BASEAK Turkish Competition Law Yearly Report

2025 was a year of notable activity for Turkish competition law, marked by enforcement across all dimensions of the Turkish Competition Authority's ("TCA") mandate: The Authority demonstrated active engagement across multiple areas. While familiar enforcement priorities like digital platforms and labour markets remained in the spotlight, new sectors received increased attention, including agriculture, food production, and the film and television industry. And across every sector, resale price maintenance violations continued to result in consistent enforcement. 2025 also involved regulatory changes, including amendments to the rules governing fine calculations and guidelines on commercial secrets and file access rights .

This article examines the key developments that defined Turkish competition law enforcement in 2025, analyzing substantive decisions, regulatory changes, and emerging enforcement priorities.

2025 Enforcement Statistics

The enforcement statistics clearly demonstrate the active enforcement: The TCA published 243 reasoned decisions, reflecting enforcement activity across both Articles 4 and 6 of the Competition Law. The Authority initiated 25 new investigations targeting anti-competitive agreements and abuses of dominance, whilst imposing administrative fines totaling TRY 11.5 billion (approximately EUR 295 million) on 196 undertakings. The TRY 11.5 billion in fines represented an increase from previous years. The merger control regime continued its activity, processing 416 notifications with an increasing trend towards conditional clearances accompanied by detailed behavioural commitments.

Dawn Raid Obstruction: Enforcement of Inspection Procedures

Enforcement related to obstruction of dawn raids continued in 2025. Of 8 decisions addressing obstruction conduct, 6 resulted in substantial administrative fines. The TCA maintained its approach regarding data deletion during dawn raids. In this context, neither the restoration of deleted data nor the fact that the data was not work-related correspondence changes the situation. The Competition Authority considers the deletion of data after the commencement of a dawn raid as sufficient evidence of obstruction of the inspection. The TCA imposed severe penalties for data deletion, message destruction, and refusal to permit inspections. BİM received a TRY 1.3 billion (approximately EUR 33 million) fine for WhatsApp message deletion of only one employee. Similarly Coca Cola, faced a TRY 282 million (approximately EUR 7.2 million) penalty for data deletion of one employee.

Commitment Breaches: Monitoring and Enforcement

Administrative fines imposed in 2025 included penalties related to non-compliance with measures and commitments accepted by undertakings in previous TCA decisions. The TCA continued to carefully monitor compliance with commitments. Şişecam received a TRY 3.2 billion (approximately EUR 82 million) fine for acting contrary to commitments concerning restriction of unprocessed flat glass purchases and obligations to refrain from behaviour rendering commitment provisions ineffective. Google faced daily penalties in two separate proceedings totalling TRY 837 million (approximately EUR 21.5 million): TRY 355 million (approximately EUR 9.1 million) for failing to implement accepted designs concerning hotel searches and blocking competitors advantageously, and TRY 482 million (approximately EUR 12.4 million) for implementing new 'Business Ads' designs containing the same nature and functionality as designs under investigation. The TCA also revised Ferrero's hazelnut purchase commitments, reducing minimum annual purchases and seasonal caps; and launched an investigation against Coca-Cola aiming also to detect the compliance to the 2021 commitment decision. This reflects continued monitoring of compliance with commitments and measures.

Sectoral Enforcement Overview

Food and Agriculture

The food and agriculture sectors were subject to enforcement activity in 2025. Two separate investigations were opened in the agricultural chemicals and seed market last year. The TCA intervened in the raw milk sector through interim measures concerning the Raw Milk Production Agreement, preventing producers from forcing farmers to purchase feed or imposing brand/price requirements on voluntary purchases, with compliance monitored through quarterly invoicing reports. An investigation was initiated against 44 undertakings regarding price-fixing and market-sharing in raw milk purchases and feed sales.

The poultry sector was also subject to enforcement, with a prohibition on advance pricing lists requiring that price lists enter into force when communicated to buyers, resulting in approximately TRY 3.7 billion (approximately EUR 82 million) in total fines. The packaged water sector was subject to enforcement, with a total TRY 25.9 million (approximately EUR 0.58 million) fine for exchanging competitively sensitive information concerning future sales prices. Two separate investigations targeted the agricultural chemicals and seed sector, examining competitively restrictive actions including information exchange and no-poaching agreements.

