- with readers working within the Pharmaceuticals & BioTech and Construction & Engineering industries
- within Consumer Protection, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration and Environment topic(s)
In our information note dated July 31, 2026, we summarized the changes introduced by the Regulation Amending the Regulation on Commercial Advertising and Unfair Commercial Practices (“Amendment Regulation”), which entered into force on August 1, 2026. We will now present our compliance recommendations regarding the new provisions introduced by the Amendment Regulation, followed by a comparative legal analysis and our criticisms of the Amendment Regulation.
1. TARGETED ADVERTISING, PROFILING, AND THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN
The Amendment Regulation defines targeted advertising for the first time; it imposes a transparency requirement on consumers in targeted advertising processes based on online behavioral profiling, and prohibits profiling-based targeted advertising in cases where it is known or reasonably expected that the consumer is a child. This approach is similar to the EU’s Digital Services Act model in that it absolutely prohibits profiling-based advertising directed at minors.
Compliance Recommendation: The criteria used in targeted advertising must be presented to consumers through an easily accessible interface. In cases where it is known or reasonably expected that the consumer is a child, profiling-based targeting activities directed at such users must be immediately suspended. To avoid facing any significant administrative sanctions in connection with targeted advertising and profiling processes, it is recommended that these processes be evaluated in conjunction with the regulations on explicit consent and the processing of special-category personal data under the Personal Data Protection Law (KVKK), as well as the decisions of the Board, in an integrated manner.
2. COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING OF DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS
The Amendment Regulation has lifted the ban on comparative advertising for dietary supplements; however, statements that give the impression that the product is a substitute for a normal diet are now prohibited. This framework is similar to the EU’s system of nutrition and health claims in that it permits comparisons while also prohibiting the implication that the product “replaces a balanced diet.”
Compliance Recommendation: Although the marketing opportunities offered by comparative advertising may continue to be pursued, statements creating the impression that the product replaces a balanced, normal diet must be strictly avoided, and any such claims should be structured with due regard to oversight by both the Advertising Board and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry.
3. DISCOUNTED SALES AND REFERENCE PRICING
Under the Amendment Regulation, the 30-day period for determining reference prices has now been reduced to 10 days; it is stipulated that the price history of each sales channel (store, website, mobile app, marketplace) be tracked independently of one another. While this mechanism is structurally based on the EU’s reference price regime, the 10-day period preferred under Turkish law is shorter than the EU’s 30-day standard; businesses operating across multiple channels and supplying goods or services to the EU should take special note of this difference.
Compliance Recommendation: Price history tracking systems must be updated operationally, in terms of software, and technically, based on a 10-day reference period. The price history for each sales channel - such as stores, websites, mobile apps, and marketplaces- must be tracked independently, without cross-channel references.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTS
The Amendment Regulation prohibits the use of general and vague environmental claims such as “environmentally friendly,” “sustainable,” and “carbon neutral” without providing evidence; it mandates that these claims be substantiated with documentation and findings from accredited or authorized organizations, and that the specific stage of the product’s life cycle to which the claim relates be clearly specified. This approach is similar to the EU’s current environmental claims regime in that it directly prohibits general environmental claims that are not based on certification.
Compliance Recommendation: Certificates from accredited organizations supporting claims such as “environmentally friendly” and “sustainable” used in advertising visuals must be submitted in full; any existing claims used without supporting certificates must be removed or substantiated.
5. CONSUMER REVIEWS AND COMPLAINT PLATFORMS
The Amendment Regulation stipulates that reviews obtained from sources where verification of the purchasing process cannot be conducted may no longer be published, and reduces the response time granted to sellers on complaint platforms from 72 hours to 48 hours. This regulation aligns closely with the principle of verification transparency introduced by the EU’s Omnibus Directive regarding the prohibition of fake or unverifiable reviews.
Compliance Recommendation: Given that the timeframes for submitting reports and providing responses on complaint platforms have been reduced to 48 hours, it is important for corporate customer relations departments to accelerate their operational intervention and response processes in line with this timeline and to establish new operational infrastructures.
6. SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCERS
The Amendment Regulation has introduced detailed labeling and placement rules for advertisements posted by social media influencers; in summary, it requires that the words “Advertisement” or “Promotion” be clearly visible at first glance in posts made by influencers in exchange for financial compensation, free or discounted products, or commissions. These specific and form-based labeling/placement rules are similar to the U.S.’s principle-based (“clear and conspicuous”) approach and France’s rule-based labeling regime, which is backed by criminal penalties.
Compliance Recommendation: Contracts and advertising content templates related to collaborations with social media influencers must be prepared in accordance with labeling rules. The terms “Advertisement” or “Promotion” must be clearly visible at first glance, and past and ongoing campaigns must be reviewed retroactively.
7. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND DIGITAL COPIES
The Amendment Regulation requires that advertisements featuring digital characters generated by artificial intelligence—which are difficult to distinguish from real people—must include a statement indicating the use of artificial intelligence, and prohibits the use of digital replicas of real people to recommend products or services without their consent. This approach is consistent with the general transparency requirement in the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Regulation.
Compliance Recommendation: For advertising content produced partially or entirely using artificial intelligence, as well as for the digital characters used or digital replicas of real people, it is recommended that the phrase “artificial intelligence” be included in the production process as a standard and mandatory approval step.
|
COMPARATIVELAW |
|||
|
Subject |
AB |
ABD |
ChinaandIndia |
|
Targeted Advertising and Protection of Children |
Under the Digital Services Regulation sup></sup , online platform providers are prohibited from displaying profile-based advertisements in cases where they reasonably know that the service recipient is a minor.
In addition, the General Data Protection Regulation 2 establishes aminimum age - whichcan besetbetween 13 and 16 years old - for the validity of a child’s consent regarding online services and providesfortheright toobject to decisions based on automatedprofiling.
Administrative fines for such violations can amount to up to 6% of the company’s global annual turnover in the previousfiscalyear |
Under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act 3 the collection of personal data from children under the age of 13 for profiling and targeted advertising purposes is subject to verifiable parental consent.
For example, in the FTC’ssettlementwithEpic Games 4 , a fine of 275 million USD was imposed forthisviolation. |
Under China's Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), 5 the data of children under the age of 14isclassified as "sensitive personal information," and parental consentismandatory.
India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act 6 prohibits behavioral tracking and targeted advertising directed at children. |
|
Comparative Advertisement of Dietary Supplements |
Comparisons are permitted under the Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive 7 the Regulation on Nutrition and Health Claims8 |
Under the Dietary Supplements Health and EducationActintheU.S.,9 while honest comparative advertising is encouraged, |
The provisions of the Chinese Advertising Law 10/sup> regarding health foods prohibit claims that the product can replace medicine or a normal diet, as |
|
COMPARATIVELAW |
|||
|
Subject |
AB |
ABD |
ChinaandIndia |
|
|
such comparisons must be objective and verifiable, and must not imply that the product “replaces a balanceddiet.” |
the law requires the standardof“sufficientand reliable scientific evidence.”
