{"id":3486,"date":"2026-04-01T14:24:58","date_gmt":"2026-04-01T11:24:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/?p=3486"},"modified":"2026-04-22T09:16:35","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T06:16:35","slug":"legal-qualification-of-income-obtained-through-airbnb-and-its-evaluation-in-terms-of-turkish-tax-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/legal-qualification-of-income-obtained-through-airbnb-and-its-evaluation-in-terms-of-turkish-tax-law\/","title":{"rendered":"LEGAL QUALIFICATION OF INCOME OBTAINED THROUGH AIRBNB AND ITS EVALUATION IN TERMS OF TURKISH TAX LAW"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Ay\u00e7a AK\u00c7AY<\/strong>
Lawyer<\/td>		Deniz DA\u011eDEV\u0130REN<\/strong>
Trainee Lawyer<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

ABSTRACT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the proliferation of short-term residential rentals through platforms such as Airbnb, the question of whether such income constitutes rental income or commercial profit has become central to practice; particularly in daily or weekly rentals by natural persons, divergences of opinion between the tax administration and taxpayers have transformed into concrete tax disputes. Short-term accommodation activities conducted through Airbnb and similar digital platforms thereby give rise to legal qualification issues both in terms of private law and tax law. The absence of a clear and uniform regulation specific to the taxation of these activities in Turkish tax legislation leads to divergences of opinion in doctrine and practice regarding whether income obtained through Airbnb should be assessed within the scope of immovable capital income, commercial profit, or incidental income. In this article, the legal nature of the Airbnb business model is first established; the position of short-term accommodation activities in Turkish law is examined, and subsequently, how income obtained through Airbnb should be taxed within the framework of the Income Tax Law, Tax Procedure Law, and Value Added Tax legislation is addressed in detail. Furthermore, the administration’s private rulings on the subject, audit practices encountered in implementation, and emerging legal uncertainties are evaluated; finally, legislative and practical solution proposals aimed at resolving existing problems are included.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keywords:<\/strong> Airbnb, Digital Platforms, Short-Term Accommodation, Immovable Capital Income, Commercial Profit, Taxation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In recent years, the acceleration of digitalisation and the proliferation of the sharing economy have given rise to new forms of economic activity that challenge the boundaries of classical legal and tax concepts. In particular, services provided through digital platforms do not entirely correspond with traditional legal relationship types; this situation leads to significant uncertainties both in terms of legal qualification and taxation. As Airbnb enables individuals to allocate their owned or usufructuary immovable properties to third parties on a short-term basis, short-term residential rentals have become one of the most visible headings of legal qualification debates in Turkey. Although the use of Airbnb is increasingly widespread in Turkey, the absence of a clear legal framework directly addressing the tax qualification and income element distinction of income obtained from short-term accommodation activities creates serious problems in practice. In the current situation, assessment is made through classical income elements regulated in the Income Tax Law; this leads to the same nature activities being taxed differently, administrative disputes, and the impairment of legal predictability for taxpayers. This study aims to address the legal and tax nature of income obtained through Airbnb in light of existing legislation, administrative practices, and views in doctrine; to identify emerging problem areas; and to present solution proposals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I. LEGAL NATURE OF AIRBNB ACTIVITY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A. Characteristics of the Airbnb Business Model<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Airbnb, in the legal sense, is established upon an intermediation system that brings together immovable property owners or users with persons seeking accommodation through a digital platform, rather than directly providing an accommodation service. The platform provides the technical infrastructure enabling the establishment of contractual relationships between the parties; in return for this service, it collects a certain commission fee. In this respect, Airbnb is qualified as a platform conducting digital intermediation activity rather than as a hotel enterprise or accommodation service provider in the classical sense.\u00b9 However, even though the platform’s legal role is limited to intermediation, considering elements such as the nature of activities conducted through the platform, the shortness of accommodation duration, the continuity of the activity, and the level of organisation, it may not be possible to assess the legal nature of the income obtained merely as immovable property rental for every concrete case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

