the Repealed Code, the attendance fee will be paid unless otherwise agreed in the articles of association, whereas under the TCC, a provision in the articles of association or a general assembly resolution is required for any financial right to be granted.
It is explicitly stated under Article 408(2)(b) of the TCC that the determination of financial rights is the exclusive authority of the general assembly. As a result of general assembly’s exclusive authority, financial rights may not be determined by the board of directors itself,[3] but must be determined by the decision of the general assembly.[4]
TCC Principles on Disguised Profit Transfer
The basic regulation on disguised profit transfer is Article 21 of the Capital Markets Law numbered 6362 (“CML”), which reads:
“Publicly held corporations and collective investment schemes and their subsidiaries and associates are prohibited from transferring income to real persons or legal entities with whom they have a direct or indirect relationship in terms of management, audit or capital by decreasing their profits or their assets or by preventing the increase of their profits or their assets via performing transactions such as making contracts or commercial practices containing different prices, fees, costs or conditions or producing a trading volume in violation of the conformity with market practices and comparability to similar transactions, prudence and honesty principles of commercial life.”
The scope of application of Article 21 of the CML covers publicly held partnerships and the affiliates and subsidiaries thereof. The TCC, which regulates private joint stock companies, does not contain an explicit regulation on disguised profit transfer. However, in order to understand whether the TCC contains the principles and mechanisms that will result in the prohibition of disguised profit transfer, the ratio legis of Article 21 of the CML should be examined. The aim of prohibiting the disguised profit transfer has been defined by scholars as preventing the transfer of company assets to a related party.[5]
It should be noted that disguised profit transfer is a concept that applies for shareholders, managers or other related third parties.[6] Beyond its appearance in the financial rights granted to the board of directors, disguised profit transfer might be examined at a wide spectrum, especially in the veiled payments and asymmetric legal transactions. Therefore, it may be argued that it is related to a number of provisions and principles under the TCC. However, since the main subject of this Newsletter article is whether the financial rights of the board members may constitute a disguised profit transfer, the capital maintenance principle and the principle of equal treatment will be discussed briefly.
The principle of capital maintenance,[7] which is among the founding principles of the TCC’s company law, may entail legal protection similar to what is aimed at by the prohibition of disguised profit transfer. The principle of capital maintenance, which also prohibits to return the paid in capital as regulated under Article 480(3) of the TCC, aims to prevent profit distribution made through veiled payments.
A precedent from comparative law perspective on such veiled payments is the Michigan Court of Appeals’ decision in Erdman v. Yolles. The court decided that the distribution of the cash obtained by the sale of company’s assets, to shareholders who were working in the company, was a veiled profit distribution even if the company referred to it as a “salary increase” rather than a profit distribution.[8]
Another key principle regarding the financial rights of board members who are also the majority shareholders, is the principle of equal treatment as regulated under Article 357 of the TCC.[9] This principle requires that the shareholders on equal terms be subjected to equal conditions. Although right to equal treatment is mainly discussed when a person is a party to a transaction not as a third-party but as a “shareholder”, it would also be applied in cases where dividend distributions (either implicitly or directly) were not made on pro rata basis (whether the capital contribution or any privilege on profit).[10]
Finally, the good-faith principle as a general principle in Article 2 of Turkish Civil Code numbered 4721, is a ground for annulment of general assembly resolutions under Article 445 of the TCC. Accordingly, general assembly resolutions that are contrary to the rule of good faith may be subject to an annulment sanction, in addition to resolutions that are contrary to the law or the articles of association of the company.
Court of Cassation’s Decision Dated 16.11.2021
By its decision dated 16.11.2021 and numbered E. 2020/5842, K. 2021/6256, 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation approved of the decision of the Istanbul 14th Regional Court of Appeal (“Court”) dated 17.06.2020 and numbered E. 2020/567, K. 2020/593 (“Decision”).[11] In this decision, the Court held that the financial rights determined to the members of the board of directors were contrary to the principle of good faith, since they constituted a disguised profit transfer. As a result, the annulment claim for the relevant general assembly decision was accepted.
