This content has been translated from the original text.
Today, intense competition and frequent discount campaigns in the e-commerce sector have a major influence on consumers' purchasing decisions. Particularly in seasonal campaigns, sellers aim to increase their sales by offering attractive discounts. However, some of these campaigns may in reality rest on misleading discount and pricing practices. Turkish law contains detailed statutory provisions designed to protect consumers against such deceptive advertising. In this article, we will examine the legal nature of the misleading discount and price manipulation practices frequently encountered in e-commerce advertising; assess them in light of the relevant legislative provisions, recent Advertisement Board (Reklam Kurulu) decisions and case law; and, having set out the problems encountered in practice and the rules that must be observed, offer practical recommendations in the conclusion. Enjoy the read!
Today, intense competition and frequent discount campaigns in the e-commerce sector have a major influence on consumers' purchasing decisions. Particularly in seasonal campaigns, sellers aim to increase their sales by offering attractive discounts. However, some of these campaigns may in reality rest on misleading discount and pricing practices. Turkish law contains detailed statutory provisions designed to protect consumers against such deceptive advertising. Beginning with the Law on Consumer Protection (TKHK), the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC) and the Law on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce contain relevant provisions; in addition, the Advertisement Board, which operates within the Ministry of Trade, carries out active inspections. Indeed, throughout 2024 the Ministry of Trade scrutinised discount campaigns run under themes such as “wonderful Friday”, “the longest day” and “New Year's discount”, and in 2024 alone administrative fines of more than TL 41.4 million were imposed on promotions that misled consumers.
These figures demonstrate how important a place the subject occupies in the world of e-commerce. In this article, we will examine the legal nature of the misleading discount and price manipulation practices frequently encountered in e-commerce advertising; assess them in light of the relevant legislative provisions, recent Advertisement Board decisions and case law; and, having set out the problems encountered in practice and the rules that must be observed, offer practical recommendations in the conclusion. Enjoy the read!
1. Relevant Legislation
Law No. 6502 on Consumer Protection and the Regulation on Commercial Advertising and Unfair Commercial Practices, published in Official Gazette No. 29232 dated 10.01.2015, govern the fundamental matters concerning commercial advertisements. Pursuant to Article 61 of the Law, commercial advertisements must be truthful, honest and in compliance with the legislation; they must not be of a nature that deceives the consumer or exploits the consumer's lack of experience and knowledge.
Discount campaigns also fall within this scope. In the continuation of Article 61 of the Law, it is stated that the procedures and principles to be complied with in advertisements will be regulated by regulation. The Regulation on Commercial Advertising and Unfair Commercial Practices issued within this framework (the “Advertising Regulation”) details the rules of honesty that advertisements must meet and the special conditions that must be complied with.
The Regulation defines deceptive commercial practices, in general terms, as the potential to affect the economic behaviour of the average consumer by providing false or misleading information about a good or service. Statements that mislead the consumer, particularly regarding critical information such as the price or the discount rate, are clearly contrary to the legislation. Indeed, Article 7 of the Regulation emphasises the rules falling within the principle of honesty, while Article 14 introduces additional obligations specific to advertisements for discounted sales. For example, a rule has been introduced to the effect that the price of a product prior to its being offered at a discount must be the lowest price applied during the 30 days preceding the start date of the discount.
This provision aims to prevent sellers from artificially raising prices and then appearing to offer a discount. In addition, the start and end dates of the discounted sale and, if the stock of the goods or services subject to the discounted sale is limited, the quantity available must be clearly stated in the advertisement.
Otherwise, the advertisement is deemed deceptive, since it would create a perception of an advantage that does not in fact exist for the consumer or generate an unrealistic sense of urgency.
The Advertisement Board is the administrative authority charged, pursuant to Article 63 of the Law, with supervising commercial advertisements and imposing sanctions when it detects a violation. The Advertisement Board examines advertisements that contravene the provisions of Law No. 6502 and the Advertising Regulation and may decide on sanctions such as suspension, correction or administrative fines. Deceptive discount advertisements made over the internet, in particular, have in recent years become one of the Advertisement Board's priority areas of review. The Ministry and the Advertisement Board conduct ex officio reviews on special discount days in e-commerce and closely monitor campaigns that attract intense consumer interest.
Misleading discount practices in advertisements may also be assessed as unfair competition. Article 54 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 regulates commercial practices contrary to the rule of honesty within the scope of unfair competition. Article 55/1-(a)(2) of the TCC lists among the instances of unfair competition a merchant's making false or misleading statements about its commercial enterprise, business insignia, goods, work products, activities, prices, stocks, the form of its sales campaigns and its business relations.
