For Turkish-resident individuals acquiring real estate in Kazakhstan, the legal landscape is considerably more structured than the volume of cross-border transactions between the two countries might suggest. Kazakhstan's land and property legislation draws a firm distinction between residential and commercial real estate, between urban and agricultural land, and between citizens, permanent residents, and foreign nationals – categories that interact in ways that regularly produce unexpected outcomes for buyers arriving without prior legal analysis. The Kazakh–Turkish bilateral relationship is close: Kazakhstan and Turkey are bound by a Treaty on the Promotion and Mutual Protection of Investments, and Turkish nationals represent one of the more active non-resident buyer groups in Almaty and Astana's secondary property markets. Yet investment-treaty protections do not override domestic land law restrictions, and the operational gap between what is contractually possible and what is registrable in the State Real Estate Register has caused practical difficulties in a number of matters across the region.
Kazakhstan's approach to non-resident real estate ownership is governed principally by the Land Code and the Law on Real Estate in State Registration, together with a body of subordinate regulation that has been amended materially on several occasions since 2014. The foundational distinction is between ownership rights over buildings and structures on the one hand, and rights over the underlying land on the other. These two bundles of rights are treated separately under Kazakh civil law, and the restrictions applicable to foreign nationals attach primarily – though not exclusively – to land.
Foreign nationals and stateless persons may, as a general rule, acquire ownership rights over residential and non-residential premises located within designated urban zones. Apartment purchases, residential condominium units, and non-residential commercial premises within multi-storey buildings are therefore within reach of Turkish-resident buyers transacting in Almaty, Astana, Shymkent, and other urban centres. The acquisition is made directly: no Kazakh legal entity is required as an intermediary, and no prior regulatory approval is required for urban residential premises.
The constraint arises when the transaction involves, or is connected to, land. Foreign nationals are prohibited from holding ownership rights over agricultural land – a category that is broadly drawn and extends to certain peri-urban plots. They may not hold ownership rights over land within designated border zones, a category that has been applied to certain districts across the country. For non-agricultural urban land plots on which a building stands, a foreign national who owns the building may typically acquire a long-term lease right over the land plot rather than outright ownership. In practice, this means that the Turkish buyer of a detached residential property or a standalone commercial building will hold the structure in fee simple but hold only a leasehold interest in the ground beneath it.
This structural bifurcation – ownership of improvements over a leasehold of land – is not unusual in comparative context, and many Turkish clients will find it familiar from analogous provisions in certain Turkish coastal and agricultural zones. However, the interaction between the lease term, the registration process, and the transferability of the combined interest warrants careful attention at the point of acquisition. Leasehold interests over state-owned land are granted for specified terms and are subject to renewal procedures that carry administrative risk if not managed proactively.
[CTA: If you are a Turkish-resident individual or family office adviser assessing a Kazakhstan real estate acquisition, our team can provide a preliminary analysis of the applicable restrictions and structuring options before any transaction proceeds – make an enquiry: info@vetrovpartners.com | WhatsApp/Telegram: +7 (983) 510-38-76]
The practical scope of direct ownership for Turkish nationals can be summarised across three transaction types that arise most frequently in the market.
Residential apartments in multi-storey buildings represent the most straightforward category. The underlying land is held collectively through the condominium structure, and individual apartment owners hold proportionate shares in the common elements. Turkish nationals may acquire, hold, and dispose of such apartments without structural restriction. The transaction proceeds through a standard notarised sale and purchase agreement and registration with the State Corporation "Government for Citizens" – Kazakhstan's one-window real estate registration infrastructure. Financing through Kazakh mortgage lenders is available in principle, though non-resident clients will encounter more stringent documentation requirements than residents.
Detached residential houses and plots within urban settlement boundaries occupy a middle category. Where the land plot is classified as intended for individual housing construction and falls within urban territory, Turkish nationals may acquire the building but must hold the land on a long-term lease from the relevant akimat (local executive authority). The lease is typically granted for terms ranging from ten to forty-nine years, is registered alongside the ownership of the structure, and may in certain circumstances be extended or converted to ownership by a natural person who has obtained permanent residency. Turkish nationals who subsequently obtain Kazakh permanent residence status – a pathway that has become more accessible under recent amendments to migration legislation – may become eligible to convert the leasehold to ownership.
