Category: Turkiye

Eren Kursun has been appointed the new Managing Partner of Baker McKenzie Turkish affiliate Esin Attorney Partnership – to start on July 1, 2023 – taking over from Ismail Esin who will continue to manage the Dispute Resolution department and serve on the firm’s executive board.

Kursun, an M&A and Private Equity specialist, joined the Esin Attorney Partnership in 2014 as a Partner and became a board member of the firm in 2019. Earlier, he had spent nine years as a Partner with White & Case.

“I never defined myself as a founding partner,” Esin stated. “Being the first intern in the office was more than enough for me. And life is actually a relay race. The only way to win this race is to hand over the flag to the right person at the right time and in the right way. I have the ultimate peace of mind; the flag will be in safe hands.” 

“It is a great honor for me to be deemed worthy of this position and to take over from a doyen like Ismail Esin,” Kursun commented. “As Managing Partner, I will act with the objective, and with the excitement, of overcoming all the challenges of today’s world with our business, our values, and our corporate culture, all of which have grown and strengthened every year for 25 years.”

 

The major discussion points in Turkey have been drastically different – before and after the earthquake – with the upcoming elections gaining new importance, according to KP Law Managing Partner Onur Kucuk.

“The earthquake has affected 11 cities in Turkey, mainly in the southeast and eastern regions, and the current death toll is more than 48,000,” Kucuk says. “The earthquake was huge and devastating and, since February 6, the agenda has changed dramatically.”

“Before the earthquake, in our normal life, we were discussing legal developments, including the difficult topic of elections,” he continues. “We talked about the unorthodox approach of the central bank of Turkey regarding interest rates and the fight against inflation, and whether this would impact foreign investments, imports, and exports in Turkey.” Another topic before the earthquake, according to Kucuk, was the early retirement law. “Even if the person was entitled to retire in working days, he or she had to wait until the age of 58,” he says. “People demanded the early retirement age be lifted, allowing for immediate retirement in Turkey for those who couldn’t retire because of age barriers. This law was heavily discussed in the Turkish market and was recently passed two weeks ago.”

“After the earthquake, life was greatly disrupted, not just legally but in every aspect,” Kucuk adds. “Everything came to a halt for a few weeks. During the initial period, international and domestic aid flooded in to assist with the situation. These earthquakes caused an estimated USD 34.2 billion in direct physical damages in Turkey, according to a World Bank rapid damage assessment report, and damages in investment exceed USD 75 to 85 billion, which will have a significant impact on social and legal life.” According to him, the government also took a number of measures to address the situation.

“The other issue at hand is the upcoming presidential election, which will be held on May 14, 2023,” Kucuk notes. According to him, the elections are of crucial importance: “the ruling party has been in power for 20 years now, and the opposition, united behind one candidate, is hoping to defeat them. We will see if they are successful.”

“While the earthquake has had a significant disruptive impact, we continue working on M&A and investments,” Kucuk notes. “Turkey is never short on investments. Strategic investors are still investing in Turkey, mainly in industrial manufacturing and some in TMT.” Additionally, “another issue to consider is that companies were already allowed to buy their own shares under the Turkish commercial code,” Kucuk says. Still, “although the economy did not come to a complete halt due to the earthquake, there may come a point when Turkey will need those companies to finance various projects. In such a scenario, it is likely that Turkish companies will seek financing abroad,” he points out.

Only one group ever came and never went away: Lawyers.
This is because if the lawyers went, so would the games industry. (Richard A. Bartle)

Why digital games, which is one of the entertainment industries with the largest market share in the world, still cannot find a place for itself in a separate category of works in the field of intellectual property law? In which category do we legally examine this digital approach, which is called the culturally and economically dominant art form for the economically advanced societies, and which legal protections do we benefit from? Why are there still debates about whether digital games have aesthetic value? How safe can a game designer feel in this industry?

Considered one of the most popular feature films in the world, E.T was one of the most popular productions of 1982. After E.T’s great success in the movie industry, Atari, which agreed with director Steven Spielberg, bought the game rights of the movie for $25 million. The job of making the game was entrusted to successful software developer Howard Scott Warshaw and was given only 5 and a half weeks. Not only the company, Steven Spielberg also trusted Warshaw, even calling him a ‘genius’. According to the technological possibilities at that time, this time was close to impossible to complete the game. More cassettes were produced than Atari’s total number of consoles, and the game was completed and released in 5 and a half weeks, as promised. There were too many software errors in the game, and those who sold the game started to return it one by one. Atari lost millions of dollars and was on the verge of bankruptcy. Nearly 750,000 cassettes were buried in a field in New Mexico, and it is said that there is still a cassette cemetery in that area.