Against acts of unfair competition, injured competitors or other interested parties may bring a civil action. Pursuant to Article 56 of the TCC, the prevention (cessation) of the unfair competition, the elimination of its consequences (for example, the publication of a corrective notice) and, where there is fault, compensation for the damage suffered may be claimed.
Furthermore, acts of unfair competition are also subject to the criminal sanction provided for in Article 62 of the TCC. Those who engage in unfair competition intentionally may, upon the complaint of the competitor, be punished with a judicial fine or imprisonment of up to two years.
2. Misleading Discount and Price Manipulations and Advertisement Board Decisions
The misleading discount and price manipulation encountered in e-commerce has been reflected in decisions rendered by the Advertisement Board in recent years, and the companies concerned have faced serious sanctions. Below, we will examine certain unfair commercial practices and examples reflected in Advertisement Board decisions.
Untrue Discount Rates: The most common example is making a false statement about the product's previous sale price. The seller may present the product as if it had been sold at a high price that it never actually applied (for example, the statement “Old price: TL 1,000”), while offering as the discounted price what is in reality the normal sale price (“New price: TL 500”). In this case, the announced “50% discount” does not in fact exist. Such price comparisons are regarded as deceptive advertising because they create a significant perception of advantage for the consumer. Legally, in such a case the advertiser deceives the consumer by providing information that is contrary to the truth about the price, which constitutes a violation of Article 61 of Law No. 6502 and Article 7 of the Advertising Regulation.
The requirement under the Law that the pre-discount price be the lowest price of the last 30 days was introduced in order to prevent this type of manipulation. Sellers must keep a record of the lowest price they applied during the 30 days before starting a discount campaign and must not exceed that price as the reference price in the discounted sale.
Misleading Discount Periods: Another frequently encountered method is giving misleading information about time restrictions or stock restrictions in order to push the consumer to buy in a hurry. For example, where an e-commerce site places a countdown timer with the wording “Last 3 Hours – 70% Discount!” and the campaign does not in fact end when the stated period expires but is extended on the same terms, the consumer is deliberately misled. The Advertisement Board has recently examined such a case; in its Decision No. 2024/2310, it established that an internet service provider ran a campaign on its website using countdown timers with the expressions “Last chance” and “Limited time”, and restarted the same campaign when the period ended. The Board decided that repeatedly extending the campaign period so as to continue it without interruption created a perception of an opportunity that would end shortly and thereby produced a deceptive effect; it found this to be contrary to the basic principles of the Advertising Regulation and to the prohibition of unfair commercial practices, and imposed on the company concerned an administrative fine of TL 550,059.00 and the sanction of suspension of the advertisement.
Similarly, misrepresenting the stock position in a discount described as “limited to stock” is also deceptive. If it is established that a product that is out of stock is being shown as discounted merely to attract customers, a sanction is imposed. Indeed, the Advertisement Board found it contrary to the legislation that a product that had sold out continued to be shown as discounted in Google advertisements, and imposed on the company concerned an administrative fine of TL 347,128.00 and the sanction of suspension of the advertisement.
Failure to Apply the Discounted Price: Another situation that misleads the consumer is where the announced discounted price is not valid at the purchasing stage. For example, if a platform's product listing carries the statement “40% discount in the basket”, but the discount is not applied when the consumer adds the product to the basket, the advertisement is clearly misleading. In an incident on this subject that occurred in 2023, a seller selling on an e-commerce marketplace promised “40% discount in the basket” in its listing, but the discount was not reflected when the basket was reached. The Advertisement Board assessed this as a failure to provide the advantage promised to the consumer and imposed on the company concerned an administrative fine of TL 347,128.00 and the sanction of suspension of the advertisement.
Price Stability and Misleading Comparisons: Some e-commerce sellers give the consumer the impression that there will be a serious price increase in the future by saying “The discounted price is now X TL, tomorrow the price will be Y TL”. If this statement is untrue or exaggerated, it is again regarded as a deceptive practice. For example, a seller ran a campaign for an electronic product containing a countdown in the form “Now TL 4,999, in 3 hours it will be TL 10,331”; however, after the stated period had passed, the price of the product remained at TL 5,399 rather than rising to TL 10,331. The Advertisement Board characterised this as a manipulative tactic aimed at reviving the consumer's urge to buy quickly, found that presenting a price-increase/discount scheme that did not correspond to the price stated by the company was contrary to the legislation, and imposed an administrative fine of TL 347,128.00 and a suspension of the advertisement.