The facts of the Decision are as follows: the plaintiff is the shareholder of a family owned company and was not elected to the new board of directors. At the subsequent general assembly meeting on 16.01.2015, a monthly fee of TRT 75,000 was determined for two board members, who also held the majority shares. The plaintiff claimed that the determined amount was excessive and that it would serve as a personal benefit to the majority shareholders, to the detriment of the minority shareholders, and, thus, was contrary to good faith.
The Court accepted the claims of the plaintiff and found the decision of the general assembly resulted in a disguised profit transfer contrary to the principle of good faith. In its examination, the Court referred to the case law of the Court of Cassation,[12] which sets out the criteria for determining the financial rights of board members. These are: (i) financial rights should be proportional to the effort and time spent by a member, (ii) amounts should be in line with the amounts in peer companies, (iii) decisions should comply with the financial situation and past practices of the company, and (iv) the right to dividend of the shareholders should not be violated.
The Court first examined the financial structure of the company. It referred to the fact that the company has been operating for almost fifteen years until the date of the general assembly, but during this period, it was decided to pay the attendance fee for less than two years. Furthermore, the company decided not to pay any attendance fee between 2009 and 2015. Therefore, the Court determined that the decision regarding the attendance fee was not in line with the past practices of the company.
The second observation was that the company was not conducting its main activity, was only generating non-operating income, and had closed the previous financial year with a loss. In the light of these findings, the Court concluded that the relevant general assembly decision did not comply with the financial situation of the company.
Finally, since the amount was found to be higher than the amounts at peer companies and there were no extraordinary effort was required for board members, the Court decided that the determined amount was in the nature of a disguised profit transfer, contrary to the principle of good faith.
Conclusion
Disguised profit transfer, although not explicitly regulated under the TCC, may be the subject of disputes with the alleged breach of capital maintenance principle the good faith principle. The principle of capital maintenance and the principle of equal treatment may shed light on whether a decision constitutes a transfer of the company’s assets to related parties, veiled as the financial rights of the board members. The Court of Cassation, in its case law, has determined the criteria regarding the determination of financial rights as the proportionality of the amount with the effort and time to be spent, similarity with the amounts at peer companies, and compliance with the financial structure and past practices of the company.
- For a comment that bonus and premium do actually have the same meaning and therefore it is redundant to state them separately, please see Kendigelen, Abuzer: Yeni Türk Ticaret Kanunu: Değişiklikler, Yenilikler ve İlk Tespitler, On İki Levha Yayıncılık, 2016, p. 282.
- Recital of the Article 394 of the TCC; also see Özer, Işık: Türk ve Yabancı Hukuk Sistemlerinde Anonim Şirket Yöneticilerinin Mali Hakları, Adalet Yayınevi, 2013, p. 219.
- However, Moroğlu suggested, de lege feranda, it should be clearly stated in Article 394 of the TCC that for the cases when the general assembly determined bonuses, premiums or profit share as a sum for the entire board, that the board of directors is authorized to decide on the distribution among the members. Moroğlu, Erdoğan: Türk Ticaret Kanunu Tasarısı ile Yürürlük ve Uygulama Kanunu Tasarısı Taslağı, Değerlendirme ve Öneriler, TBB Yayınları, 2006, p. 187.
- As a difference from other financial rights, only a decision of the general assembly alone will not be sufficient for the profit share decision, and if profit share is to be paid to the board members in accordance with section339(2)(f) of the TCC, it must be clearly agreed in the articles of association. Kendigelen, s. 282.
- Manavgat, Çağlar: “Örtülü Kazanç Aktarımının Ortaklıklar Topluluğu Düzenlemelerindeki Sınırları” BATİDER, 31st Volume, 2015, p. 99.
- For detailed explanations on related party transactions, please see Cankat, Rifat: Anonim Ortaklıklar Hukukunda İlişkili Taraf İşlemleri, On İki Levha Yayıncılık, 2022.