Unsuccessful licensed games have been made since the beginning of the digital game industry, and E.T is one of the most striking examples of this. This is why digital game law needs to be addressed as an important issue.

Computer games, which were initially tried to take advantage of the attractive effect of introducing computers to the market and increasing the sales of computers, now take their place at the top of the sectors in the entertainment market. Today, almost everyone in the world has a cell phone and half of the world’s population has a smart phone. Young people who are introduced to technology at a very early age, who cannot read or even speak yet; middle-aged people who add excitement to their lives by playing games that offer the opportunity to meet third parties and send instant notifications; The only common point that older people, who are late to meet with smartphones, meet, except perhaps for their basic human needs, may be digital games. The user base of digital games has now reached a level that will appeal to almost all age groups.

According to the Global Game Market Report for 2022 by Newzoo, digital game revenue in the world has reached the level of 196.8 billion dollars, and the annual growth rate has been determined as 2.1%. Mobile games account for $103.5 billion of this amount, which means a 53% market share. The annual growth rate of mobile games is also stated as 5.1%.

The Turkish gaming industry is also increasing its recognition by opening up to the global market, and the domestic gaming startup Fomo Games received a seed investment by Libertus

Capital in the first months of 2022, as a good example. The further growth of the sector will depend on the establishment of a strong legal basis. In this article, we will discuss the legal studies within this framework.

The digital game industry is developing very fast, but it does not have its own regulations yet. The increase in demand for a sector naturally increases the conflicts in that sector. Disputes may be encountered in the development of the game idea, at the end of the game’s production process, or even later. The inadequacy of legal regulations also increases the importance of international agreements and judicial decisions for the gaming industry. “While certain criteria and regulations may be taken into account in disputes concerning labor law and criminal law, what will be the legal protection in case of intellectual property violations?” the question comes up.

There is no consensus in the doctrine about which terms such as computer game, digital game, video game, computer (video) game should be used. While the Supreme Court includes the term digital game in some of its decisions, it uses the term video game in some decisions and the term computer game in others. The biggest Turkish game production companies usually use the term computer game. The equivalent of the word computer in the Dictionary of the Turkish Language Institution is “An electronic device, electronic brain, which performs and concludes a task consisting of many arithmetic or logical operations according to a pre-given program”. Therefore, game consoles and mobile devices are actually computers. Therefore, it can be accepted that the concept of computer game covers all these varieties and the term digital game can be used in general.

Intellectual protection of digital games is ensured by Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works (“FSEK”) in our country. We will briefly refer to this law as FSEK in our article.
FSEK accepts science and literature, music, fine arts, cinema works and processing-compilations that have the characteristics of their owner as works. Works that are not included in one of these main types can be protected according to the unfair competition provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102.

Every digital game is based on a computer program. For this reason, some opinions argue that computer games should be considered essentially as a computer program in the doctrine. Computer programs are created to achieve a specific purpose. Computer games, on the other hand, do not have a pure purpose. The game is designed to give pleasure and have fun. At the core of the game, a scenario and characters are presented, and the game can end in different ways. The point where it fundamentally differs from the computer program is the use of imagination.

Legal Nature and Protection of Digital Games

Computer programs were protected under Turkish Law with an amendment made in FSEK in 1995. With this regulation, computer programs are considered as works of science and literature in accordance with FSEK article 2. However, it may be misleading to think that computer games can be protected with these provisions, because computer games are complex formations.

They consist of visual and auditory elements, dialogues between characters and a separate scenario that combines all these. A game of protection for a computer program only can leave other game-making elements unprotected.

Pursuant to Article 1 of the FSEK, the Work is as follows: “Represents all kinds of intellectual and artistic products… that have the characteristics of the owner and are considered as works of science and literature, music, fine arts or cinema”. Article 6 of the FSEK regulates that processing and compilations will be considered works, provided that they bear the condition of the operator’s specialty. The product, which does not fall under one of these titles, is not considered suitable for protection in the sense of FSEK, even if it is a work.

Turkish doctrine seeks three conditions for a product to be considered a work:
Requirement as to form ====> Include in one of the work types
Subjective condition ====> Particularity
Objective condition ====> Physical quality

The concept of privacy expresses the intellectual product between the work and its creator, so it is accepted that the work is the result of the intellectual effort of real people. However, for the works created by artificial intelligence, this strict character definition is starting to lose its validity. According to the new modern theory created as a requirement of our age, intellectual creativity is sought on the work, while the search for the reflection of the author’s personality is ignored.