In summary, the legal framework for discount campaigns in e-commerce requires that all information presented to the consumer be accurate, complete and free from any misleading effect. Transparent and honest conduct is required with regard to matters such as the discount rate, the previous price, the campaign period, the quantity in stock and the conditions of the price advantage. Otherwise, liability will arise under both consumer law and commercial law. In addition to administrative sanctions, case law is also being formed through civil actions brought by competitors. In recent years, actions in the field of e-commerce, particularly against large online marketplaces, have come onto the agenda.
3. Administrative Sanctions and Penalties
There are various sanctions that apply when advertisements that are misleading and contrary to the legislation, and unfair commercial practices, are detected.
Suspension of the Advertisement: If the Advertisement Board determines that an advertisement is contrary to the legislation, it first decides to suspend the publication of that advertisement. This means that the ongoing broadcast of the discount campaign concerned must be terminated immediately. The broadcast of the advertisement must cease as soon as the decision is served on the advertiser. In internet advertisements in particular, the Board may, where necessary, also resort to the measure of blocking access. For example, in the inspections carried out in November 2024, it was decided to impose access bans on 29 advertisements.
This is a measure generally brought into play for deceptive campaigns carried out through sources originating abroad or through imitation sites.
Publication of a Correction: The Law provides that, where necessary, a corrective advertisement may be published by the same method. For example, if a campaign misleading the consumer has been run in a very widespread medium, the Advertisement Board may decide that the advertiser must publish a notice in the nature of a correction or retraction in the same medium. Although this is seen relatively rarely in practice, it is one of the sanction options available under the law.
Administrative Fines: The most concrete consequence of misleading discount and price advertisements is high administrative fines. Article 77 of Law No. 6502 regulates the amounts of fines, which vary according to the medium in which the violation occurs. In cases of repeated violations or serious cases affecting wide audiences, penalties close to the upper limit may be imposed; it will be possible for small-scale businesses to be warned with lower fines. Thanks to the settlement provisions added to Law No. 6502, a company that is the subject of an advertising fine may, instead of going to court, settle with the Ministry, pay a certain percentage of the fine and bring the process to an end. This mechanism is important in that it offers a quick and definitive solution for both parties.
Consumer Arbitration Committee and Court Proceedings: If individual consumers have suffered financial loss because of a misleading discount (for example, if they made a purchase influenced by a discount that did not in fact exist), the consumer may claim compensation from the seller for the losses suffered. In practice, consumers mostly resolve a transaction with which they are dissatisfied through the right of return/withdrawal, or apply to Consumer Arbitration Committees to request a refund of the amount paid. Arbitration committee decisions may order the seller to make a refund, but since these are generally small amounts, the real deterrent mechanism remains administrative sanctions.
In conclusion, administrative sanctions against misleading discount and price practices are quite severe. In addition to fines, the risk of suspension of the advertisement and public exposure has a serious deterrent effect on companies. In particular, the successive penalties received by large e-commerce platforms have increased the need for compliance across the sector. For this reason, it is vital for companies to involve legal oversight in their advertising and campaign processes.
4. Conclusion and Recommendations
Discount and price information in e-commerce advertising is a legally sensitive area because it directly influences consumers' decisions. Turkish law, in both its consumer law and commercial law dimensions, has established a strong protective structure against misleading discount practices. The administrative decisions and judicial case law of recent years have shown that dishonest discount campaigns are punished with serious sanctions.
In order to reduce their legal risks in campaign processes, e-commerce companies must become familiar in detail with the relevant legislation, in particular Articles 61-62 of the Law on Consumer Protection, the Regulation on Commercial Advertising and the unfair competition provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code, and must act in accordance with these provisions. Companies should prepare their campaigns in a clear, plain and non-misleading manner and should avoid expressions that may lead consumers to misunderstand. To this end, particularly before large-scale campaigns, a legal review should be carried out by in-house legal counsel or attorneys, and any risky or ambiguous expressions should be corrected.
In addition, e-commerce companies should document in detail their pre-campaign pricing policies, stock positions and other relevant information, and should be in a position to satisfy the burden of proof in any inspection or Advertisement Board investigation. The company's relevant employees should be trained regularly on the possible legal consequences of misleading advertising, and the e-commerce infrastructure should be brought into full compliance with the legislation. In addition, companies should closely follow Advertisement Board decisions and the sector announcements published by the Ministry of Trade and keep their advertising and campaign practices constantly up to date. In this way, they will both be protected from possible administrative sanctions and be able to protect their commercial reputation by earning consumer trust.
Attorney at Law Mehmet Emre DARICI
