Precautionary assessment and provisional attachment in the protection of public receivables

Public receivables, depending on the sovereign power and law of the State, are taxes, duties, fees, fines, tax penalties and other provisions related to these, and other receivables aimed at the fulfillment of public expenditures. The necessity of continuous maintenance of public services necessitates the collection of public receivables without delay. While Law No. 6183, determines the principles for the collection and follow-up of public receivables, it also foresees some assurance measures to protect these receivables. Two of the assurance measures for the protection of public receivables regulated in Law No. 6183 are precautionary assessment (Law No. 6183, art. 17-20) and provisional attachment (Law No. 6183, art. 13-16). Precautionary accrual is the accrual process carried out without completing the assessment and notification stages of the taxpayer's public debts that have not yet been accrued due to taxes and duties within the scope of Law No. 213, as well as their increases and penalties. Precautionary seizure is the seizure of the public debtor's property sufficient for its debt in advance and as temporary legal protection, by the decision of the highest local officer of the creditor public administration, in order to secure the timely payment of the public receivable in the presence of one of the situations limitedly listed in Law No. 6183, art. 13. The fact that precautionary assessment and provisional seizures, which are regulated for the protection of public receivables, can be carried out against the public debtor as temporary security measures and through an administrative process in the presence of one of the reasons listed in the relevant legal texts, has brought about various discussions in the doctrine and caused some problems in practice. Based on this framework, this study aims to examine precautionary assessment and provisional attachment in the protection of public receivables. The study attempts to find solutions to the debates and problems about these two security measures through current doctrinal opinions and judicial decisions.