Türk Konut Finansmanı Piyasasına Devlet Müdahaleleri: Konut Destekleme Paketleri

Abstract

Konut piyasalarına yönelik olarak sunulan devlet politikalarının çoğunun amacı, konut sahiplik oranını yükseltmek ve konuta erişilebilirliği iyileştirmektir. Ancak, beklenen faydaların aksine, bu politikaların kimi zaman belirsizliğe ve hatta irrasyonel ve stratejik davranışlara neden olabildiği görülmüştür. Türkiye'de 2020 ve 2022 yıllarında, devlet tarafından iki konut destekleme paketi çıkarılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, farklılıkların farkı ve etki analizi yöntemleri kullanılarak, bu paketlerin konut satış işlemlerinde konut kredisi kullanılması olasılığı üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmıştır. Ülke genelinde gerçekleşen tüm tam hisse ve gerçek konut satış işlemlerini kapsayan özgün bir veri seti kullanılmıştır. 2020'de çıkarılan destekleme paketinin, konut kredisi kullanımında belirgin bir artışa sebep olduğu (ülke düzeyinde ortalama yüzde 71,5’lik bir göreli artış), 2022 yılındaki paketin ise 2020 paketine kıyasla çok daha düşük bir artışla sonuçlandığı gösterilmiştir. Bu makalede, konut kredisi faiz oranlarına yapılan devlet müdahalelerinin, konut kredisi piyasasının likiditesi üzerinde artışa neden olabileceği sonucuna ulaşılırken, iki önemli vurguda bulunulmuştur. Birincisi, benzer politikalar geliştirilirken, öncelikli amaç ve hedef gruplar açık bir şekilde tanımlanmalıdır. İkincisi, politikaların etkin bir şekilde işleyebilmesi için yerel ve sektöre özgü koşullar, politika içeriğine muhakkak yansıtılmalıdır. Aksi halde, başlangıçta beklenen etkilere ulaşılamaması olasılığı ile karşılaşılabilir.

Keywords

• Devlet Müdahalesi
• Konut Finansman Piyasaları
• Konut Politikaları
• Konut Ekonomisi
• Konut Finansmanı

Government Interventions in the Turkish Mortgage Market: Housing Support Schemes

Abstract

Many government policies in housing markets aim to encourage homeownership and raise affordability. However, conflicting outcomes of government interventions suggest that such policies may lead to uncertainty, as well as irrational and strategic behaviours, contrary to initial expectations. The Turkish government initiated two housing support schemes in 2020 and 2022. To explore the impact of housing support schemes on the probability of mortgage-financing in house sales transactions, this study applies difference in differences and an event-study method on a novel transaction-level dataset covering all full share apartment unit sales across the country. The 2020 scheme produced a large shift in the extensive margin of credit use (71.5 percent relative increases on average across the country) while the 2022 program generated a substantially smaller increase than that of the 2020 scheme. This study argues that government interventions in mortgage interest rates have a boosting effect on the mortgage market and market liquidity. However, the primary objective and the target population of such policies need to be clearly defined, and they must be tailored to reflect local and sector-specific conditions in order to be effective. Otherwise, the results might be inconsistent with the initial anticipated impacts.

Keywords

• Government Intervention
• Mortgage Markets
• Housing Policies
• Housing Economics
• Housing Finance

References

1. Akgündüz, Y.E., Dursun-de Neef, H.Ö., Hacihasanoğlu, Y.S. and Yılmaz, F. (2023). Cost of credit, mortgage demand and house prices. Journal of Banking & Finance, 154(2023), 106953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2023.106953
2. Berry, J., McGreal, S., Stevenson, S. and Young, J. (2001). Government intervention and impact on the housing market in greater Dublin. Housing Studies, 16(6), 755–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030120090520
3. Capponi, A., Jia, R. and Rios, D.A. (2022). The effect of mortgage forbearance on refinancing: Evidence from the CARES Act (SSRN Paper No. 3618776). http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2139/ssrn.3618776
4. CBRT. (2025a). Housing unit prices, TL/Sqm, quarterly [Dataset]. Retrieved from https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/index.php?/evds/serieMarket
5. CBRT. (2025b). Interest rates on housing loans, Türkiye, monthly [Dataset]. Retrieved from https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/index.php?/evds/serieMarket
6. Damen, S. and Goeyvaerts, G. (2025). Housing market responses to the mortgage interest deduction. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 116(104165). https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.regsciurbeco.2025.104165
7. Domènech-Arumí, G., Gobbi, P.E. and Magerman, G. (2022). Housing inequality and how fiscal policy shapes it: Evidence from Belgian real estate (NBB Working Paper No. 423). Retrieved from https://www.nbb.be/en/publications-research/publications/all-publications/housing-inequality-and-how-fiscal-policy-shapes
8. Doruk, Ö.T. (2024). Exploring the determinants of housing price bubbles in the Turkish economy: A COVID-Related framework. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-05-2024-0073

