Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2019, Volume: 21 Issue: 2, 427 - 453, 03.07.2019

Hatice Kübra Kandemir

https://doi.org/10.31460/mbdd.457884
Cited By: 2

Abstract

References

  • Armour, J., H. Hansmann ve R. Kraakman. 2009. The Essential Elements of Corporate Law. ECGI Working Paper Series in Law No. 134/2009.
  • Berglöf, E. ve A. Pajuste. 2005. “What Do Firms Disclose and Why? Enforcing Corporate Governance and Transparency in Central and Eastern Europe”. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 21(2): 178–97.
  • Bozcuk, A. ve M. A. Lasfer. 2005. “The Information Content of Institutional Trades on the London Stock Exchange”. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 40(03): 621.
  • Chakravarty, S. 2001. “Stealth-trading: Which traders’ Trades Move Stock Prices?” Journal of Financial Economics 61(2): 289–307.
  • Chassagnon, V. ve X. Hollandts. 2014. “Who Are the Owners of the Firm: Shareholders, Employees or No One?” Journal of Institutional Economics 10(01): 47–69.
  • Claessens, S., S. Djankov ve L H.P Lang. 2000. “The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations”. Journal of Financial Economics 58(1–2): 81–112.
  • Commission Staff Working Document. 2007. Report on the implementation of the Directive on Takeover Bids. Brussels, 21.02.2007 SEC(2007) 268 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/company/docs/takeoverbids/2007-02-report_en.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • Cools, S.. 2005. “The Real Difference in Corporate Law between the United States and Continental Europe: Distribution of Powers”. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 30: 697.
  • Demirag, I. ve M. Serter. 2003. “Ownership Patterns and Control in Turkish Listed Companies”. Corporate Governance 11(1): 40–51.
  • Djankov, S., R. La Porta, F. Lopez-de-Silanes ve A. Shleifer. 2008. “The Law and Economics of Self-dealing”. Journal of Financial Economics 88(3): 430–65.
  • Duman, H. 2011. “Sermaye Piyasasının Etkinliği Açısından, Kamunun Aydınlatılması Sürecinde, Şirket Çevresinin İhtiyaç Duyduğu Bilginin Özellikleri: İMKB ’de Bir Uygulama”. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi Nisan: 95–132.
  • Ergincan, Y. ve B. Karaağaçlı. 2015. “How Electronic General Meetings Affected Exercise of Shareholder Rights in Turkey: An Analysis of the Turkish Model in Light of International Market Standards and Regulations”. Boğaziçi Journal Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies 29(1): 95-117.
  • ESME. 2007. First Report of ESME on the Transparency Directive ("TD") 5 December 2007 file:///D:/Kamuyu%20aydınlatmamülkiyet%20yapısı/First%20Report%20of%20ESME%20on%20the%20TD.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • ESME. 2017. Report on Shareholder Identification and Communication Systems https://www.esma.europa.eu/document/report-shareholder-identification-and-communication-systems (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • Expert Group on Cross-Border Voting. 2002. Consultative Document on Cross-Border Voting in Europe and Final Report.
  • Ferrell, A. 2007. “The Case for Mandatory Disclosure in Securities Regulation around the World”. Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial and Commercial Law 2(81).
  • Fox, M. B. 2009. “Civil Liability and Mandatory Disclosure”. Columbia Law Review 109(2): 237.
  • Fox, M. B., R. Morck, B.Yeung ve Artyom Durnev. 2003. “Law, Share Price Accuracy, and Economic Performance: The New Evidence”. Michigan Law Review 102(3): 331.
  • Goshen, Z. ve G. Parchomovsky. 2006. “The Essential Role of Securities Regulation”. Duke Law Journal 55(4): 711.
  • Hu, H. T. C. ve B. Black. 2006. “The New Vote Buying: Empty Voting and Hidden (Morphable) Ownership”. Southern California Law Review 79: 811.
