Recent Comprehensive Amendments to the Electronic Commerce and Consumer Law Legislation
I. Introduction
As of 2025, significant legislative amendments have been introduced in the field of electronic commerce, reshaping both the obligations of service providers and the rights of consumers. Through the amendments made to the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers on 8 March 2025, and to the Distance Contracts Regulation on 24 May 2025, comprehensive updates have been implemented regarding the rights and obligations of the parties involved in the digital commerce ecosystem.
The full Turkish text of the Regulation Amending the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers can be accessed here.
The said amendments were published in the Official Gazette dated 8 March 2025 and entered into force on the same date.
The full Turkish text of the Regulation Amending the Distance Contracts Regulation can be accessed here; the amendments therein will enter into force on 1 January 2026.
II. Amendments to the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers
1. Updates to ETHS’ Disclosure Obligations
Under Article 1 of the Regulation Amending the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers (“Regulation Amendment”), amendments were introduced to three separate paragraphs of Article 5 of the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers (“Regulation”), which governs the disclosure obligations of Electronic Commerce Service Providers (“ETHS”).
Pursuant to the amendment made to Article 5, paragraph 2 of the Regulation, the information that must be displayed in full by ETHS — who are merchants or craftsmen and artisans selling through an electronic commerce marketplace — within the area allocated to them by the Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Provider (“ETAHS”) has been revised. Accordingly, ETHS are now required to display at least one of the following: trade name, business name or registered trademark, as well as tax identification number for craftsmen and artisans or MERSIS number for merchants, within the area allocated to them by ETAHS. With this amendment, the requirement to display a Registered Electronic Mail (KEP) address has been removed.
The same article also introduced an amendment to Article 5, paragraph 3 of the Regulation. Accordingly, ETHS who are not merchants or craftsmen and artisans and who sell through an electronic commerce marketplace are now only required to display the province information of their registered address within the area allocated to them by ETAHS. Previously, these individuals were required to display their name, surname, and the province information of their registered address. It can be noted that this amendment significantly narrows the scope of information required to be disclosed.
The amendment to Article 5, paragraph 4 of the Regulation redefines the information that ETHS selling through an electronic commerce marketplace must provide to ETAHS, introducing a distinction based on whether the ETHS is a merchant or a craftsman and artisan. Accordingly:
- Merchants or craftsmen and artisans are required to provide their registered address, email address, and phone number to ETAHS.
- ETHS who are not merchants or craftsmen and artisans are required to provide their name, surname, Turkish ID number, email address, and phone number to ETAHS.
Under Article 2 of the Regulation Amendment, amendments were also made to paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 6 of the Regulation, which governs ETAHS’ disclosure and verification obligations. Pursuant to this amendment, ETAHS is required to verify the identifying information of ETHS, and cannot provide services to an ETHS whose information has not been verified. In practice, ETAHS fulfils its verification obligation by cross-checking the identifying information provided by ETHS against publicly available databases and official records. Once the trade name, MERSIS number, tax identification number, Turkish ID number, and contact details have been verified, this information is accurately and promptly displayed on ETAHS’s platform, and the ETHS is permitted to operate on the marketplace.
The amendment stipulates that this verification must be conducted at least once per calendar year. Under the former regulation, verification was required to be completed within the first three months of the calendar year; this time constraint has now been removed, while maintaining the obligation to conduct verification at least annually. Additionally, it is now expressly provided that ETAHS is not required to verify this information in years when the ETHS does not list any products.
The amendment to Article 6, paragraph 4 of the Regulation further requires the ETAHS to display, within the area allocated to ETHS, a notice confirming that it holds the verified identifying information and an approved electronic communication address. This includes, for merchants or craftsmen and artisans, their registered address; and for non-merchant and non-craftsman/artisan ETHS, their province information, name, surname, and Turkish ID number. This amendment also reinforces the distinction in disclosure obligations between merchants or craftsmen and artisans and the ones that are not merchants, craftsmen and artisans.
2. New Regulations on Unfair Commercial Practices
Article 3 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to Article 11 of the Regulation, which governs unfair commercial practices in electronic commerce. Specifically, paragraph (f) was amended, and a new paragraph (ğ) was added.