B. The Position of Short-Term Accommodation Activity in Turkish Law<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although the lease contract in the Turkish Code of Obligations also covers short-term rentals, in practice it has predominantly been shaped through long-term and continuous usage relationships. Short-term accommodation activities conducted through Airbnb are mostly limited to a few days and differ from the characteristics of classical lease contracts. Particularly in cases where cleaning services, key delivery, customer relationship management, and the conduct of accommodation within a professional organisation are involved, the activity is accepted to acquire the nature of accommodation service or commercial activity rather than remaining a mere lease relationship.\u00b2 Therefore, the legal nature of Airbnb activity must be determined by considering the scope, continuity, and organisation level of the activity in each concrete case.\u00b3\u2074<\/p>\n\n\n\n

II. CLASSIFICATION OF AIRBNB INCOME IN TERMS OF INCOME TAX LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A. Assessment as Immovable Capital Income<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pursuant to Article 70 of the Income Tax Law No. 193, income obtained from the rental of immovable properties is taxed as immovable capital income. In cases where income obtained through Airbnb does not exhibit continuity and does not contain an organisation element, it is possible to assess it within this scope.\u00b3 In this case, taxpayers can benefit from the exemption and declaration provisions related to immovable capital income. However, in cases of short-term and frequently repeated rentals and the evaluation of multiple immovable properties through Airbnb, it is seen that the boundaries of the classical immovable capital income understanding are reached. At this point, not only the source of income but also the manner of execution of the activity becomes determinative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

B. Assessment as Commercial Profit<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pursuant to Article 37 of the Income Tax Law, commercial profit encompasses profits arising from all kinds of commercial and industrial activities. In cases where Airbnb activity exhibits continuity, is conducted within a certain organisation, and the aim of obtaining profit is at the forefront, it is possible to assess this activity as commercial profit.\u2074 It is observed that the administration, in practice, makes assessments in the direction of commercial profit in situations such as the operation of multiple immovable properties through Airbnb, utilisation of professional management services, or provision of uninterrupted accommodation throughout the year. In these cases, establishment of taxpayership, keeping of books, and fulfilment of tax obligations related to commercial profit are required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

C. Possibility of Incidental Income<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Incidental income is regulated in the Income Tax Law as income obtained from activities that do not exhibit continuity and are not habitual. Due to the nature of Airbnb activity exhibiting a repetitive structure and mostly containing a certain continuity, its assessment within the scope of incidental income finds limited acceptance in doctrine.\u2075<\/p>\n\n\n\n

III. TAX PROCEDURE LAW AND DIMENSION OF IMPLEMENTATION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Persons obtaining income through Airbnb must have income tax taxpayership established according to the nature of the activity. Failure to establish taxpayership in cases assessed as commercial profit brings tax loss penalties and irregularity sanctions into question. Furthermore, pursuant to the Tax Procedure Law No. 213, taxpayers obtaining commercial profit are obliged to comply with document order and fulfil bookkeeping obligations. In recent years, the strengthening of audit mechanisms aimed at monitoring income obtained from digital platforms, together with examinations made through bank records and payment systems, has facilitated the determination of Airbnb income; this situation has also increased risks of retrospective assessments.\u2076<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IV. EVALUATION IN TERMS OF VAT AND OTHER TAXES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the event that Airbnb activity is assessed as commercial profit, value added tax taxpayership may also come into question. Furthermore, in cases where short-term accommodation activity acquires the nature of accommodation service or accommodation facility in the concrete case, accommodation tax and notification obligations towards municipalities must also be separately evaluated. Violation of these obligations may lead to administrative fines and additional tax sanctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

