Newsletters
Three months ago, we questioned whether Istanbul’s abrupt abolition of the notarized sponsorship undertaking system was intended as a permanent policy shift or merely an emergency response to an extraordinary fraud investigation.
At the time, the answer was unclear.
The decision came immediately after Turkish authorities dismantled an organized residence permit network and arrested 51 suspects accused of securing hundreds of residence permits through fraudulent documentation. The sponsorship mechanism had become one of the principal vehicles through which fabricated address arrangements were commercialized, and migration authorities reacted by effectively eliminating the system for everyone except close family members who could document their relationship through apostilled civil records.
In our April analysis, we argued that while decisive action against fraud was justified, abolishing an entire legal mechanism risked creating unnecessary hardship for thousands of legitimate applicants living with partners, friends, or long-term companions. We also suggested that the prohibition might not represent a final policy choice, but rather a temporary measure allowing the administration time to reassess how sponsorship could continue under stricter safeguards.
That assessment now appears to have been correct.
As of Monday, July 27, 2026, Istanbul has once again begun accepting notarized sponsorship undertakings from individuals who are not limited to family members, provided that sponsors satisfy newly introduced financial and compliance requirements. The information was communicated directly by an immigration officer at the Istanbul Provincial Directorate of Migration Management.
The sponsorship system has therefore not simply returned—it has returned in a substantially modified form.
The most significant change concerns financial capacity.
Where the sponsor is a Turkish citizen, authorities will require evidence of a regular monthly income amounting to at least twice the current minimum wage.
If the sponsor is a foreign national, the evidentiary burden becomes more nuanced. Individuals with documented income must provide proof of their monthly earnings. Those without formal salary documentation will instead be expected to submit Turkish bank statements covering the previous six months. Applicants who cannot demonstrate a recurring monthly income are expected to maintain sufficient funds in their accounts to satisfy immigration authorities that they possess adequate financial resources. Officials have deliberately refrained from announcing any fixed monetary threshold, indicating that the assessment will remain discretionary and will depend on the overall financial circumstances presented in each case.
Financial scrutiny, however, is only one component of the revised framework.
Authorities have also introduced a practical mechanism aimed directly at the commercial sale of sponsorship undertakings and fictitious address registrations.
According to the guidance provided by immigration officials, a sponsorship-based application will be subject to heightened scrutiny if the address in question has exhibited patterns commonly associated with fraudulent activity. Specifically, where five or more foreign nationals have been registered and subsequently deregistered at the same address within the preceding twelve months, or where five foreign nationals are simultaneously registered at that address, a sixth sponsorship application connected to the same property is expected to face rejection.
Although the precise legal implementation of this practice has not yet been formally published, the policy objective is clear.
Rather than prohibiting sponsorship altogether, authorities are now attempting to identify addresses exhibiting characteristics consistent with organized misuse.
Whether this numerical approach ultimately proves effective remains to be seen. Genuine shared housing arrangements certainly exist, particularly in major metropolitan areas where rising rental costs have encouraged lawful cohabitation among unrelated foreign nationals. Nevertheless, the overwhelming majority of commercially sold sponsorship undertakings have historically relied upon recycling the same residential addresses for successive applicants. The newly adopted address-monitoring practice appears designed to disrupt precisely that business model.
The practical implications for foreign nationals are significant.
Purchasing a notarized sponsorship undertaking from an intermediary who merely offers an address—without any genuine residential arrangement—has always carried legal risks. Under the revised system, those risks have become considerably greater.
Should an applicant unknowingly purchase a sponsorship undertaking tied to an address already associated with repeated foreign registrations, the application itself may be rejected regardless of the applicant's personal good faith. The consequences extend well beyond the immediate refusal. Individuals whose first-time residence permit applications are denied cannot submit another application based on the same residence permit category for 180 days. Unless another independent legal basis for residence exists, the applicant may ultimately be required to leave Türkiye.
For that reason alone, foreign nationals should exercise exceptional caution before paying anyone offering "ready-made" sponsorship undertakings or address registration services. What may initially appear to be a convenient administrative shortcut could instead result in the loss of lawful immigration status.
Migration officials have likewise indicated that enforcement efforts will continue against those who commercially exploit the sponsorship system.
Foreign nationals are encouraged to report individuals or businesses engaged in selling fictitious sponsorship undertakings or fraudulent address registrations by contacting yimer@goc.gov.tr, while Turkish citizens may submit reports through CİMER by selecting the Ministry of Interior. According to information provided by immigration authorities, those found preparing or selling fraudulent sponsorship documentation may face prosecution under Article 204 of the Turkish Penal Code, governing forgery of official documents, an offense carrying penalties ranging from one to eight years' imprisonment.
The broader lesson from the past several months is perhaps less about sponsorship itself than about regulatory evolution.
In April, the administration responded to a serious fraud investigation with an exceptionally restrictive measure. Today, it appears to have concluded that complete prohibition was not the optimal long-term solution.
Set as preferred source
Set as preferred source
9 min read
