Problems with the Income Value Basis in Agricultural Lands Subject to Inheritance
Sümeyye Tuba KorkusuzAgreement among heirs is essential when divvying up inherited agricultural lands. If the heirs cannot agree, the problem is resolved through litigation. In accordance with Article 657/II of Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 and Article 8/C of Law No. 5403 on Soil Conservation and Land Use, a judge must allocate agricultural lands to competent heirs based on the income value. The provision on the definition of the income value of agricultural lands in the Regulation on the Transfer of Ownership of Agricultural Land was amended at the end of 2021. Although the regulation contains many new provisions, especially regarding the use of the income capitalization method to calculate the value, the adoption of this method is accompanied by many problems. This is because using the income capitalization method provides a value for agricultural lands that is considerably lower than the market (i.e., real/fair market) value, especially due to the current high inflation in Türkiye. Meanwhile, agricultural land is quite commonly undervalued due to inaccurately determining the average annual net income and capitalization interest rates. The predominant view in the doctrine is that the acceptance of the income-based value instead of the actual value leads to a violation of interest for the heirs other than the heir to whom the agricultural lands are dedicated. In addition, the competent heir to whom the agricultural land is allocated based on the estimate potential income value can make a profit by disposing of the agricultural land. This study aims to identify the problems arising from the allocation of agricultural lands subject to inheritance based on value obtained using the income capitalization method. The study aims to ensure a balance among heirs when divvying up agricultural lands. In this context, the study present solutions to the discussed problems.
Mirasa Konu Tarımsal Arazilerde Gelir Esaslı Değerin Yarattığı Sorunlar
Sümeyye Tuba KorkusuzTarımsal arazilerin paylaşılmasında mirasçıların anlaşması asıldır. Mirasçıların anlaşamadığı takdirde sorun, dava yolu ile çözülür. 4721 sayılı Türk Medeni Kanunu m. 657/II ve 5403 sayılı Toprak Koruma ve Arazi Kullanımı Kanunu’nun 8/C maddesi gereğince hâkim, tarımsal arazileri ehil mirasçılara gelir değeri üzerinden özgülemelidir. Tarımsal Arazilerin Mülkiyetinin Devrine İlişkin Yönetmelik’teki tarımsal arazilerin gelir değeri tanımını içeren hüküm, 2021 yılının sonunda değiştirilmiştir. Yönetmelik, özellikle gelir kapitalizasyonu yöntemi ile elde edilen değer hesaplamasına ilişkin birçok yeni hüküm içermesine rağmen, bu yöntemin benimsenmesi birçok sorunu beraberinde getirmektedir. Zira tarımsal arazilerin gelir yöntemi ile elde edilen değeri, özellikle günümüzdeki yüksek enflasyon sebebiyle piyasa (gerçek, sürüm, rayiç) değerine göre oldukça düşük kalmaktadır. Öte yandan yıllık ortalama net gelir ve kapitalizasyon faiz oranlarının hatalı tespit edilmesi sebebiyle tarımsal arazilerin değerinin düşük hesaplanması oldukça yaygındır. Doktrindeki baskın görüş, gerçek değer yerine gelir esaslı değerin kabul edilmesinin, tarımsal arazilerin özgülendiği mirasçı dışında kalan mirasçılar bakımından menfaat ihlaline yol açtığı şeklindedir. Bunun yanı sıra tarımsal arazi kendisine gelir esaslı değer üzerinden özgülenen ehil mirasçının tarım arazisi üzerinde tasarruf ederek kâr elde etmesi mümkündür. Bu çalışmada, mirasa konu tarımsal arazilerin gelir kapitalizasyonu yöntemiyle ulaşılan değer üzerinden özgülenmesi sebebiyle ortaya çıkan sorunlar tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Çalışma, tarımsal arazilerin paylaşımında mirasçılar arasında denge sağlanması amacını taşımaktadır. Bu bağlamda tartışılan sorunlara ilişkin çözüm önerileri sunulmuştur.