V. TAXATION OF AIRBNB ACTIVITIES IN LIGHT OF COURT DECISIONS AND CURRENT PRECEDENTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In recent periods, a distinct increase has been observed in the number of decisions by the Council of State that question the established practices and administrative interpretations of the tax administration and produce results in favour of taxpayers. Indeed, precedents regarding special fund practices, guarantee services, offsetting of previous year losses in domestic minimum corporate tax, and the benefits provided to partners who do not pay capital commitment debt being assessed within the scope of financing service and thus tax assessment not being able to be made constitute concrete examples of this tendency. Within this scope, the most recent and most striking effect created by the Council of State towards the tax administration concerns the taxation of short-term residential rentals conducted through Airbnb and similar digital platforms. The basis of the dispute is formed by the question of whether income obtained by natural persons through renting their owned residences via the Airbnb system on daily, weekly, or monthly bases is subject to income tax and value added tax within the scope of commercial profit. The tax administration, within the framework of the approach it has long adopted, has asserted that making residences available for use by different persons on a daily or monthly basis in a continuous manner, with the aim of obtaining more income compared to income to be obtained through long-term rental of immovable properties; the delivery of the residence to the tenant, its retrieval at the end of the accommodation period, and making it ready for reuse again requires a certain organisation. With this rationale, it has expressed the view that the activities of homeowners conducting daily, weekly, or monthly rentals through the Airbnb system or individually should be assessed as commercial activity; within this scope, establishment of taxpayership and taxation in terms of income tax and VAT pursuant to commercial profit provisions is mandatory.\u2077 In line with this approach of the tax administration, taxpayership has been established retrospectively for many natural persons conducting short-term rentals through Airbnb and similar platforms; tax loss penalised assessments have been made in terms of income tax and value added tax. Taxpayers subjected to said assessments have brought the matter to court with claims that these rental activities cannot be assessed as commercial profit and therefore income tax and value added tax cannot be calculated; within this framework, hundreds of lawsuits have been filed across the country. The Council of State, in one of the disputes referred to it, has clearly rejected this approach of the tax administration with the decision of the Council of State 3rd Chamber dated 14.04.2025 and numbered E.2024\/6160, K.2025\/1856. In the aforementioned decision, the Council of State emphasised that for an activity to be qualified as commercial profit, the rental must be conducted within a commercial organisation such as hotel, apart, or pension enterprise and must include additional services such as breakfast, meals, ironing, and daily cleaning.\u2078 According to the Council of State, without such a commercial organisation, renting immovable properties through the platform called Airbnb on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis merely for the purpose of obtaining more income does not change the legal nature of the income obtained; income arising from these activities must be accepted as immovable capital income. With this rationale, the Council of State found tax loss penalised income tax and temporary tax assessments unlawful and rejected the administration’s appeal request. On the other hand, another controversial area regarding Airbnb activities is the determination of the value added tax rate. The tax administration has asserted, within the framework of Law No. 7464 and relevant regulation provisions, that since residences for which “Residence Permit for Touristic Rental” is obtained from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism are not included among accommodation facilities listed in the Regulation on Qualifications of Tourism Facilities, overnight services provided in these residences cannot be subject to reduced value added tax rate and value added tax should be applied at the general rate.\u2079 A remarkable evaluation in favour of taxpayers on this subject has been presented with the decision of the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court First Tax Court Chamber dated 30.09.2025 and numbered E.2025\/1489, K.2025\/1911. In the aforementioned decision, the Court stated that there is no clear regulation in the VAT Law and relevant Council of Ministers Decrees requiring the possession of a tourism enterprise certificate or workplace opening and operating licence for the application of reduced value added tax rate; furthermore, noting that no concrete determination was made by the administration that the plaintiff did not provide accommodation service, it reached the conclusion that the revenue excluded from declaration should be subject to reduced value added tax rate.\u00b9\u2070 However, the said decision has not yet become final and is before the Council of State at the appeal review stage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CONCLUSION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The acceleration of digitalisation has made the incompatibility between classical tax law concepts and new forms of economic activity more visible; in particular, the legal and tax nature of short-term residential rentals conducted through Airbnb and similar platforms has become the subject of intense debates both in practice and before judicial authorities. The absence of a clear and uniform regulation regarding the tax qualification of income obtained from these activities in Turkish tax legislation has led the tax administration to develop practices based on broad interpretations; these practices have caused serious legal uncertainties and unpredictable results for taxpayers. The tax administration, based on the facts that short-term rentals exhibit continuity and carry the aim of obtaining higher income, has assessed these activities within the scope of commercial profit; in this direction, it has adopted a rather harsh taxation practice through retrospective taxpayership establishments and tax loss penalised assessments. However, decisions given by the Council of State in recent periods have clearly revealed the legal boundaries of this approach; in particular, it has explicitly emphasised the indispensability of the “commercial organisation” element for commercial profit qualification. The decision of the Council of State 3rd Chamber dated 14.04.2025 and numbered E.2024\/6160, K.2025\/1856 has clearly revealed that in cases where income obtained from short-term residential rentals is obtained merely for the purpose of providing more profit and without being within a commercial organisation, the legal nature of this income does not change and it must be assessed as immovable capital income. This decision should be considered not only for the resolution of the concrete dispute but also as an important precedent prioritising legal security against the generalising and expanding taxation approach long adopted by the administration. On the other hand, debates regarding the value added tax rate to be applied to short-term rentals have not yet achieved full uniformity in light of both the administration’s private rulings and regional administrative court decisions. In particular, the issue of whether the reduced value added tax rate can be applied depending on whether residences are considered “accommodation facilities” is subject to different interpretations in practice; this situation creates significant tax risks for both natural persons and corporate structures. Although the decision given by the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court and not yet finalised creates a new discussion ground in favour of taxpayers in this area, the decision to be given by the Council of State will be determinative for the final evaluation. Within this framework, it is clear that in the taxation of short-term residential rentals conducted through Airbnb and similar platforms, the concrete characteristics of the activity, particularly the organisation structure, additional services provided, and whether it bears the nature of an enterprise, must be taken as basis. It is of great importance for both ensuring legal security and increasing voluntary tax compliance that the tax administration, instead of categorically qualifying these activities as commercial profit, adopts a more measured and case-based evaluation approach in line with the boundaries drawn in Council of State precedents. Consequently, the elimination of existing uncertainties regarding the taxation of short-term residential rentals should be removed from being an area shaped only by court decisions and should be supported with a clear, predictable, and systematic legal regulation. Considering the permanent nature of the digital platform economy, legislative work to be carried out in this area will both clarify the legal situation of taxpayers and contribute to the reduction of disputes between the administration and taxpayers. The Council of State’s recent precedents constitute a fundamental reference point directing practice that determines the direction of this process and clearly draws legal boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

