When capital-markets rules name the standard

Most discussions of valuation standards concern professional practice: how valuers work, how firms govern quality, how reports are written. But in a number of jurisdictions the standards have crossed into the rulebook itself — named in communiqués, resolutions and directives that govern regulated valuations. For capital-markets regulators, these examples show the different forms that recognition can take, from direct mandate to anchoring reference.

Türkiye: the standard written into the communiqué

Türkiye offers one of the longest-standing examples of a securities regulator mandating IVS for capital-markets valuations. The Capital Markets Board (SPK) first adopted IVS in 2006, under Communiqué Serial VIII No. 45. The current instrument, the Communiqué on Valuation Standards in Capital Markets (III-62.1), published in the Official Gazette on 1 February 2017, provides that valuations required under capital-markets legislation must comply with IVS as published by the IVSC, in translations prepared by the national professional bodies. The communiqué concerns the standards that regulated valuations must follow — a clean example of a rulebook pointing directly at the international framework.

Dubai: the Emirates Book

Dubai took a different route to a similar destination. Executive Council Resolution No. (37) of 2015 makes the Emirates Book, issued by the Dubai Land Department, the mandatory valuation standard for registered valuers. According to the IVSC and the Dubai Land Department, the Emirates Book was revised in 2019 in conjunction with the IVSC to fully incorporate IVS. Here the binding instrument is local — but its content was aligned with the international standards, so that valuers complying with the Emirates Book are working within the IVS framework.

Europe: a directive that points to recognised standards

The EU illustrates a third model: anchoring rather than mandating. Article 19(1) of the Mortgage Credit Directive (2014/17/EU) requires Member States to ensure that reliable standards are in place for valuing residential property for mortgage lending, and Recital 26 states that reliable standards should take into account internationally recognised valuation standards, in particular those developed by the International Valuation Standards Committee — as the body now known as the International Valuation Standards Council was then called — TEGoVA or RICS. No single framework is imposed; the directive instead ties national rules to the internationally recognised ones.

A standard that keeps moving

Naming a standard in a rulebook creates an obvious dependency: the rule is only as current as the standard it references. The IVS are maintained through a public cycle — an exposure draft for the next edition was open for consultation from 30 January to 30 April 2026, with the next IVS to be issued in January 2027 and effective from January 2028, drafted by four technical boards following the 2024 Agenda Consultation. With IVS used as a framework in more than 100 countries, regulators referencing the standards are not adopting a static text but joining a maintained, consultative process. The three models above — direct mandate, locally issued standards incorporating IVS, and directive-level anchoring — differ in mechanism, but they answer the same supervisory need: regulated valuations whose framework is recognised well beyond the jurisdiction that requires them.