9. ECB. (2025). Cost of borrowing for households for house purchase, Euro Area, monthly [Dataset]. Retrieved from https://data.ecb.europa.eu/data/datasets/ MIR/MIR.M.U2.B.A2C.AM.R.A.2250.EUR.N
10. Floetotto, M., Kirker, M. and Stroebel, J. (2016). Government intervention in the housing market: Who wins, who loses? Journal of Monetary Economics, 80(2016), 106–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2016.04.005
11. Fuster, A., Hizmo, A. Lambie-Hanson, L., Vickery, J. and Willen, P.S. (2021). How resilient is mortgage credit supply? Evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 28843). Retrieved from https://www.nber.org/system/files/ working_papers/w28843/w28843.pdf
12. Gerardi, K., Lambie-Hanson, L. and Willen, P. (2022). Lessons learned from mortgage borrower policies and outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic (Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s Policy Hub Working Paper No. 2022-9). Retrieved from https://www.atlantafed.org/-/media/documents/research/publications/policy-hub/2022/07/07/09--covid-and-mortgage-borrowers.pdf
13. Golding, E., Goodman, L. S., Green, R. and Wachter, S. (2021). The mortgage market as a stimulus channel in the COVID-19 crisis. Housing Policy Debate, 31(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10511482.2020.1850015
14. Grynevych, M. (2024). Impact of first time buyer’s relief on housing market of different property types in Greater London area. Paper presented at The Fourth Annual Tech Econference, University of Toronto, Canada. Retrieved from https://newsletter.economics.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/Impact-of-First-Time-Buyers-Relief-on-Housing-Market.pdf
15. Letdin, M. and McCollum, M. (2023). Mortgage relief: Who cares? Journal of Housing Research, 32(1), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10527001.2022.2079170
16. Lichtenstein, B. and Weber, J. (2023). COVID-19 and the CARES Act: Racial disadvantage, mortgage relief, and foreclosure in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama. Housing and Society, 50(2), 162–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/08882746.2022.2070699
17. Malpezzi, S. (2023). Housing affordability and responses during times of stress: A preliminary look during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contemporary Economic Policy, 41(1), 9–40. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/coep.12563
18. Mao, F., Wang, Y. and Yu, X. (2025). The role of government emergency response capability in regional governance: Evidence from the COVID-19 outbreak impact on the housing market. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 40(2), 525–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-023-10065-7
19. MoT. (2024). Electronic listing verification system, Ministry of Trade, Institutional news. Retrieved from https://ticaret.gov.tr/kurumsal-haberler/elektronik-ilan-dogrulama-sistemi-eids-yetki-dogrulama-uygulamasi-hayata-gecirildi
20. Popova, P. (2025). The impact of Covid-19 and preferential mortgage lending programs on mortgage lending: Evidence from Russia (National Research University Higher School of Economics Basic Research Program Working Papers Series: Financial Economics Working Paper No BRP 97/FE/2025). Retrieved from https://wp.hse.ru/data/2025/03/04/1970418726/97FE2025.pdf
21. Spatt, C.S. (2020). A tale of two crises: The 2008 mortgage meltdown and the 2020 COVID-19 crisis. The Review of Asset Pricing Studies, 10(4), 759–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/rapstu/raaa019
22. Subaşı, S.Ö. and Baycan, T. (2022). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on private rental housing prices in Turkey. Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, 6(3), 1177–1193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41685-022-00262-7
23. TurkStat. (2025). House sales statistics, Türkiye, monthly [Dataset]. Retrieved from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Konut-Satis-Istatistikleri-Ekim-2025-54145
24. Valentin, M. (2024). Subsidizing housing with deductions. Journal of Economic Surveys, 38(4), 1490-1515. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12596. Vergi Usul Kanunu Genel Tebliği. (2022, 31 May). Resmi gazete (No: 31852). Erişim adresi: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2022/05/20220531-7.htm
25. Warlters, M. (2023). Stamp duty reform and home ownership. Economic Record, 99(327), 492-511. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4932.12754.
26. Wong, S.K., Cheung, K.S., Deng, K.K. and Chau, K.W. (2021). Policy responses to an overheated housing market: Credit tightening versus transaction taxes. Journal of Asian Economics, 75(2021), 101330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2021.101330