Under the former version of paragraph (f), it was deemed an unfair commercial practice for ETAHS to impose withdrawal periods exceeding those prescribed under the Consumer Protection Law without the prior consent of the ETHS. Following the recent amendment to paragraph (f), it is now also deemed an unfair commercial practice to determine such withdrawal periods without expressly stipulating them in the intermediary agreement, regardless of whether prior consent from the ETHS has been obtained.
Furthermore, with the introduction of paragraph (ğ) to Article 11, it is now deemed an unfair commercial practice for ETAHS to impose a contractual penalty without first requesting an explanation from the ETHS through its internal communication system, except where the circumstances giving rise to the penalty can be substantiated by documents and records, in accordance with the intermediary agreement.
3. Amendments to the Minimum Elements of Intermediary Agreements
Article 4 of the Regulation Amendment introduced a revision to subparagraph (a) of paragraph 2 of Article 15 of the Regulation, which sets forth the minimum elements for intermediary agreements. This provision specifically addresses the elements related to data portability and access that must be included in intermediary agreements executed by medium, large, and very large-scale ETAHS. Pursuant to the amendment, it is now mandatory for intermediary agreements to include a clause stipulating that ETAHS provide the technical means for ETHS to transfer, free of charge and effectively, the data specified in Article 21, paragraph 1, subparagraph (c) of the Regulation both during the term of the intermediary agreement and for one year following its termination. Additionally, ETAHS must ensure that ETHS has free access to the data specified in subparagraph (d) of the same paragraph throughout the duration of the intermediary agreement. This amendment ensures that technical safeguards regarding data portability and access are explicitly incorporated into the contractual framework, thereby providing more comprehensive protection in favor of ETHS.
4. Updates Regarding Amendments to the Intermediary Agreements
Article 5 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to paragraph 2 of Article 16 of the Regulation. According to the amendment, unless a longer period is specified by the ETAHS, amendments to the intermediary agreement shall enter into force fifteen days after the date of notification. This period shall be implemented as thirty days in cases where the amendment requires the Electronic Commerce Service Provider (“ETHS”) to implement technical developments; involves an increase in commission rates or other service fees; restricts, suspends, or terminates the intermediary services; introduces new penalties against the ETHS; or otherwise affects the balance of rights and interests between the parties. Additionally, the amendment stipulates that the fifteen-day period shall not apply to amendments made in favor of the ETHS, provided that such amendments are duly notified to the ETHS.
Finally, a new paragraph was added to Article 16, providing that the periods specified in paragraph 2 shall not apply to amendments to the intermediary agreement that are required to be made pursuant to decisions or regulations issued by regulatory or supervisory authorities.
5. Amendments Regarding Obligations
Article 6 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to Article 18 of the Regulation, which is set forth under chapter six, titled "Obligations." Under the former version of this provision, ETAHS had only been required to provide the technical means for the information contained within its internal communication system to be accessed by Ministry personnel designated for this purpose. Following the amendment, ETAHS is now also required to ensure that such information can be viewed, recorded, and copied — without alteration — by the relevant ETHS throughout the term of the intermediary agreement and for a period of one year following its termination.
Article 7 of the Regulation Amendment also introduced changes to paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 20 of the Regulation, which regulates promotion and visibility through online search engines. Under the former version of the Regulation, ETAHS or ETHS was prohibited from engaging in marketing and promotional activities on online search engines — using keywords consisting of registered trademarks that exclusively form the main element of domain names registered in the Electronic Commerce Information System (“ETBİS”) and belonging to persons with whom they have no economic affiliation — without having first obtained an explicit declaration of positive intent (based on written or electronic consent). Under the new provision, if the Ministry determines that this prohibition has been violated, it shall impose an administrative sanction, and the relevant ETAHS or ETHS shall be notified to cease the violation. Upon receiving such notification, the ETAHS or ETHS shall be required to eliminate the violation within twenty-four hours and to add the keywords that are the subject of the complaint to the list of exact match negative keywords across all advertising models and campaign types used to place text ads on online search engines. Furthermore, supporting information and documentation demonstrating compliance with this obligation must be submitted to the Ministry without delay.
