Identifier: C5T1L4 · Revision: 2026-10-26 · Classification: restricted

Decision and objectives

The practical task is to verify legal entity and the exact Turkish leveraged-trading authority. Make the decision reproducible: name the exposure, time horizon, cash requirement and comparison baseline before selecting a product.

Objectives: Verify legal entity and the exact Turkish leveraged-trading authority; Separate CFD scope from tailored OTC transactions and foreign authorization; Reject an unsupported service before comparing its price.

Prerequisite: C5T1L3; completed Classes 1–4 and the Stock Market School foundation or Forex School foundation. Every example is hypothetical. Prices, dates, rates, fees, contract factors, policies and tax schedules are supplied teaching inputs, not current offers or legal parameters. No live account is needed.

Mechanics

Authorization belongs to a named legal entity for defined activities and scope. A group logo, foreign registration or generic statement that a firm is licensed does not establish permission to offer a Turkish CFD service. Check the contractual entity, regulator record, current activity status and service actually offered. The investor must also identify customer classification, appropriateness/risk disclosures and the governing agreement.

The SPK guide updated 10 March 2026, pages 41–42, places OTC CFDs in leveraged trading, including the relevant operational requirements. Its tailored-contract discussion must not be used to relabel an otherwise CFD-like electronic leveraged service to evade the framework. Read the activity and transaction facts together.

Price and return drivers

Authorization is a feasibility gate, not a discountable risk premium. Only after the route passes can all-in cost be compared. A cheap quote from an unverified route is not an executable equivalent to a verified domestic offer. Current numerical leverage, minimum collateral and professional-customer thresholds are intentionally omitted; obtain effective current provisions and applicable SPK decisions.

Worked case

Hypothetical evidence comparison: Offer A identifies a Turkish intermediary, current relevant permission, contractual counterparty, risk statement and a reproducible cost of TRY 2,400 for the stated size/horizon. Offer B costs TRY 1,200 but supplies only a foreign-company certificate and a different payment beneficiary. Apparent saving is TRY 1,200, but the routes are not equivalent. The decision is to exclude B pending verification rather than score its fee as an advantage. No live firm or permission is being certified.

Adverse case

Suppose A's relevant activity is then shown suspended for the decision date. Its old license copy is insufficient; A also fails the gate. A larger collateral balance or an experienced customer cannot turn a suspended service into an authorized one. If both routes fail, retaining cash or a separately verified domestic alternative is justified even when the investor's market view later proves right.

Practical use

Use the SPK institution/activity route, current notices and official III-39.1 text alongside the March guide. Verify the entity through independently obtained contact details and reconcile the agreement and beneficiary. The binding Turkish III-37.1 consolidated text was retrieved from SPK on 26 October 2026; its amendment list includes 7 April 2022. Read articles 5, 9, 15, 19, 24, 25/A and 27 with later decisions. Article 25/A(3) places OTC CFDs under leveraged-trading provisions. Articles 19 and 24 address loss collection for general and elective professional customers, including a written-request exception for elective professional customers. Do not presume a universal customer protection or treat a customer label alone as sufficient.

Use permitted domestic access routes and the actual instrument documents. Verify intermediary authority, investor eligibility, order/redemption terms, settlement, custody and executable size before implementation. Reconcile spread and commissions, funding, collateral, custody, product expenses, conversion and exit charges; an amount already embedded in a fill or fund unit price is not deducted again. A published mark or product description does not promise an executable price or liquidity.

Tax is excluded unless a numerical schedule is expressly supplied as hypothetical. For actual rules record income year, residence and individual/corporate status, instrument and acquisition/contract dates, taxable event and rule effective date. The GIB investment-income guide, checked 2026-10-26, covers 2025 individual income; its 2026 publication date alone cannot settle a 2026 liability.

Decision boundaries

Advance to cost and suitability analysis only when authority, product scope and customer terms are established. A provider's external hedging venue does not replace the domestic customer contract. Decline or defer an unsupported route; do not recommend bypassing domestic authorization through an offshore account.

Practice and references

Exercise: hypothetical verified route costs TRY 900 and an unverified route TRY 500. Calculate the apparent saving and decide. Solution: TRY 400 apparent saving; the second route is excluded until its specific authority and entity are verified. The saving is not an expected return that compensates for missing legal access. If the verified route also exceeds the risk budget, decline both.

Takeaway: Reject an unsupported service before comparing its price with the cash dates, costs and remaining risks stated.

Product card: domestic-cfd. Formula: Cost comparison after feasibility gates. Glossary: Activity permission, Customer classification. Next lesson: C5T1L5. Topic test.

Sources checked 2026-10-26:

Shared reference guide