  • ISSA, (2012). “Global Principles for Corporate Actions and Proxy Voting”. http://www.issanet.org/pdf/ISSA_WG_CA-PV_Final_Report_June2012.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • Jensen, M. C. ve W. H. Meckling. 1976. “Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure”. Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305–60.
  • Kılıç, S., A. Alp ve İ. U. Delikanlı. 2014. “Borsa Şirketlerinde Genel Kurula Katılma ve Oy Haklarının Kullanılması: Pay Blokajı Şartının Kaldırılması Sonrasındaki Uygulama, Karşılaşılan Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri”. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar 8(2): 75-98.
  • Kraakman, R. 2009. “Disclosure and Corporate Governance: An Overview Essay”. Içinde Reforming Company and Takeover Law in Europe, ed. E. Wymeersch, G. Ferrarini, K. J. Hopt, J. Winter. Oxford University Press, 96.
  • Kyle, A. S. 1985. “Continuous Auctions and Insider Trading”. Econometrica 53(6): 1315–35.
  • La Porta, R., F. Lopez-De-Silanes ve A. Shleifer. 1999. “Corporate Ownership Around the World”. The Journal of Finance 54(2): 471–517.
  • Mahoney, P. G. 1995. “Mandatory Disclosure as a Solution to Agency Problems”. The University of Chicago Law Review 62(3): 1047–1112.
  • Morck, R. ve B. Yeung. 2003. “Agency Problems in Large Family Business Groups”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 27(4): 367–82.
  • OECD. 2015. G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. https://www.oecd.org/daf/ca/Corporate-Governance-Principles-ENG.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 07 Ağustos 2018).
  • Pulaşlı, H. 2017. Şirketler Hukuku Genel Esaslar. 5.Baskı. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi.
  • Rapier, G. 2018. “A Private Life is A Happy Life”. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/tesla-stock-price-going-private-what-wall-street-is-saying-about-the-potential-move-2018-8-1027443394 (Erişim Tarihi: 14 Ağustos 2018).
  • Şafak, N. 2003. Anonim Ortaklıkta Pay Defteri. Ankara: Seçkin.
  • Schouten, M. C. 2009. “The Case for Mandatory Ownership Disclosure”. Stanford Journal of Law, Business and Finance 15: 127.
  • Schouten, M. C ve M. M Siems. 2010. “The Evolution of Ownership Disclosure Rules Across Countries”. Journal of Corporate Law Studies 10(October): 451–83.
  • Shleifer, A. ve R. W. Vishny. 1997. “A Survey of Corporate Governance”. The Journal of Finance 52(2): 737–83.
  • Siems, M. M. 2008a. Convergence in Shareholder Law. Cambdrige University Press.
  • Siems, M. M. 2008b. “Shareholder Protection Around the World (Leximetric 11)”. Journal of Corporate Law Studies 33(17).
  • Stapledon, G. P. ve J. J. Bates. 2002. “Reducing the Cost of Proxy Voting”. Içinde Corporate Governance Regimes - Convergence and Diversity, ed. J. A. McCahery, P. Moerland, T. Raajmakers, L. Renneboog. Oxford, 567.
  • Tekinalp, Ü. ve E. Çamoğlu. 2018. Sermaye Piyasası Hukukunun Temel İlkeleri. İstanbul: Vedat Kitapçılık.
  • Tekinalp, Ü., R. Poroy ve E. Çamoğlu. 2000. Ortaklıklar ve Kooperatif Hukuku. 8. Baskı. İstanbul: Arıkan Yayınevi.
  • Töremiş, H. E. 2008. Türk Ticaret Kanunu Tasarısı ve Sermaye Piyasası Mevzuatı Çerçevesinde Nama Yazılı Payların Borsada Devri. Ankara: SPK Yeterlilik Etüdü.
  • Winter, J. 2003. “Cross-Border Voting in Europe”. içinde Capital Markets and Company Law, ed. Kalus J. Hopt ve Eddy Wymeersch. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 387.
  • Yılgör, A. G. ve E. Yücel. 2012. “İşletmelerin Sahiplik Yapısının İncelenmesi: Sahiplik ve Kontrol Ayrımı Konusunda Çıkarımlar”. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi 8(16): 41–57.
  • Yurtoglu, B. B. 2000. “Ownership, Control and Performance of Turkish Listed Firms”. Empirica 27(2): 193–222.
  • www.esma.europa.eu, (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • www.mkk.com.tr, (Erişim Tarihi: 12.08.2018).
  • www.oecd.org, (Erişim Tarihi: 10.07.2018).
  • www.spk.gov.tr, (Erişim Tarihi: 12.08.2018).