Additionally, paragraph 1 of Article 21 of the Regulation, which governs data usage and sharing and sets out the obligations imposed on medium, large, and very large-scale ETAHS, has been revised under Article 8 of the Regulation Amendment. Accordingly, ETAHS is now required to:
- Use the data obtained from ETHS or consumers, excluding publicly available data, solely for the purpose of providing and improving the intermediary service;
- Refrain from using the data obtained through the intermediary service to compete with other ETHS where it acts as an ETHS itself or through other ETHS within its economic entity;
- Provide the technical means to ensure that the ETHS can transfer the following data free of charge and effectively, both during the term of the intermediary agreement and for one year following its termination:
- Sales and returning data, product features, descriptions, and images related to the products offered for sale by ETHS; as well as questions, answers, and reviews concerning such products. Performance ratings of ETHS, if such data has been obtained by ETAHS.
- If obtained by ETAHS, data regarding the most preferred products based on periodic, special day, category, and product metrics related to its own orders; and demographic and behavioral data of consumers, including gender, age group, city and district distribution, and the timing of purchases, with free access provided to such data throughout the term of the intermediary agreement.
6. Amendments Regarding the Independent Audit Process
Article 9 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to Article 23 of the Regulation, which governs the independent audit process. Under the amended provision, medium, large, and very large-scale ETAHS and ETHS are now required to have an independent audit conducted, covering the previous calendar year, by an independent audit firm authorized by the Capital Markets Board of Türkiye. The resulting audit report must be submitted to the Ministry each year in August. Previously, the deadline for submission was set for April, which has now been revised to August. Considering the effective date of this amendment, the current practice will remain applicable for the submission of independent audit reports for the 2025 calendar year. The new deadline will apply starting with reports due in August 2026.
The scope of the required content to be included in the audit reports has also been expanded under the Regulation Amendment. Accordingly, the audit reports must now include information regarding the activities of ETAHS or ETHS, their management and organizational structure, current shareholders and their shareholding ratios, subsidiaries and their shareholding ratios, entities within the same economic entity, the registered trademark information of both ETAHS or ETHS and the entities within their economic entity, electronic commerce platform information, financial condition — including financial statements — and compliance with obligations related to the electronic commerce license. With this amendment, the scope of the independent audit has been broadened in terms of both content and parties covered. In particular, the inclusion of information regarding entities within the same economic entity as ETAHS and ETHS reflects a more comprehensive and transparent approach to the audit process.
7. Amendments Regarding the Compliance Report Obligation
Article 10 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to Article 24 of the Regulation, which governs the compliance report obligation. Under the new provision, medium, large, and very large-scale ETAHS are now required to conduct an annual review to assess the compliance of the content provided by ETHS with the applicable legislation, and to submit the resulting compliance report to the Ministry in August of the following calendar year. Similar to the independent audit process, this amendment revised the previously applicable deadline for submission from April to August. The compliance report must be prepared for the purpose of identifying any violations within the content provided by ETHS, in relation to the Consumer Protection Law (Law No. 6502), the Personal Data Protection Law, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, the Industrial Property Law, and the Product Safety and Technical Regulations Law (which was newly added), as well as any secondary legislation enacted pursuant to these laws. The report must include the following: the subject matter of any identified violation, the relevant legal basis, the methods used to detect the violation, and the measures taken in response.
Considering the effective date of this amendment, the current practice will remain applicable for the submission of compliance reports for the 2025 calendar year. The new deadline will apply starting with compliance reports due in August 2026.
8. Cases of Advertising Budget Overruns and Misleading the Ministry
Article 12 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to the relevant paragraphs of Article 28 of the Regulation, which governs the advertising budget, and added a new paragraph to the article. Under the amended provision, if an ETAHS exceeds its advertising budget by having advertisements placed to benefit itself — either through ETHS to whom it provides intermediary services or through third parties — and fails to include the costs it incurred for such advertisements in its report submitted to the Ministry, these expenditures shall be deemed to constitute acts or transactions intended to mislead the Ministry.
Under the former version of the Regulation, the mere act of exceeding the advertising budget through advertisements placed by ETAHS for its own benefit was deemed a misleading act toward the Ministry. However, following the recent amendment, for such conduct to qualify as a misleading act, in addition to exceeding the advertising budget, there must also be a failure to report the related expenditure to the Ministry.