Commercial real estate – office premises, retail units, and logistics facilities – follows comparable rules to residential, with the additional consideration that certain types of commercial activity conducted from the premises may require licensing or notification to the relevant regulatory authority. The real estate interest itself is not restricted by the commercial purpose, but a Turkish national intending to operate a business from a Kazakh property should not assume that the property acquisition and the business authorisation are independent of each other in all circumstances. Where the commercial operation falls within a regulated sector, the two processes require coordinated management.
Agricultural and peri-urban land, land within designated border zones, and land over a certain threshold area outside urban boundaries: these categories remain closed to foreign national ownership, and no bilateral treaty provision with Turkey creates an exception to these restrictions under current Kazakh law. Turkish nationals who have acquired interests in entities holding agricultural land interests should take legal advice on the compliance position, since administrative proceedings in this area are periodically initiated.
"The most common structuring error we see in cross-border real estate mandates involving non-EAEU nationals acquiring Kazakh property is the assumption that holding through a Kazakh company resolves the land restriction. In some cases it does not, and the analysis requires examining the beneficial ownership rules rather than the nominal entity form." — Daniyar Abenov, Contributing Regional Analyst — Kazakhstan, Vetrov & Partners
A structuring approach that Turkish clients and their advisers frequently consider is the interposition of a Kazakh limited liability partnership (tovarishchestvo s ogranichennoy otvetstvennostyu, or "TOO") between the client and the real estate asset. The TOO acquires the property as a legal entity, and the Turkish national holds a 100% participation interest in the TOO. The question is whether this structure genuinely resolves the land ownership restriction or merely displaces it.
For urban residential and commercial premises, a TOO holding is generally effective and is commonly used. The TOO, as a Kazakh legal entity, holds the land rights as a Kazakh person, and the beneficial ownership by the Turkish national is exercised through the participation interest rather than direct property title. This structure also has advantages for succession planning, since the participation interest may be subject to a different (and in some cases more flexible) devolution regime than direct real estate ownership.
For agricultural land and the other restricted categories, the position is more nuanced. Kazakh land legislation contains beneficial ownership and control provisions that in certain circumstances pierce the entity form and attribute the restriction to the ultimate beneficial owner. The specific threshold and trigger conditions for these provisions have been applied inconsistently across different regional land registration authorities, and the analysis is therefore fact-specific. A TOO in which a foreign national holds more than a defined proportion of the participation interest may be subject to the same agricultural land restrictions as the foreign national directly. Clients relying on a TOO structure without a formal legal analysis of the beneficial ownership provisions are exposed to an administrative position that is not certain to be resolved in their favour.
A third approach, relevant to higher-value transactions, is a holding through an AIFC-registered special purpose vehicle. The Astana International Financial Centre operates under English common law principles and offers its own company law, trust law, and property holding frameworks. AIFC structures do not operate as a workaround to the substantive Kazakh land restrictions – the underlying asset remains subject to Kazakh land law – but they offer advantages in governance, succession, and cross-border asset management that a domestic TOO does not. For Turkish clients with assets or family members in multiple jurisdictions, an AIFC holding may integrate more cleanly with the overall structuring picture than a domestic entity.
[CTA: Structuring decisions of this nature benefit from early-stage analysis, before formal transactions create constraints on available options. Our Private Wealth & Structuring practice provides a preliminary review of Kazakhstan holding structure options for non-resident clients – make an enquiry: info@vetrovpartners.com | WhatsApp/Telegram: +7 (983) 510-38-76]
The relationship between Turkey and Kazakhstan in the investment and trade sphere has intensified materially over the past decade. Turkey is Kazakhstan's principal bilateral trade partner in the West, and Kazakh real estate has attracted significant Turkish capital both from established Turkish business families with long-standing Kazakh commercial relationships and, more recently, from Turkish nationals relocating to Kazakhstan following the economic pressures and currency devaluations of recent years.
The Treaty on the Promotion and Mutual Protection of Investments between Turkey and Kazakhstan (the "BIT") affords Turkish nationals and Turkish-incorporated entities certain protections in relation to qualifying investments in Kazakhstan, including protections against expropriation without compensation, non-discriminatory treatment, and access to international arbitration in the event of a treaty breach. Real estate held by a Turkish national or Turkish entity may, in defined circumstances, constitute a "covered investment" under the BIT.