- This principle may be referred to among Turkish law scholars as “capital maintenance” or “asset maintenance.” For more detail in the choice of term and for detailed explanations, please see Toraman Çolgar, Emek: Şirkete Borçlanma Yasağı, On İki Levha Yayıncılık, 2019, p. 10 ff.
- For the summary of the decision in Turkish, please see Toraman Çolgar, p. 54. For the full text of the decision, please see https://www.leagle.com/decision/197565662michapp5941584 (access date: 28.02.2022).
- For detailed explanations on right to equal treatment, please see Erdem, H. Ercüment: “Türk ve İsviçre Hukuklarında Eşit İşlem İlkesi”, İsviçre Borçlar Kanunu’nun İktibasının 80. Yılında İsviçre Borçlar Hukuku’nun Türk Ticaret Hukuku’na Etkileri, İstanbul, Vedat, 2009.
- Günay, Ece Deniz: Sermaye Piyasası Hukuku'nda Örtülü Kazanç Aktarımı ve Türk Ticaret Kanunu Açısından Değerlendirilmesi, On İki Levha Yayıncılık, 2018, p. 143.
- For the full text of the decision in Turkish, please see https://www.lexpera.com.tr/ictihat/bolge-adliye-mahkemesi/istanbul-bam14-hd-e-2020-567-k-2020-593-t-17-6-2020 (access date: 28.02.2022).
- Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber decision numbered E. 2014/18093, K. 2015/12978 and dated 03.12.2015, https://www.lexpera.com.tr/ictihat/yargitay/11-hukuk-dairesi-e-2014-18093-k-2015-12978-t-3-12-2015 (access date: 28.02.2022).
All rights of this article are reserved. This article may not be used, reproduced, copied, published, distributed, or otherwise disseminated without quotation or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm's written consent. Any content created without citing the resource or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm’s written consent is regularly tracked, and legal action will be taken in case of violation.
Other Contents
The Turkish automobile and light commercial vehicle market left the 2000s behind with steadily rising sales figures and the 2010s with high and stable sales figures as well. In this period, the growth of the market was driven not only by high purchase power but also by easy access to credit and product diversity...
Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 ("TCC") provides the right to exit from the company to the shareholders of limited liability companies and the right to squeeze out the shareholder from the company, unlike the structure of joint stock companies, with the exit and squeeze out institutions specially regulated for...
Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (“TCC”) preserves the rule that the board of directors shall manage and represent joint stock companies. The TCC regulates how the power of representation shall be exercised, the registration and announcement of the persons authorized to represent, the transfer of the...
Ordinary partnerships are regulated under Turkish Law between Articles 620 and 645 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (“TCO” or the “Code”). The Law defines an ordinary partnership contract as a contract where two or more persons undertake to combine their labour or property to achieve a common...
Merger and acquisition processes are one of the legal processes that most seriously affect the identities and legal status of companies. After the completion of legal, tax, financial and operational due diligence reports, the parties initiate the negotiation process in case they reach an agreement on proceeding with the...
A popular business model for expanding market reach and brand recognition worldwide is franchising. Despite being less common than distribution agreements in the form of mono-brand store agreements, franchising is another significant method for extending luxury brands' distribution networks. Luxury brands use...
In the decision dated 14.06.2022 and numbered 2019/149 E. 2022/894 K., the Court of Cassation General Assembly (“CCGA”) evaluated the theory of piercing the corporate veil in the context of the relationship between the guarantor and the borrowing company in a dispute arising from a loan agreement...
The European Union continues to be an important investment center for foreign investors. According to data from the European Commission's "Second Annual Report on the monitoring of foreign direct investment in the European Union", the European Union received €117 billion worth of foreign direct investment in...
Transfer of shares is arguably the first legal transaction that comes to mind among the legal transactions regarding the shares of a capital company, and the most common transaction in practice. However, the shares of a capital company may also be subject to various transactions, other than share purchase...
Law No. 6563 on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce (E-commerce Law or Law) has recently undergone a radical change in order to regulate the behavior of the players in the rapidly growing and developing e-commerce sector. The new regulations that came into force as of January 1, 2023 envisage important...