Ready-Mixed Concrete: Regional Enforcement

Ready-mixed concrete remained a familiar sector for enforcement, particularly in the early years of the TCA, with investigations and fines across multiple regions: investigations in Siirt and Ordu, and fines totalling TRY 111 million (approximately EUR 2.8 million) in Hatay, TRY 10.2 million (approximately EUR 0.26 million) in Edirne, TRY 76.5 million (approximately EUR 1.96 million) in Aydın, TRY 72 million (approximately EUR 1.85 million) in Malatya, and a new investigation in Ankara in 2025. This consistent enforcement pattern reflects persistent competition concerns in regional construction materials markets.

Labour Markets: No-Poaching Agreements

Labour market enforcement continued this year, too. The pharmaceutical sector was subject to enforcement, with 17 firms receiving fines totaling TRY 245 million (approximately EUR 6.3 million) for no-poaching agreements and sharing forward-looking competitively sensitive information regarding employee salaries and benefits. Ongoing investigations target casting agencies and managers, agricultural chemicals and seeds, shipbuilding, banking, and other sectors, signalling that labour market enforcement will remain a priority.

Vertical Restrictions:

The TCA continued its enforcement approach regarding resale price maintenance (RPM). RPM investigations proceeded rapidly across all sectors, resulting in either settlement or substantial fines. Notable enforcement actions included settlements with Adidas and concluded investigations against Arzum, alongside multiple proceedings in the consumer goods sector targeting companies including Biota, Muya, Ceel Cosmetic, Hemel, and construction chemicals producers.

Beyond RPM, the TCA also addressed other vertical restraints, particularly customer and territory restrictions. When combined with RPM, such restrictions invariably resulted in fines. However, when examined independently, the Authority proved willing to accept commitments addressing competitive concerns. The TCA also scrutinised passive sales prohibitions, resolving several cases through commitment procedures that preserved competition whilst allowing undertakings to avoid formal infringement findings.

Abuse of Dominance

Digital Platforms: Ongoing Investigations

Digital platforms remained one of the leading sectors for abuse of dominance cases. Google's eighth investigation examined whether Google transfers its power in online advertising to other services through its PMAX advertising campaign, whether it engages in unfair practices against advertisers, and whether it restricts competition through data combination. Similarly, two separate investigations examined whether Sahibinden and Kariyernet leveraged their data acquired from the markets where they are allegedly dominant, for the related services and markets. These investigations also examined whether intensive advertising expenditure leads to foreclosure. Sahibinden, a listing platform, case resolved with commitments, including removing redirections to individual users during listing, preventing use of platform data in second-hand vehicle sales services, and an advertisement cap for its related services. Algorithm-related issues were also examined following 2024 enforcement against multi-seller platforms where BuyBox algorithms created price rigidity. 2025 investigation against Spotify focused on discriminating against competitors through licence royalty distribution and discriminating in content producers' visibility via algorithms.

Creative Content: Exclusivity Under Scrutiny

The TCA's abuse of dominance cases were not limited to digital markets. Creative content was also examined, with ongoing investigations into long-term exclusivity agreements between producers/distributors and creative talent. The TCA accepted commitments addressing allegations that STAR TV was prevented from working with producers other than OGM and vice versa, and that MARS provided advantages to films it distributed, restricting market access for third-party film distributors.

Frito Lay: Foreclosure Through Distribution Practices

Another decision concerned Frito Lay, in which the company received a TRY 1.3 billion (approximately EUR 33 million) fine for hampering competitors' activities, blocking competitors' sales, and excluding competitors from the market. The behavioural remedies imposed significant structural changes: for sales points under 200 square metres, Frito Lay stands must now be opened to competing products. The fine calculation methodology illustrated the cumulative impact of aggravating factors, with a 2.5% base rate increased by 10% for recidivism and 5% for infringement duration exceeding 5 years, demonstrating how repeat offenders face exponentially higher penalties.

