Real Estate Valuation System and Professionalisation in Türkiye

The institutionalisation of valuation studies and the establishment of real estate departments at universities commenced in the 1900s. A substantial body of knowledge concerning professional standards and institutionalisation has since been accumulated across many countries. Currently, the formulation of uniform standards on a global scale, including those pertinent to real estate measurement, is widely accepted. However, in Türkiye, real estate and asset valuation studies diverge significantly from international standards, necessitating enhancements in quality. Until the early 2000s, valuation was predominantly pursued as a “secondary activity” by various professional disciplines, with a neglect of professionalisation and institutionalisation. To address valuation issues encountered within the money and capital markets, the Capital Markets Board (CMB) of Türkiye issued a Communiqué on August 12, 2001, which delineated licensed valuers and valuation companies and instituted licensing regulations. During the 2000s, the expansion of housing and real estate finance, infrastructure projects, urban transformation, real estate investment trusts (REITs), asset management, and real estate-based capital market instruments—propelled by macroeconomic stability—necessitated rational valuation of real estate, projects, related rights, and movable properties. The Housing Finance System Law No. 5582 of 2007 led to the establishment of the Turkish Association of Appraisers (TDUB), a professional organisation endowed with the character of a public institution, thereby ensuring the membership of valuation experts and companies within the Association and the supervision of their work. Currently, there are 154 valuation companies licensed by the CMB and approximately 18,000 licensed valuers. Excluding periods of economic crisis, between 1.2 and 1.5 million valuation reports are generated annually. Roughly 37% of the total 2 million lawsuits filed in civil courts are related to real estate, with an average of two reports obtained per case. Most expert witness reports presented in courts do not adhere to valuation science or international standards. Despite the enactment of Law No. 6754 on Expert Witnessing, there has been no significant improvement in the quality of reporting, thus highlighting the necessity to develop new methods and approaches within this discipline. Furthermore, objectives include organising the real estate valuation system within the public sector, grounding values for taxes and fees on valuation reports, and thereby reducing tax loss and evasion. It appears essential to unify valuation practices stipulated in legal regulations under a single authority, to reinforce the public valuation organisation, and to establish a public authority responsible for monitoring and evaluating the activities of private individuals and institutions.