It cannot be claimed that the product cures any disease, and the warning required by the FDA -“This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease” - must appear on the packaging. |
wellascomparisonsofefficacy or safety with competing products. Similarly, in India, the FSSAI Advertising and Claims Regulation 11 andthe ASCI Code 12 , require that comparative advertising be based on scientific facts and notbeofanaturethatdamages the reputation of a competing brand. |
|
Discounted Sales and ReferencePricing |
In accordance with the Price Indication Directive 13 the lowest price from at least the 30 days prior to the discount mustbeindicated. |
According to the Guidelines on Deceptive Pricing 14 the “old price” must have actually been chargedintherecentpast; a discount based on an artificially inflated price is considered “fictitious pricing.” |
China'sPriceLaw15 andSAMR regulations 16 require a short-term reference price. In India, the CCPA's "Dark Patterns" Guidelines prohibit the display ofmisleadingreferenceprices. |
|
Environmental Statements |
The Directive on Empowering Consumers in the Green Transition 17 will take effect as of September 27, 2026; this Directive |
The FTC's Green Guidelines 18 consider general claims to be misleading; they require thatitbespecifiedwhether |
In China, under the Consumer Rights Protection Law 19 and the Advertising Law, environmental performance claims must be accurate and |
|
COMPARATIVELAW |
|||
|
Subject |
AB |
ABD |
ChinaandIndia |
|
|
directly places general environmental claims that are notbased oncertification onablacklist. |
the claim applies to the entire product or just the packaging, and that the claim be supported by scientificevidence. |
verifiable; false emissions claims made in the context of the “Dual Carbon” goals are punishable under the Anti-UnfairCompetitionLaw20
Similarly, in India, the ASCI’s Environmental Claims Guidelines require that eco-claims be substantiated by independent scientific data andlife-cycleanalysis. |
|
ConsumerReviewand ComplaintPlatforms |
Under the Omnibus Directive 21 merchants are required to explain the reasonablestepstheytaketo verifythatreviewscome from actual consumers; it is prohibited to publish fake reviews or to manipulate reviews in a way that highlightsonly positiveones. |
Pursuant to the Consumer Reviews Rule 22 enacted by the FTC in August 2024; posting reviews under fake identities, generating robotic orartificial reviews, blocking access to negative reviews, or purchasing reviews are prohibited, and violations are subject to administrative fines of up to a maximum amount—indexed to inflation—that can reach approximately $50,000perviolation. |
The Chinese E-Commerce Law 23 , prohibits businesses from engaging in misleading commercial promotions by creating fake transactions or fabricatingreviews.
In India, however, in accordance with standards regarding online consumer reviews and the CCPA’s “Dark Patterns” Guide24 companies are required to verify that the reviewerisaverifiedpurchaser. |
|
Social Media Influencers |
The general framework provisions regarding the distinguishability of advertising and the ban on surreptitious advertising applythroughouttheEU; |
In accordance with the FTC’s Endorsement Guidelines,26 anymaterial connection between a social media influencer and a brand must be |
In China, social media influencersareheldjointlyliable with the brand for thequality of theproductstheypromoteand are not permitted to recommend products they |
|
COMPARATIVELAW |
|||
|
Subject |
AB |
ABD |
ChinaandIndia |
|
|
In France, under the law dated June 9, 2023, 25 influencers are required to display the “#Publicité” or “#CollaborationCommercial e” tag on screen throughout the entire visual or video for any form of compensation theyreceive; aviolationofthis obligation may result in up to two years in prison and a fine of €300,000. Thisisoneof the regulations among EU memberstates that imposes the most concrete penalties forinfluencermarketing. |
disclosed in a clear and prominent manner; tags should include phrases such as “#ad” or “#sponsored” andshould not be hidden behind a “readmore”link. |
havenotpersonallytried.
In India, under the CCPA’s Guidelines for Influencers and ASCI rules, “Advertisement” or “Sponsored” labels are mandatory for sponsored posts, and influencers providing financial advice must be registered with the relevant regulatoryauthority. |
|
Artificial Intelligence andDigitalCopies |
Under Article 50 of the EU Artificial Intelligence Regulation 27 providers and distributors offering audio, image, or video content generated or manipulated using artificial intelligence are required to clearly label such content as artificially generated. French Law No. 2023-451 requires the label “modified image” to be displayed on digitally altered images and the label “virtual image” on faces and bodies generated by artificial intelligence.
Withregardtodigitalcopiesof deceased individuals, the French Civil Code provides protection based on personalityrights. |
At the federal level, the FTC Act is enforced under the general ban on deceptive advertising; at the state level, California’s AB 1836 Act of 2024 28, prohibits the commercial useofdigitalaudioorvideo recordings of deceased individuals without the consentoftheirheirs. |
In China, visible labeling is required for content that uses artificial intelligence technology. In India, however, the dissemination of misleading content generated by artificial intelligence is prohibited. |
CONCLUSION AND OUR CRITICISMS
While the Amendment Regulation fills an important gap in digital marketing practices, it does not provide for any transition period for social media influencer contracts entered into before August 1, 2026, or for campaigns that are ongoing or have not yet begun. This situation creates the risk that existing campaigns will become unlawful as of the effective date.