Additionally, a new paragraph (paragraph 12) was added to Article 28 of the Regulation. According to this new provision, advertising expenditures — calculated pursuant to paragraph 3 — that do not exceed five percent of the advertising budget, incurred for the purchase of used goods and the sale of refurbished products within the scope of the Regulation on the Sale of Refurbished Products, shall not be included in the calculation of the advertising budget.
9. Clarification of the Elements Included in the Discount Budget
Article 13 of the Regulation Amendment introduced changes to Article 29 of the Regulation, titled "Discount Budget." Pursuant to the amended provision, costs incurred by ETAHS for the benefit of buyers and ETHS, and by ETHS for the benefit of buyers — including promotions, rewards, points, vouchers, gift certificates, and similar benefits, as well as other economic advantages — shall be considered as part of the discount budget. The provision also sets out in detail which items must be treated as discounts under all circumstances. Furthermore, the newly added clause stipulates that benefits and discounts provided by ETAHS to buyers and ETHS in situations requiring solidarity and assistance, such as earthquakes, fires, and floods, or in order to promote the active participation of disadvantaged segments of society in economic and social life — provided that prior approval has been obtained from the Ministry — shall not be considered as part of the discount budget.
10. ETAHS’ Liability for Unlawful Content and Limitations Introduced by the Council of State Decision
Article 10 of the Regulation, titled "Unlawful Content," regulates the liability of ETAHS in relation to unlawful content provided by ETHS. No amendments have been made to paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article. However, a significant practical change has arisen as a result of a stay of execution decision issued by the Council of State concerning paragraph 3. According to paragraph 3, ETAHS is deemed to have become aware of unlawful content under any of the following circumstances: When the unlawful content is identified by ETAHS within the scope of the compliance report prepared pursuant to Article 24 of the Regulation; when a court decision regarding the unlawful content is notified to ETAHS; or when the Ministry or other public authorities notify ETAHS of the unlawful content. By its decision dated 8 July 2024 (Case No. E.:2023/465), the 10th Chamber of the Council of State ordered the suspension of the phrase “when the unlawful content is identified by ETAHS within the scope of the compliance report prepared pursuant to Article 24” contained in paragraph 3. As a result of this ruling, a determination made by ETAHS within its own compliance report will no longer, on its own, be deemed to constitute awareness of unlawful content. Accordingly, the scope of ETAHS’s liability arising from such determinations has been narrowed.
III. Amendments Introduced by the Regulation Amending the Distance Contracts Regulation (“DCR Regulation Amendment”)
1. Amendments to the Pre-Contractual Information Requirements
Article 1 of the DCR Regulation Amendment introduced changes to subparagraphs (g) and (k) of paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Distance Contracts Regulation (“DCR”). This article regulates the specific information that sellers or providers must disclose to consumers prior to the conclusion of a distance contract or before the consumer accepts any corresponding offer.
The amendment to subparagraph (g) redefined the scope of information to be provided to consumers in cases where a right of withdrawal applies. Under the former version of the Regulation, sellers were required to disclose not only the conditions, time frame, and procedure for exercising the right of withdrawal, but also the identity of the carrier designated by the seller for product returns and which party would be responsible for the return costs. With the amendment, this subparagraph has been streamlined to require only the disclosure of the following: “The conditions, time frame, and procedure for exercising the right of withdrawal, as well as information on the carrier designated by the seller for returns.” Accordingly, it is now expressly provided that the consumer shall not be required to bear the cost of returns.
The amendment to subparagraph (k) updated the scope of the pre-contractual information obligation concerning the avenues available to consumers for resolving disputes. Under the former version of the Regulation, it was sufficient to inform consumers that they could apply either to a Consumer Court or to a Consumer Arbitration Committee in the event of a dispute. Under the new provision, sellers and providers are now required to inform consumers that they must first apply to a Consumer Arbitration Committee, or, in accordance with Article 73/A of the Consumer Protection Law (Law No. 6502), apply to a mediator before initiating a lawsuit before the Consumer Court. This amendment ensures that pre-contractual information reflects the updated legal requirements and properly guides consumers in disputes where mandatory mediation procedures have been introduced.