The mere idea that passes through the human mind may be excluded from FSEK protection, because the idea must be put into practice in order to benefit from the protection. The idea of the person who shares the idea of the game scenario with his relatives is also left unprotected within the scope of FSEK.

Although the types of works are determined by the method of counting one by one in the law in accordance with the principle of numerus clausus (limited number) in FSEK, this hard wall can be overcome due to some gaps in the law.
Many criticisms are made for these three conditions.

Review for terms of Science and Artwork

The protection of digital games as works of science and art under the title of computer program is insufficient. Because digital games are designed as formations far beyond computer programs. Contrary to computer programs with technical features, digital games feature more interactive, scenario, visual and auditory factors.

Review for databases protection

Creations belonging to the digital games industry and not a database of digital games. There is a basic purpose when designing games for digital entertainment and enjoyment. The information is targeted at certain target audiences. Therefore, it is seen that the database and digital games are kept in an inappropriate place to consider equivalent sectors.

Review for terms of fine art Works

Fine art works are based on aesthetic value, the obligatory element of the work is its aesthetic value. Digital games, on the other hand, do not have such an obligation, although there is an opinion that they have aesthetic aspects, they should not be evaluated in the same scope as this is an element of necessity in fine art works.
Review for embroidered work

An embroidered work is defined as a connected work that is not independent of the original work, but is recreated with the original work’s peculiarity. As an example of processed works, we can give as an example the game versions of the Lord of the Rings series adapted to the cinema by Peter Jackson. There are also works that are the opposite of this and turned into a movie through the game. In other words, we call the new work that emerges with the processing of the original work. There is no significant debate in the doctrine as to whether digital games should be considered a work of art. Some authors think that when concrete conditions are met, digital games will be considered as works of art, while some authors think that digital games can be considered as inspiration due to disconnection.

Review for multimedia terms

Considering their interactive aspects, it is generally accepted that digital games can be qualified as multimedia works. However, the regulation of multimedia works within the scope of FSEK has not yet been found, and the acceptance of digital games as multimedia works as per the principle of numerus clausus (limited number) remains an opinion. Therefore, digital games cannot benefit from multimedia copyright protection.

Review in terms of cinematic work

The main reason why digital games are considered as cinematic works can be considered as they both consist of a series of moving images, are based on a scenario and concern the entertainment industry. In Black Mirror: Bandersnatch, released in 2018, the audience is given the opportunity to reach different endings by offering ways to choose. Among the cinema works, this is an exception because the scripts of the cinema works are written with a certain ending. In digital games, the player’s decisions can shape the end of the game. A movie can be consumed by watching it, but in the digital game, the player continues to interact with the game all the time.

Although FSEK is a very old law, the number of works counted in this law is limited in accordance with the principle of numerus clausus. With the development of technology, many new types of artifacts have emerged that should be added to the concept of work, and digital games are considered one of the biggest reasons why FSEK is exposed to criticism in this direction.

The general acceptance is that digital games are most similar to cinema and multimedia works by their nature. Since multimedia works are not regulated within the scope of FSEK, it is thought that they can benefit from the legal protections provided to cinema works by bringing a broad interpretation. However, of course, this does not provide sufficient protection. . We see that a protection that will be the exact equivalent of the situations encountered during the creation and implementation of digital games can only be achieved when regulations that keep up with the times are made.

By Onur Kucuk, Managing Partner, Esra Gokce Saltik, Junior Associate, KP Law

Aksan has advised the Medicover Group on the acquisition of Guven Laboratuvarlari from founder Ahmet Sahin. BeyKem reportedly advised Ahmet Sahin on the deal.

The Medicover Group is a Sweden-based publicly traded specialized provider of diagnostic and healthcare services.

According to Aksan, as a result of the transaction, Medicover now owns all of the shares in the target company.

Aksan’s team included Partner Onur Ergun.

Paksoy has advised the EBRD on its USD 20 million long-term loan for Uludag Icecek to pursue green investments in Turkey. Egemenoglu advised the borrower.

According to Egemenoglu, Uludag Icecek “plans to utilize the loan to fund (1) a new warehouse for the Yenice plant, (2) a wastewater recovery facility for the Caybasi plant, and (3) solar panel investments for both facilities. The loan sets an excellent example of green finance in Turkey, aiming to minimize Uludag Icecek’s carbon footprint and water use.”