However, it is a standard feature of bilateral investment treaties that they operate on the assumption of compliance with the host state's domestic law. A Turkish national who acquires an interest in restricted land in violation of the Land Code does not thereby become a treaty-protected investor. The BIT does not create rights of acquisition that do not exist under domestic law; it protects qualifying investments that have been made lawfully. The significance of this for Turkish clients is that the BIT's protective umbrella is available only once the structuring has been done correctly. Clients who proceed on the assumption that treaty protection covers procedurally irregular acquisitions are exposed in two directions: to administrative proceedings under Kazakh land law, and to the loss of treaty protection precisely when it might be needed.
Kazakhstan is also a member of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), though the EAEU's internal market rules for the movement of capital and investment do not, as at the date of this publication, extend to real estate ownership rights in a manner that benefits non-EAEU nationals such as Turkish citizens. Turkey has observer status in certain EAEU organs and an active bilateral economic relationship with EAEU member states, but this does not translate into an EAEU-law basis for expanded property rights.
For Turkish clients who have, or are considering, a broader regional footprint across Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, or Georgia, the interplay between different bilateral frameworks, residency options, and property regimes is a material planning consideration. The Private Wealth & Structuring practices in those jurisdictions set out the comparable position.
The acquisition of real estate by a Turkish national in Kazakhstan triggers a registration obligation, a set of ongoing tax exposures, and – if the client has any income from the property – annual reporting requirements that must be managed carefully to avoid administrative penalties.
Registration proceeds through the unified real estate registration infrastructure. For foreign nationals, the documentation requirements include a notarised and apostilled copy of the passport, evidence of a Kazakh individual taxpayer identification number (IIN), and in some regions an additional declaration of the funding source. The IIN registration step is a prerequisite and should be initiated before the transaction is executed: it typically takes from several days to several weeks depending on the method of application. Turkish nationals may apply for an IIN at a Kazakh consular mission in Turkey or upon arrival in Kazakhstan.
Real estate held by a non-resident foreign national in Kazakhstan is subject to property tax assessed by reference to the cadastral value of the asset. The rate applicable to non-residents differs from the rate applicable to Kazakh tax residents, and the applicable rate has been subject to periodic adjustment. Rental income received by a non-resident from a Kazakh property is subject to Kazakh withholding obligations on the payer, and the non-resident recipient has an obligation to report income received in Kazakhstan to the Kazakh tax authority for years in which the non-resident has exceeded defined presence or income thresholds.
The double taxation convention between Turkey and Kazakhstan (the "DTC") provides a framework for the allocation of taxing rights over rental income and capital gains arising from Kazakh real estate held by Turkish-resident individuals. Under the standard real estate article of the DTC, Kazakhstan retains primary taxing rights over income from immovable property situated in Kazakhstan, with credit relief available in Turkey to eliminate or reduce double taxation. Turkish clients should not assume that Turkish tax residency alone shields Kazakh-source real estate income from Kazakh tax obligations: the DTC allocates, rather than eliminates, the Kazakh taxing right.
On disposal, capital gains from the sale of real estate by a non-resident are in principle subject to Kazakh tax on the gain, subject to the DTC's capital gains article and any applicable holding period exemptions under domestic law. The precise applicable rules have changed over the period since 2020 and continue to evolve: a Turkish client planning a disposal should obtain current tax advice rather than relying on the position as it was described in earlier secondary sources.
Foreign nationals holding Kazakh real estate must ensure that the property remains in compliance with technical regulation, utility registration, and any homeowners' association obligations. Where the client is non-resident and the property is managed remotely, appointment of a local property management representative with a properly drafted power of attorney is advisable. The power of attorney requirements for real estate transactions and management actions in Kazakhstan carry specific notarisation and apostille requirements that differ in certain respects from Turkish notarial practice.
Note: A Turkish national who fails to register an acquired real estate interest within the period prescribed by Kazakh law may lose priority against subsequent acquirers and creditors. Registration is constitutive, not merely declaratory, under Kazakh law: an unregistered transaction does not create an enforceable property right against third parties. Clients who have completed transactions without formal registration should take immediate advice on their legal position.
[CTA: If you are a Turkish-resident client managing an existing Kazakh property holding or planning a new acquisition, our Asset Protection and Private Wealth teams can advise on the registration, tax, and structuring position. Discuss your matter in confidence: info@vetrovpartners.com | WhatsApp/Telegram: +7 (983) 510-38-76]
Q: Can a Turkish national buy an apartment in Almaty or Astana outright, without setting up a Kazakh company?