KURUMSAL YÖNETİM VE ŞEFFAFLIĞIN GÜÇLENDİRİLMESİNDE MÜLKİYET AÇIKLAMA KURALLARININ ROLÜ VE PAY SAHİPLİĞİNİN TANIMLANMASI SORUNU

Year 2019, Volume: 21 Issue: 2, 427 - 453, 03.07.2019

Hatice Kübra Kandemir

https://doi.org/10.31460/mbdd.457884
Cited By: 2

Abstract



Kurumsal
yönetimin temel prensiplerinden biri olan kamuyu aydınlatma ilkesi, şirketi
gerçekte kimin kontrol ettiğini ve şirketin sahiplerinin kimler olduğunu
açıklamayı gerektirir. Mülkiyetin ifşası, mevcut hissedarların ve
yatırımcıların şirketteki vekil maliyetlerini öngörebilmesini sağlar ve
hisselerin doğru fiyatlanması yoluyla piyasa etkinliğine katkıda bulunur. Ancak
mevcut sistemde, pay sahipliğine ilişkin şeffaflığın sağlanmasının önünde bir
takım engeller mevcuttur. Bu çalışma, mülkiyet ifşa kurallarının bu iki temel
amacı yerine getirmede kullandığı mekanizmaları ele almaktadır. Ayrıca, paylar
üzerinde nihai hak sahibinin kimliğinin tespitinde ve yönetim haklarını elinde
bulunduran hissedarların tanımlanmasında mevcut sistemdeki eksiklikler ortaya
konmuştur.




Keywords

Kurumsal Yönetim Kamuyu Aydınlatma İlkesi Mülkiyet Açıklama Kuralları Pay Sahipliği Merkezi Kayıt Kuruluşu