Lack of Sanctions and Control Mechanisms
While the Amendment Regulation prohibits violations that are largely algorithmic or technical in nature—such as targeted advertising, fake reviews, and AI-generated content—it does not provide for a proactive and systematic monitoring or oversight mechanism to detect these violations; under current practice, the Advertising Board acts primarily in response to complaints. At this point, the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) model could provide a concrete roadmap: The DSA requires each member state to appoint a Digital Services Coordinator, mandates that large platforms undergo annual independent systemic risk audits and ensures the proactive detection of violations through a “trusted whistleblower” mechanism. Similarly, in France, the DGCCRF has the authority to conduct on-site inspections on its own initiative. The absence of such a proactive/technical inspection authority or agency under Turkish law carries the risk of weakening the deterrent effect of the Amending Regulation in practice.
Uncertainty Based on Age Declaration
The regulation links the ban on targeted advertising to cases where it is “known or reasonably expected to be known” that the consumer is a child, but it does not provide for an age verification standard or mechanism. It is unclear who would be held liable if a parent or user provides a false age to the platform.
The Failure to Specify Administrative Sanctions in Concrete Terms
The Amendment Regulation does not specify the amounts of administrative fines to be imposed in the event of a violation of the new obligations it introduces; instead, it merely refers to the general penalty regime under Consumer Protection Law No. 6502. This situation reduces the predictability of deterrence, particularly with regard to new and technical types of violations such as targeted advertising and artificial intelligence transparency.
Lack of a Coordination Mechanism with the KVKK
The topic of targeted advertising and profiling largely falls within the scope of the Personal Data Protection Law (KVKK); however, the Amending Regulation does not provide for a coordination mechanism between the Advertising Board and the Personal Data Protection Board that would enable information sharing or joint investigations. This situation creates the risk that the same act could be assessed independently and inconsistently by the two separate authorities.
Footnotes
1 DSA — Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, m. 28/2
2 GDPR — Regulation (EU) 2016/679, m. 8, m. 22.
3 COPPA — 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501-6506.
4 FTC, “Fortnite Video Game Maker Epic Games to Pay More Than Half a Billion Dollars...”, basın duyurusu, 19.12.2022.
5 个人信息保护法(PIPL), m. 28, m. 31.
6 Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023, m. 9.
7 Directive 2006/114/EC.
8 Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006.
9 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), 1994.
10 Advertising Law of the People's Republic of China
11 The Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018
12 ASCI Code for Self-Regulation of Advertising Content in India
13 Directive 98/6/EC, m. 6a (Directive (EU) 2019/2161 — “Omnibus Direktifi” ile eklenmiştir).
14 FTC, Guides Against Deceptive Pricing, 16 CFR Part 233.
15 Price Law of the People's Republic of China.
16 State Administration for Market Regulation.
17 Directive (EU) 2024/825 (“ECGT”), UCPD (2005/29/EC) Ek I'i güncellemektedir.
18 FTC, Green Guides, 16 CFR Part 260.
19 Law of the People's Republic of China on Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests
20 Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China
21 Directive (EU) 2019/2161, UCPD (2005/29/EC)'ye eklenen hükümler.
22 FTC, Trade Regulation Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials, 16 CFR Part 464 (2024).
23 E-Commerce Law of the People's Republic of China (2018, m. 17).
24 Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 19000:2022, "Online Consumer Reviews — Principles and Requirements for their Collection, Moderation and Publication
26 FTC, Endorsement Guides, 16 CFR Part 255
25 LOI n° 2023-451 du 9 juin 2023, m. 5.
27 AI Act — Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, m. 50.
28 California AB 1836 (2024); Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.1 (vefat etmiş kişiler); yaşayan kişiler için ayrıca Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.
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.