Tetrapak: IP Rights and Competition Law

The Tetrapak decision addressed the intersection between intellectual property and competition law. Tetrapak held dominant positions in the aseptic liquid food carton and packaging, and carton and packaging filling machine markets. The TCA found that Tetrapak's trademark and design rights for packaging shapes created market foreclosure concerns. The Authority required Tetrapak to withdraw from trademark and design rights concerning registered 3D aseptic prism shape trademarks and design applications, and imposed a TRY 130 million (approximately EUR 3.3 million) fine. However, the decision provoked strong dissenting opinions. One dissenting opinion argued that registration of packaging does not foreclose markets, as sales were largely based on non-trademarked alternatives and filling machines allowed flexible packaging choices. It further contended that interference with trademark rights would unjustly undermine legitimate intellectual property protection. Another dissenting opinion noted that the investigation failed to establish tying, entry barriers, or exclusionary effects, emphasising that merely possessing intellectual property rights cannot constitute abuse. This dissent found both the administrative fine and the obligation to relinquish trademark rights inappropriate, and considered the subsequent amendment of the previous Board decision procedurally flawed. The case reflects the TCA's approach to examining how dominant firms use intellectual property rights in the context of competition law.

Regulatory Changes: Administrative Fines and Procedural Rules

Administrative Fines Regulation: Key Amendments

Regulatory changes were made to the Administrative Fines Regulation. The distinction between cartels and other infringements previously considered in determining the base fine was abolished. A separate administrative fine of up to 10% of turnover may now be imposed for each infringement. Whilst lower limits for aggravating factors were removed, upper limits were maintained. For infringements lasting more than 5 years, the fine rate may be doubled, with graduated increases for infringements lasting up to 5 years. These amendments provide the TCA with greater flexibility in determining fines.

Guidelines on Administrative Fines

The accompanying Guidelines defined 'decisive influence' as 'indispensable function in the formation and/or continuation of the infringement', requiring a strict causal connection between the employee and the formation and continuation of the infringement. Critically, the Regulation provisions apply separately for each infringement, with the base penalty rate and aggravating/mitigating factors assessed separately for each infringement, resulting in an upper limit for administrative fines of 10% of annual gross revenues for each infringement. This separate assessment methodology affects the calculation of liability for undertakings engaged in multiple infringements.

File Access Rights and Commercial Secrets

Key procedural changes included removal of complainants' file access rights, redefinition of 'file' to include information and documents obtained or created during investigation and final examination, and expansion of internal correspondence to include not only preliminary examination and pre-investigation reports but also leniency information, settlement documents, and dawn raid minutes. The amendments also specified that file access requests may be submitted until expiry of initial written defence periods or, where additional written opinions are sent, second written defence periods.

Merger Control: Conditional Clearances and Enforcement

The TCA processed 416 merger and acquisition notifications in 2025, with 46 decisions concerning technology undertakings. Trends included an increase in conditional clearances and detailed behavioural commitments. The CEVA-Borusan transaction was subject to conditions including maintenance of existing customer contracts, price increase limits, switching rights, network access for competitors, termination rights, and prohibition on bundling. The Curium/Eczacıbaşı Monrol transaction addressed concerns in narrow market definitions and DTPA cold kit markets through price regulation, non-discrimination commitments, supply prioritisation for Turkey, and maintenance of pre-transaction market structure. The Petrol Ofisi–BP transaction required maintenance of rental agreements, divestiture of 115 petrol stations, diesel distribution limits, restrictions on storage facility reactivation, and capacity usage limitations. The Kartek/Param transaction addressed input foreclosure risks through legal entity and management separation, contractual protections, and information barriers. The Tofaş/Stellantis transaction was subject to commitments concerning investment plans, capacity increases, domestic production protection, distribution measures, and prevention of one-stop-shop risks. Uber's acquisition of 85% of Trendyol GO received unconditional clearance. Gun-jumping enforcement continued. TEKFEN and Can Group received a TRY 11 million (approximately EUR 0.28 million) fine for acting as if the transaction had been approved whilst the review process continued. The TCA ruled that transfer of sole control was not legally valid until final clearance.

Conclusion

Turkish competition law enforcement in 2025 involved continued enforcement activity and regulatory changes. The TCA maintained enforcement across multiple sectors of the economy. RPM violations continued to result in consistent penalties. Substantial penalties were imposed for dawn raid obstruction and commitment breaches. Enforcement activity included labour markets and cases addressing the intersection of intellectual property and competition law. Regulatory reforms provided the Authority with greater flexibility in determining administrative fines.

The enforcement trends observed in 2025 suggest that similar regulatory priorities may continue in 2026. Compliance programmes should address vertical distribution arrangements, dawn raid preparedness, commitment monitoring, labour market practices, and mergersfor operations in Turkey.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.