References

  • Armour, J., H. Hansmann ve R. Kraakman. 2009. The Essential Elements of Corporate Law. ECGI Working Paper Series in Law No. 134/2009.
  • Berglöf, E. ve A. Pajuste. 2005. “What Do Firms Disclose and Why? Enforcing Corporate Governance and Transparency in Central and Eastern Europe”. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 21(2): 178–97.
  • Bozcuk, A. ve M. A. Lasfer. 2005. “The Information Content of Institutional Trades on the London Stock Exchange”. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 40(03): 621.
  • Chakravarty, S. 2001. “Stealth-trading: Which traders’ Trades Move Stock Prices?” Journal of Financial Economics 61(2): 289–307.
  • Chassagnon, V. ve X. Hollandts. 2014. “Who Are the Owners of the Firm: Shareholders, Employees or No One?” Journal of Institutional Economics 10(01): 47–69.
  • Claessens, S., S. Djankov ve L H.P Lang. 2000. “The Separation of Ownership and Control in East Asian Corporations”. Journal of Financial Economics 58(1–2): 81–112.
  • Commission Staff Working Document. 2007. Report on the implementation of the Directive on Takeover Bids. Brussels, 21.02.2007 SEC(2007) 268 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/company/docs/takeoverbids/2007-02-report_en.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • Cools, S.. 2005. “The Real Difference in Corporate Law between the United States and Continental Europe: Distribution of Powers”. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 30: 697.
  • Demirag, I. ve M. Serter. 2003. “Ownership Patterns and Control in Turkish Listed Companies”. Corporate Governance 11(1): 40–51.
  • Djankov, S., R. La Porta, F. Lopez-de-Silanes ve A. Shleifer. 2008. “The Law and Economics of Self-dealing”. Journal of Financial Economics 88(3): 430–65.
  • Duman, H. 2011. “Sermaye Piyasasının Etkinliği Açısından, Kamunun Aydınlatılması Sürecinde, Şirket Çevresinin İhtiyaç Duyduğu Bilginin Özellikleri: İMKB ’de Bir Uygulama”. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi Nisan: 95–132.
  • Ergincan, Y. ve B. Karaağaçlı. 2015. “How Electronic General Meetings Affected Exercise of Shareholder Rights in Turkey: An Analysis of the Turkish Model in Light of International Market Standards and Regulations”. Boğaziçi Journal Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies 29(1): 95-117.
  • ESME. 2007. First Report of ESME on the Transparency Directive ("TD") 5 December 2007 file:///D:/Kamuyu%20aydınlatmamülkiyet%20yapısı/First%20Report%20of%20ESME%20on%20the%20TD.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • ESME. 2017. Report on Shareholder Identification and Communication Systems https://www.esma.europa.eu/document/report-shareholder-identification-and-communication-systems (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • Expert Group on Cross-Border Voting. 2002. Consultative Document on Cross-Border Voting in Europe and Final Report.
  • Ferrell, A. 2007. “The Case for Mandatory Disclosure in Securities Regulation around the World”. Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial and Commercial Law 2(81).
  • Fox, M. B. 2009. “Civil Liability and Mandatory Disclosure”. Columbia Law Review 109(2): 237.
  • Fox, M. B., R. Morck, B.Yeung ve Artyom Durnev. 2003. “Law, Share Price Accuracy, and Economic Performance: The New Evidence”. Michigan Law Review 102(3): 331.
  • Goshen, Z. ve G. Parchomovsky. 2006. “The Essential Role of Securities Regulation”. Duke Law Journal 55(4): 711.
  • Hu, H. T. C. ve B. Black. 2006. “The New Vote Buying: Empty Voting and Hidden (Morphable) Ownership”. Southern California Law Review 79: 811.
  • ISSA, (2012). “Global Principles for Corporate Actions and Proxy Voting”. http://www.issanet.org/pdf/ISSA_WG_CA-PV_Final_Report_June2012.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • Jensen, M. C. ve W. H. Meckling. 1976. “Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure”. Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305–60.
  • Kılıç, S., A. Alp ve İ. U. Delikanlı. 2014. “Borsa Şirketlerinde Genel Kurula Katılma ve Oy Haklarının Kullanılması: Pay Blokajı Şartının Kaldırılması Sonrasındaki Uygulama, Karşılaşılan Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri”. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar 8(2): 75-98.
  • Kraakman, R. 2009. “Disclosure and Corporate Governance: An Overview Essay”. Içinde Reforming Company and Takeover Law in Europe, ed. E. Wymeersch, G. Ferrarini, K. J. Hopt, J. Winter. Oxford University Press, 96.
  • Kyle, A. S. 1985. “Continuous Auctions and Insider Trading”. Econometrica 53(6): 1315–35.
  • La Porta, R., F. Lopez-De-Silanes ve A. Shleifer. 1999. “Corporate Ownership Around the World”. The Journal of Finance 54(2): 471–517.
  • Mahoney, P. G. 1995. “Mandatory Disclosure as a Solution to Agency Problems”. The University of Chicago Law Review 62(3): 1047–1112.
  • Morck, R. ve B. Yeung. 2003. “Agency Problems in Large Family Business Groups”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 27(4): 367–82.
  • OECD. 2015. G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. https://www.oecd.org/daf/ca/Corporate-Governance-Principles-ENG.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 07 Ağustos 2018).
  • Pulaşlı, H. 2017. Şirketler Hukuku Genel Esaslar. 5.Baskı. Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi.
  • Rapier, G. 2018. “A Private Life is A Happy Life”. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/tesla-stock-price-going-private-what-wall-street-is-saying-about-the-potential-move-2018-8-1027443394 (Erişim Tarihi: 14 Ağustos 2018).
  • Şafak, N. 2003. Anonim Ortaklıkta Pay Defteri. Ankara: Seçkin.
  • Schouten, M. C. 2009. “The Case for Mandatory Ownership Disclosure”. Stanford Journal of Law, Business and Finance 15: 127.
  • Schouten, M. C ve M. M Siems. 2010. “The Evolution of Ownership Disclosure Rules Across Countries”. Journal of Corporate Law Studies 10(October): 451–83.
  • Shleifer, A. ve R. W. Vishny. 1997. “A Survey of Corporate Governance”. The Journal of Finance 52(2): 737–83.
  • Siems, M. M. 2008a. Convergence in Shareholder Law. Cambdrige University Press.
  • Siems, M. M. 2008b. “Shareholder Protection Around the World (Leximetric 11)”. Journal of Corporate Law Studies 33(17).
  • Stapledon, G. P. ve J. J. Bates. 2002. “Reducing the Cost of Proxy Voting”. Içinde Corporate Governance Regimes - Convergence and Diversity, ed. J. A. McCahery, P. Moerland, T. Raajmakers, L. Renneboog. Oxford, 567.
  • Tekinalp, Ü. ve E. Çamoğlu. 2018. Sermaye Piyasası Hukukunun Temel İlkeleri. İstanbul: Vedat Kitapçılık.
  • Tekinalp, Ü., R. Poroy ve E. Çamoğlu. 2000. Ortaklıklar ve Kooperatif Hukuku. 8. Baskı. İstanbul: Arıkan Yayınevi.
  • Töremiş, H. E. 2008. Türk Ticaret Kanunu Tasarısı ve Sermaye Piyasası Mevzuatı Çerçevesinde Nama Yazılı Payların Borsada Devri. Ankara: SPK Yeterlilik Etüdü.
  • Winter, J. 2003. “Cross-Border Voting in Europe”. içinde Capital Markets and Company Law, ed. Kalus J. Hopt ve Eddy Wymeersch. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 387.
  • Yılgör, A. G. ve E. Yücel. 2012. “İşletmelerin Sahiplik Yapısının İncelenmesi: Sahiplik ve Kontrol Ayrımı Konusunda Çıkarımlar”. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi 8(16): 41–57.
  • Yurtoglu, B. B. 2000. “Ownership, Control and Performance of Turkish Listed Firms”. Empirica 27(2): 193–222.
  • www.esma.europa.eu, (Erişim Tarihi: 05.09.2018).
  • www.mkk.com.tr, (Erişim Tarihi: 12.08.2018).
  • www.oecd.org, (Erişim Tarihi: 10.07.2018).
  • www.spk.gov.tr, (Erişim Tarihi: 12.08.2018).
There are 48 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Business Administration
Journal Section MAIN SECTION
Authors