A: Yes. Turkish nationals may purchase residential apartments in multi-storey residential buildings in urban centres including Almaty and Astana directly, without the intermediation of a Kazakh legal entity. The acquisition requires registration in the State Real Estate Register and a Kazakh individual taxpayer identification number (IIN). The underlying land beneath a multi-storey building is held collectively through the condominium structure and does not create a separate land restriction for the individual apartment buyer. However, direct purchase of a detached house with a separate land plot will result in the buyer holding the building in ownership and the land only on a long-term leasehold, since outright ownership of non-agricultural urban land plots by foreign nationals is not available in the same way as for Kazakh citizens.
Q: Does holding Kazakh real estate through a Kazakh TOO fully remove the land ownership restriction for Turkish nationals?
A: Not in all cases. For urban residential and commercial premises, a TOO holding is generally effective and widely used. However, Kazakh land legislation contains provisions that in certain circumstances look through the entity form and attribute the land restriction to the ultimate beneficial owner where a foreign national holds more than a defined proportion of the participation interest. This analysis is fact-specific and depends on the classification of the land, the ownership percentage, and the applicable regional administrative practice. A TOO structure should not be adopted without a formal legal opinion on the beneficial ownership question. For agricultural land and restricted categories, no corporate intermediation provides a reliable workaround under current law.
Q: What are the main Kazakh tax obligations for a Turkish resident who owns and rents out a Kazakh property?
A: A Turkish-resident non-resident holding and renting Kazakh real estate is subject to Kazakh property tax on the asset and to Kazakh withholding obligations on rental income. The Turkish–Kazakh double taxation convention allocates primary taxing rights over Kazakh real estate income to Kazakhstan, with credit relief in Turkey to reduce double taxation. The Turkish client retains a Turkish tax reporting obligation in respect of foreign-source income under Turkish personal income tax rules. On disposal, capital gains from Kazakh real estate are in principle subject to Kazakh tax on the gain. Clients should obtain specific advice on current rates and any applicable exemptions, as the rules in this area have been subject to amendment.
Q: Is AIFC structuring available and useful for a Turkish client holding Kazakh real estate?
A: An AIFC-registered vehicle can be used as the holding entity for Kazakh real estate, and offers advantages in governance, succession planning, and integration with cross-border family structures that a domestic Kazakh TOO does not. The AIFC operates under English common law principles, which many Turkish clients and their international advisers find more familiar than Kazakh domestic company law. However, an AIFC vehicle does not circumvent the substantive Kazakh land restrictions: the underlying real estate remains subject to Kazakh land law, and the beneficial ownership provisions applicable to the restricted categories apply equally to an AIFC-held structure. The AIFC option is most relevant for higher-value transactions where governance, succession, and multi-jurisdictional portability are planning priorities.
Q: What does the Turkey–Kazakhstan bilateral investment treaty actually protect in a real estate context?
A: The BIT protects qualifying investments made in compliance with Kazakh domestic law. For a Turkish national who has acquired Kazakh real estate lawfully and in accordance with the applicable land and registration rules, the BIT affords protections against expropriation without compensation, non-discriminatory treatment, and access to international arbitration. The BIT does not create acquisition rights beyond those available under domestic law, and it does not protect investments made in violation of the Land Code or registration requirements. The treaty's protective effect is therefore conditioned on prior structuring compliance: clients who proceed without legal analysis of the domestic framework may find themselves without treaty protection at the point when it matters most.
Vetrov & Partners is a Russian boutique law firm established in 2009, recognised by Pravo-300 for eight consecutive years. The firm advises foreign companies and private clients on legal matters across Russia and the post-Soviet region, including Kazakhstan, working with trusted regional counsel.
The firm's Private Wealth & Structuring practice advises high-net-worth individuals, family offices, and their advisers on real estate acquisition, asset protection, holding structure design, and cross-border succession planning. Regional mandates are managed with direct partner involvement and are supported by a network of qualified regional analysts and local counsel.
Enquiries: info@vetrovpartners.com | WhatsApp / Telegram: +7 (983) 510-38-76 | t.me/vitvetcom
This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice under Russian or any other applicable law. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Vetrov & Partners is a Russian-qualified law firm. For matters governed by foreign law or requiring local admission in another jurisdiction, we collaborate with trusted counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@vetrovpartners.com.
— Daniyar Abenov Contributing Regional Analyst — Kazakhstan, Vetrov & Partners vetrovpartners.com/contributions/