2. Amendments Regarding Return Costs in the Event of Withdrawal
Article 2 of the DCR Regulation Amendment introduced changes to paragraph 4 of Article 12 of the Distance Contracts Regulation (“DCR”). Prior to the amendment, paragraph 4 contained a reference to paragraph 3 of Article 13 (“without prejudice to paragraph 3 of Article 13”), which provided that, in the event of the consumer exercising the right of withdrawal, the consumer could be held responsible for return costs unless the goods were defective. With the amendment, this reference has been removed, thereby eliminating the distinction based on the nature of the withdrawal and introducing a uniform obligation in favor of the consumer regarding refunds.
Significant changes were also made to paragraph 5 of the same article. Under the former version of the Regulation, detailed rules were set forth regarding the allocation of return costs in cases where pre-contractual information required under Article 5(1)(g) did not include details of the return carrier designated by the seller, or where the designated carrier did not have a branch in the consumer’s location. With the amendment, paragraph 5 of Article 12 has been entirely redrafted. It now establishes a clear principle that consumers exercising their right of withdrawal under distance contracts shall not be required to bear return costs. The amendment also clarifies the respective responsibilities of both the seller and the intermediary service provider in this regard.
3. Repeal of Article 13 Concerning Consumer Obligations
Article 3 of the DCR Regulation Amendment repealed Article 13 of the Distance Contracts Regulation, which had governed the consumer’s obligations regarding the return of goods when exercising the right of withdrawal — including the return period, liability for changes in the condition of the goods due to use, and responsibility for return costs. Under the now-repealed Article 13, if the seller or provider did not offer to collect the goods itself, the consumer was required to return the goods to the seller or a person authorized by the seller within fourteen days of sending the notice of withdrawal. The provision also stated that consumers would not be held liable for any changes or deterioration resulting from the proper use of the goods in accordance with their operation, technical specifications, and usage instructions during the withdrawal period.
Furthermore, Article 13 provided that, if the return was made using the carrier designated by the seller in the pre-contractual information and subject to the limitation that return costs would not exceed delivery costs, the consumer would bear such return costs — unless the goods were defective as per Article 8 of the Consumer Protection Law (Law No. 6502), in which case the consumer would not be held responsible for any return costs. The article also allowed consumers, upon request, to have the return costs offset against their refund. With the repeal of Article 13, the above provisions no longer apply. The return process and related obligations in the event of withdrawal will now be governed by other provisions of the Regulation. This amendment reflects a clear shift toward a more consumer-friendly framework by removing obligations related to return costs from the consumer.
4. Removal of an Exception to the Right of Withdrawal
Article 4 of the DCR Regulation Amendment repealed subparagraph (i) of paragraph 1 of Article 15 of the Distance Contracts Regulation. Prior to its repeal, this subparagraph excluded contracts relating to the sale of mobile phones, smartwatches, tablets, and computers that had been delivered to the consumer from the scope of the right of withdrawal. As a result, the right of withdrawal could not be exercised for such electronic devices. With the repeal of subparagraph (i), consumers will now be entitled to exercise the right of withdrawal in relation to distance contracts concerning these types of devices, even after delivery. Accordingly, the right to withdrawal has been reinstated in favor of consumers for products such as mobile phones, smartwatches, tablets, and computers.
This amendment not only broadens the scope of the right of withdrawal but also strengthens consumer protection in transactions involving electronic products. By eliminating subparagraph (i), the list of exceptions under Article 15 of the Regulation has been narrowed, marking an important step forward for consumer rights.
IV. Conclusion
The legislative amendments covered in this publication, introduced in 2025, have substantially reshaped both the obligations governing the activities of ETAHS and ETHS and the consumer protection rules. The newly introduced obligations — aimed at ensuring that electronic commerce activities are conducted in a transparent, fair, and trust-based manner — provide a clearer framework for sector participants in various areas, including data sharing, contract modifications, independent audits, and advertising/discount budgets. At the same time, the amendments to the Distance Contracts Regulation have eased the obligations placed on consumers in return processes, expanded the scope of the right of withdrawal, and updated pre-contractual information requirements to reflect current legal developments. When the two sets of regulatory amendments are considered together, it is clear that the objective is to establish a more balanced, secure, and predictable framework for electronic commerce, benefiting both service providers and consumers alike.
Elif Aksöz Bayraktar, Senior Associate
Işıl Gizem Demirtaş, Legal Intern