Hatice Kübra Kandemir 0000-0001-9722-1798

Publication Date July 3, 2019
Submission Date September 6, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 21 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Kandemir, H. K. (2019). KURUMSAL YÖNETİM VE ŞEFFAFLIĞIN GÜÇLENDİRİLMESİNDE MÜLKİYET AÇIKLAMA KURALLARININ ROLÜ VE PAY SAHİPLİĞİNİN TANIMLANMASI SORUNU. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 21(2), 427-453. https://doi.org/10.31460/mbdd.457884

Cited By

Borsa İstanbul'da Yatırımcıların Şirket Yönetimine Katılımını Etkileyen Şirket Düzeyindeki Finansal Faktörler
Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.25095/mufad.801497
KURUMSAL YÖNETİM ARACI OLARAK BAĞIMSIZ YÖNETİM KURULU ÜYELİĞİ: TAM BAĞIMSIZLIK MÜMKÜN MÜ?
Yıldırım Beyazıt Hukuk Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.33432/ybuhukuk.695372
 Download Cover Image

Authorship
MBDD follows the guidelines in COPE Authorship Guideline to ensure fair recognition of contributions to a research paper (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/discussion-document/authorship ). Authorship carries both credit and responsibility, and it is essential that all listed authors have made significant contributions to the research.

For multi-author studies, the Contributions of Authors must be declared after the conclusion and before the bibliography of the paper. The authors' initials and last names should be used to indicate which author contributed to which part of the manuscript. Details can be found by clicking the “Article Submission Checklist” button. The authors can acknowledge contributions that do not merit authorship.


The author(s) should disclose the use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted tools in design and implementation of the research. Such use need to be disclosed within the methodology section of the manuscript. Use of AI does not preclude the manuscript from publication, rather provides a transparent picture of the research.