On 11 June 2021, the German Federal Parliament approved the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (Lieferkettensorgfaltsgesetz) (“Act”) which affects not only German entities but also their suppliers in foreign countries (including Turkish entities). The main focus of the Act, which entered into force on...
On 21 December 2007, the Federal Council approved the draft revision of the Swiss Code of Obligations, which also includes amendments to company law. On 28 November 2014, the Federal Council referred the draft revision for consultation. Following extensive discussions and a long enactment process, the...
The Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 ("TCC") regulates maritime trade contracts under the fourth part of the fifth book of the Code. Among the types of contracts regulated in this section, the most frequently used contract in international maritime transport practice is the freight contract regulated under...
Prohibition on hidden income shifting is one of the most important issues that is broadly regulated under Capital Markets Law No. 6362 (“CML”). In conjunction with CML Article 21, which has a broader context than Article 15 of the abrogated Capital Markets Law No. 2499, another significant step has been taken...
As a result of developing commercial activities and large-scale investments, especially concluded in the fields of construction, energy and mining, companies are seeking to participate in these investments by uniting their powers and expertise to take advantage of financial opportunities together. This tendency...
The Turkish Commercial Code (“TCC” or “Law”) has enabled companies to apply different structural models and to implement new legal formations by including spin-off provisions to its Article 159 et seq. In accordance with the provisions of the law, companies may transfer a certain element, or elements, of their...
The International Federation of Consulting Engineers is a professional association established in 1913, known as the FIDIC (Fédération Internationale Des Ingénieurs-Counseils). Its members are duly elected from consultant-engineer associations of various countries, and membership to the association is...
Incoterms are a set of rules introduced by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) to explain the commercial terms that are widely used in international trade. The purpose of Incoterms rules is to facilitate and expedite international trade in a safe and secure manner...
The regulation applicable to all Turkish ports prepared by the Ministry of Transport, Maritime Affairs and Communications that entered into force after being published in the official gazette on October 31, 2012 (˝the Regulation˝), consolidates all the bylaws, regulations and instructions in a single Regulation...
As a rule, rights and obligations arising from an agreement have legal consequences only between the creditor and the debtor which are parties to the agreement. This principle is referred to as "privity of contract." In general, contracts for the benefit of third parties, where the fulfillment of an...
The rules of e-commerce, which grow and develop with the digitalizing world, are changing. E-commerce has become the driving force of the digital economy. However, considering the growth rate of e-commerce and the transformation it has undergone in a short time, it is obvious that some...
The dissolution of a company is a specific type of dissolution, which results in the cancellation of the legal personality which was gained by registration at incorporation. The specific proceeding which leads to the dissolution, and thus, the termination of a company upon the constitutive decision...
Companies in which shares or authority to manage is held by members of a family are considered to be “family businesses”. Family members can hold shares that control the company, as well as retain management authority. Having a family business means opportunity, security and income for...
Turkey ratified the Convention on the Contract for International Carriage of Goods by Road (“CMR”) in accordance with Act No. 3939 dated 7 December 1993, and the CMR entered into force in Turkey on 31 October 1995. In accordance with Article 1 / 1 of the CMR, the carriage of goods by road...
Ordinary partnerships are governed by Article 620 et seq. of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (“TCO”). An ordinary partnership agreement is defined as an agreement whereby two or more persons undertake to join efforts and/or goods to reach a common goal...
Share subscription agreements, which are commonly encountered in start-up investments, set out the terms and conditions of an investor’s participation in a company as a shareholder by subscribing the new shares issued in a capital increase...
The electronic signature, which has the same legal consequences as wet signatures if it meets certain conditions, has taken its place in many legal systems and has enhanced commercial life. Although there are various types and applications in different legal systems...
INCOTERMS are a set of rules introduced by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) to explain the commercial terms that are widely used in international trade. The purpose of the Incoterms rules is to contribute to and facilitate the safe and swift conduct of international trade...