Uludag Icecek is a beverage manufacturer in Turkey established in 1930.

Back in 2021, Egemenoglu advised Uludag Icecek on another loan from the EBRD, amounting to EUR 15 million (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on May 3, 2021).

Paksoy’s team included Partner Sera Somay and Associates Bulent Ozturk and Muhammed Kesim.

The Egemenoglu team included Partner Gunsel Dede and Associate Irem Pelen.

Data processing systems’ convenience has led to emergence of new cybersecurity risks and methods for committing cyber-crimes, as well as a growth in such crimes, notably fraud. This is one of the unintended consequences of digitalization in the financial sector.

In Turkish law, cybercrimes are divided into two categories: direct and indirect. Direct cybercrimes are listed under Section 10 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 [“TPC”] titled “Offenses in the field of Data Processing Systems”, whereas indirect cybercrimes are regulated as a qualified form of various crimes under the TPC. In this respect, “access to data processing system”, “hindrance or destruction of the system, deletion or alteration of data”, “improper use of bank or credit cards” and ” prohibited devices or programs” are classified as direct cyber-crimes under the Section 10. On the other hand, indirect cybercrimes are regulated as qualified forms of theft, fraud, and the crime of providing a place and opportunity for gambling.

Fraud By Using Data Processing Systems

Pursuant to Article 158/1-f of the TPC, committing fraud by using data processing systems, banks and financial institutions as a tool has been regulated as a qualified form of fraud that increases the penalty. Within this framework, offenders of such crime will be punished with imprisonment from four years to ten years and imposed punitive fine up to five thousand days, not less than twice the profit obtained from the crime.

Data processing systems serve as a bridge in the case of cyber fraud, transferring the fraudulent act from the perpetrator to the victim. Of course, there are a variety of ways to use this bridge. Phishing and man-in-the-middle attacks are the two most common methods used to commit cyber fraud, especially when international trading companies are targeted.

• Phishing

Phishing is one of the oldest methods of online attacks in which individuals or organisations are contacted by e-mails or websites that poses legitimate to lure the targets into making money transfers or providing sensitive data such as passwords, usernames, and banking and credit card details. Although virtually anybody might be the target of these attacks, business executives and employees in the finance departments who have access to confidential financial data are the most frequently attacked.

• Man in the Middle Attack

Man-in-the-middle attack is a type of cyber-attack in which the attackers illegally intrude into the communication between two computer users in order to secretly monitor and alter the communication between the parties who believe they are communicating directly and securely to one another. In this case, the perpetrator, known as the “man in the middle,” frequently intercepts email correspondence between businesses that trade together and transmits emails on their behalf by impersonating one of the two parties. The perpetrator, who has a detailed knowledge of the nature of the business relationship between the companies and the intended transaction, intervenes in the email exchange and modifies the banking information that will be used by the businesses to transfer money, ensuring that the transaction is received by the modified account instead of the intended recipient.

These two methods, which are often used in fraudulent activities, have one thing in common: they both involve transferring money to the fraudster’s account. Phishing convinces the remitter to make the money transfer by e-mails that appear to have come from persons with whom they have a business relationship or from their senior managers. In the man-in-the-middle attack, while the parties of the business relationship are actually communicating with each other, the attacker inserts themselves in the mail chain via a fake e-mail address that appears to be original by changing the extension, a letter or punctuation of the e-mail address belonging to one of the parties. Infiltrating the mail chain covertly, the attacker changes the real account details belonging to one of the parties of the commercial relationship and make the other party transfer the money to their own account. This account is mostly a bank account. Therefore, it is crucial to decide the position of the bank which plays a significant part in such crimes.

What Are the Legal Remedies?

So, what should persons who are exposed to cyber fraud in Türkiye do? In fact, the moment crime of any kind is discovered, it is imperative that the competent authorities are informed. In this regard, the report to cyber fraud may be submitted to the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, law enforcement authorities, governor’s office, office of the administrative chief of district, or the court. However, it should be noted that the report submitted to the governor’s office, office of the administrative chief of district, or the court will cause a waste of time, considering that it will be sent to the relevant Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. Moreover, the crime may be reported to Turkish ambassadors and consulates if it was committed abroad but needs to be prosecuted in Türkiye.