\u00b9 OECD, “The Sharing and Gig Economy: Effective Taxation of Platform Sellers”, 2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00b2 K\u0131z\u0131lot, \u015e., “Gelir Vergisi Kanunu Uygulamas\u0131”, Ankara, 2022, p. 412.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00b3 Income Tax Law Art. 70.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2074 Income Tax Law Art. 37<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2075 Y\u0131lmaz, B., “Dijital Platform Gelirlerinin Vergilendirilmesi”, Vergi Sorunlar\u0131 Dergisi, 2021, p. 85 et seq.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2076 Tax Procedure Law Art. 127; Ministry of Treasury and Finance digital economy audit reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2077 Revenue Administration Istanbul Tax Office Presidency’s special ruling dated 19.02.2016 and numbered 62030549-120[40-2014\/891]-14193; Bal\u0131kesir Tax Office Presidency’s special ruling dated 08.09.2020 and numbered 46480499-120.01.01[2018\/1661]-E.63499.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2078 Council of State 3rd Chamber’s decision dated 14.04.2025 and numbered E.2024\/6160, K.2025\/1856<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2079 Revenue Administration \u0130zmir Tax Office’s special ruling dated 17.09.2024 and numbered E-21152195-130[28-2024.7318]-550725<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00b9\u2070 Istanbul Regional Administrative Court First Tax Court Chamber’s decision dated 30.09.2025 and numbered E.2025\/1489, K.2025\/1911<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ay\u00e7a AK\u00c7AY Lawyer Deniz DA\u011eDEV\u0130REN Trainee Lawyer ABSTRACT With the proliferation of short-term residential rentals through platforms such as Airbnb, the question […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[44,45,46,47,48],"class_list":["post-3486","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-makale","tag-airbnb","tag-digital-platforms","tag-immovable-capital-income","tag-short-term-accommodation","tag-taxation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3486","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3486"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3486\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3602,"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3486\/revisions\/3602"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3486"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3486"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nazali.av.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3486"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}