Articles 659-668 of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TCC) had regulated the provisions on the sharing of inheritance in inheritance cases involving agricultural lands or agricultural enterprises. However, Law No. 6537 repealed these relevant articles of the TCC and moved the regulations of these cases under the Soil Conservation and Land Use Law No. 5403 (SCLUL). As a rule, immovables are allocated to one of the heirs based on the actual (market, current) value at the time of distributing the inheritance. Inheritance cases involving agricultural lands are an exception, as the property is allocated based on the income value (Art. 657 TCC, Art. 8/C, f. 2/a of the SCLUL). The definition and calculation of the income-based value is not legally regulated but provisions on how to do this are made in the Regulation on the Transfer of Ownership of Agricultural Lands (RTOAL). In 2014, the regulations regarding the TCC provisions on agricultural immovables in SCLUL also detailed the income value basis. In December 2021, many changes were also made to the provisions in RTOAL on how agricultural lands are to be evaluated.
The income-based value of agricultural land is often considerably lower than its real (market/fair) value. This study presents solutions to the existing problems regarding how agricultural lands subject to inheritance laws are allocated to heirs based on income evaluations. The difference in value between the income-based evaluation and market value creates a breach of interest, especially for the heirs other than the one to whom the agricultural land is to be allocated. However, this study is of the opinion that this situation should be evaluated within the framework of the purposes for which the income capitalization method was adopted, because applying the value obtained using the income capitalization method is more appropriate with regard to maintaining objectivity, protecting the financial status of the competent heir to whom the agricultural land is allocated, and ensuring in relation to this continuity in the agricultural system. However, adopting the income capitalization method when allocating agricultural lands does not justify the gap that exists between the incomebased value and the market value. In this respect, importance is had in updating the data from the Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat) and Ministry over shorter time frames and in increasing the number of academic studies to be conducted in the region in order to determine the correct capitalization interest rate and to evaluate the enhancement factors regarding objective value. In addition, having experts be experts in their field and make comparisons on the market value of a large number of similar agricultural lands based on the market approach and annual net income would be more appropriate in order to create a balance between the income-based and actual market values.
The legislation contains no provision limiting a competent heir to whom agricultural land has been allocated from transferring its ownership at market value. In other words, a competent heir who has been allocated agricultural land based on the estimated income value may transfer said land to a third party subject to a barter agreement or put it up as capital in a company. Therefore, this competent heir will be able to obtain as much profit as the difference between the income-based value and the value determined in the relevant agreement under which the obligation to transfer ownership is undertaken. In this context, the claim should be accepted that profit has been purposefully obtained by interpreting the provision of the Law on the increase in value due to non-agricultural use (Art. 8/C/V TKAKK). However, this article is of the opinion that regulating a legislative provision would be more appropriate in which the profit to be obtained due to the transfer of agricultural land by a competent heir can also be claimed by the other heirs in proportion to their inheritance shares.
In addition to all these suggestions, legislators should consider giving the outright ownership of agricultural lands to all heirs by granting usufruct rights to the competent heir and deducting the value of the usufruct right from the inheritance share. Choosing this method will both prevent the violation of the interests of other heirs due to agricultural lands not being allocated at their actual market value as well as ensure continuity in agriculture wherein competent heirs actually cultivate the agricultural lands. However, calculating the usufruct value should not be forgotten to also fall within the scope of evaluation. Therefore,the problems that arise when making income-based evaluations will obviously also arise with regard to the acceptance of usufruct rights. In addition, because inheritance shares not being terminated when applying usufruct rights may increase the likelihood of disputes, more problems are likely to occur than when using the income capitalization method. As a result, this study believes that, instead of granting usufruct rights to competent heirs regarding agricultural lands subject to inheritance, allocation should be made based on the value obtained by the income capitalization method within the scope of the solution proposals presented in the study.