In parallel to reporting the crime, it may be possible to cancel or postpone the money transfer in cyber fraud cases, which typically involve bank accounts, by directly contacting the Turkish bank that received the money. As a matter of fact, there is a limited time frame to cancel the transfer by blocking the payment. Sometimes the time frame is so limited that even if you realize the fraud and contact the bank immediately after making the transfer, the transfer cannot be revoked because it is instantaneous. Yet throughout the stages of the criminal investigation and prosecution, it is crucial to demand of the judicial authorities the implementation of measures to seize the bank accounts of the suspect or the accused. Because, if the unfairly transferred amount or a portion of it is still in the bank account, securing the money in the bank account might prevent the damage from occurring and make it possible for the victims to compensate their losses when the investigation is concluded more swiftly and efficiently.

The identification of the perpetrator present yet another challenge in fraud crimes committed via data processing systems due to the need for technical methods. In cases where the identity of the suspect is known, although it is extremely rare, legal actions such as lawsuits, enforcement proceedings etc. can be initiated directly against the suspect(s).

How much liability falls on the bank?

According to data from the World Bank published in 2021 76% of the total human population has bank accounts. In other words, 76% of people apply to banks to protect their savings. As a matter of fact, as stated in many decisions of the Court of Cassation of Republic of Türkiye, banks are institutions of trust and reliance. In this respect, banks have an objective duty of care to their customers, and the limits of their liability are determined as a requirement of being a trust/reliance institution. To summarise, banks are strictly liable for the unlawful acts of their employees and are held liable for even the slightest faults in their relations with their customers.

Although this is true in theory, it is questionable whether banks can really be held liable for cyber fraud cases. The bank is obligated to compensate the losses of the customers in accordance with the Court of Cassation’s jurisprudence if the money in the customers’ accounts is seized by third parties through illicit transactions or falsified documents without the customers’ fault.

However, natural or legal persons, who are exposed to cyber fraud through the methods described above, place their own orders for money transfers in accordance with the instructions of the other party. In such cases, it becomes impossible to hold the bank liable, because it has been established through legal precedent, that if money transfer orders are given to incorrect account numbers, the bank cannot be sued. Banks are not even obliged to check whether the account number and the name of the recipient match.

In other words, even though the bank can be held liable for an unauthorized transaction, it is the customer that bears liability if the money transfer to the fraudster is completed by them, because this way the transaction is authorized by the customer. This approach, nevertheless, also sparks debate. Although it is accepted that the bank will not be liable for compensation in such cases, it might be argued that the bank’s response and attitude once the cyber fraud is discovered may have an impact. Once the bank is notified of the cyber fraud crime and the associated transaction, certain actions are expected from the bank, such as control, detection, and reporting of suspicious transactions. The bank may be held fully or partially liable if it fails to take these actions, i.e., if a loss occurs due to the bank’s fault.

By Baris Ulker, Senior Associate, and Beliz Boyalikli, Legal Trainee, Guleryuz & Partners

Turkish law firms Diri Legal and Sevi & Mergen have joined forces to form a new full-service law firm in Istanbul – Diri Sevi Mergen – helmed by Partners Nazan Diri Bal, Ali Murat Sevi, and Turhan Mergen.

Diri Bal specializes in corporate and M&A, IT and data protection, and competition law. Before joining forces with Sevi & Mergen, she spent over five years as the Managing Partner of Diri Legal. Earlier, she spent over 11 years with the Birsel Law Offices.

Sevi’s primary areas of focus are commercial law, company law, and capital markets law. He spent over five years as a Partner with Sevi & Mergen and almost 14 years with the Birsel Law Offices.

Mergen’s expertise is corporate and M&A, project finance, consumer law, and labor law. Before setting up the new firm, he spent over five years as a Partner with Sevi & Mergen and almost a decade with the Birsel Law Offices.

According to a Diri Sevi Mergen press statement, “with this reunion of old colleagues as partners who have worked at the Birsel Law Offices for more than a decade, the team enjoys the taste of a fresh start blended with a warm familiarity and well-suited rebranding.”

The Law Amending the Social Security and General Health Insurance Law No. 375 and Decree-Law No. 32121 (“Law”), which is eagerly awaited by the public and directly concerns approximately 2.5 million Turkish citizens, was published in the Official Gazette No. 32121 dated 03/03/2023 and came into force.

With the amendment, employees started working before 08/09/1999 and have completed the insurance period and premium payment days specified in the Law will be entitled to the pension.

A. Overview of The Amendment In Terms of Employees
Under the Turkish Social Security Legislation, the conditions required for employees to be eligible for retirement pension are (i) having paid a certain amount of premiums, (ii) reaching a certain age, and (iii) leaving the job due to retirement.

The amendment introduced under the Law has removed the barrier for employees not meeting the age limit criterion to receive the pension.

B. Overview of The Amendment In Terms of Employees
The employees entitled to the pension will terminate their labor contracts in a way that entitles them to statutory seniority compensation, which will result in the obligation of employers to pay severance pay to many employees in a short period of time.

The government has stated that a fund will be provided to ease the statutory seniority compensation burden on employers during the drafting period of the Law, but no regulation has been made yet in this regard; it is expected that regulation on this issue will be published in the coming days.

One of the most crucial questions for employers is whether an employee who resigned due to retirement could be re-employed, and if so, whether they should be employed under the same conditions, and whether it is mandatory to employ all the employees in the same situation.

There is no such provision in Turkish legislation that prevents a retired person from working again. The employer can re-employ any employee they wish.

Indeed, the Law also stipulates that if a retiree is re-employed within 30 days, five percentage points of the employer’s social security support premium will be paid by the Treasury.

C. Conclusion
With the amendment introduced by the Law, the age limit for retirement has been eliminated for employees who started working before 08/09/1999. These employees are expected to terminate their labor contracts and retire in the coming days in a way that entitles them to statutory seniority compensation. If the employer and retiree agree, the retiree could be re-employed even after retirement.

By Sertaç Kökenek, Senior Partner, Özgür Güner, Partner and Bekir Yağız Kızkapan, Associate, Moral, Kinikoglu, Pamukkale, Kokenek

Paksoy has advised the shareholders of SAP partner MBIS on the sale of the company to Nagarro. Herguner Bilgen Ucer reportedly advised Nagarro.

The transaction remains contingent on regulatory approval.

MBIS is an SAP Gold Partner in Turkey. Nagarro is an IT services management company.

According to Paksoy, “with this transaction, MBIS will strengthen its operations and offer its products and services on a global scale.”

Paksoy’s team included Partner Elvan Aziz, Senior Associate Simge Sengun, and Associate Idil Gunes.

Editor’s Note: After this article was published, Herguner Bilgen Ucer confirmed it had advised Nagarro. The firm’s team included Partner Deniz Tuncel, Senior Associate Emel Tulun, and Associate Mey Akkayan.

The obligation of e-commerce intermediary service providers and e-commerce service providers to obtain licenses from the Ministry of Commerce was introduced to our legal system with the “Law Amending the Law on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce” [available only in Turkish] published in the Official Gazette dated 7 July 2022, and thus has been amended by the Presidential Decree No. 6829 [available only in Turkish] published in the Official Gazette dated 23 February 2023 and numbered 32113.

As per the amendment, which enters into force with its publication, all of the monetary limits regarding the license obligations were increased by 50%.

The amended thresholds according to yearly transaction volume of the intermediary service providers and service providers are renewed as stated below.

Accordingly, the annual minimum transaction volume to fall into the scope of the license obligation is now determined as 15 billion Turkish Liras and the annual transaction value required to be subjected to the maximum license fee of 25% of the relevant portion of the trading volume was increased to 97,5 billion Turkish Liras.

Below are listed, respectively, [i.] the old threshold [the annual transaction volume], [ii.] the new threshold [the annual transaction volume] and [iii.] the license fee.

• 10 billion ₺ – 15 billion ₺ – 3/10.000
• 20 billion ₺ – 30 billion ₺ – 5/1.000
• 30 billion ₺ – 45 billion ₺ –1%
• 40 billion ₺ – 60 billion ₺ –5%
• 50 billion ₺ – 75 billion ₺ –10%
• 55 billion ₺ – 82.5 billion ₺ –15%
• 60 billion ₺ – 90 billion ₺ –20%
• 65 billion ₺+ –97.5 billion ₺+ –25%

Although the amendment has not made an explicit change in license fees, the monetary limits have been increased significantly even though the licensing obligation had just entered into force and is still in its adaptation period until 2024 for service providers and 2025 for intermediary service providers.

This development demonstrates that the concerns regarding potential restrictive effect of the regulation, as previously mentioned in our article “New Era in Turkey’s E-Commerce Market”, were becoming considerably likely to be proven right. With the amendment and the increased thresholds, many e-commerce intermediary service providers and e-commerce service providers are now subjected to lower license fees, and thus the financial burden caused by the license obligation will be alleviated to some degree and the market will be relieved.

By Zahide Altunbas Sancak, Partner, and Aziz Can Cengiz, Attorney, Guleryuz & Partners