WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION  
ORGANISATION MONDIALE DU COMMERCE  
ORGANIZACIÓN MUNDIAL DEL COMERCIO  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
13 March 2008 
 (08-1087) 
Trade Policy Review Body 
10 and 12 December 2007 Original:  English/ 
                 anglais/                  inglés  
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
TURKEY 
Minutes of Meeting
 
Addendum  
Chairperson:  H.E. Mr. Vesa Himanen (Finland)  
 This document contains the advance writte n questions, and replies provided by Turkey.1 
 
 __________________________________________________________________________________ 
 
Organe d'examen des politiques commerciales 10 et 12 décembre 2007 
 
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES COMMERCIALES 
TURQUIE 
Compte rendu de la réunion
 
Addendum  
Président:  S.E. M Vesa Himanen (Finlande) 
 
 Le présent document contient les questions écrites communiquées à l'avance et les réponses fournies par la Turquie.
1 
  __________________________________________________________________________________ 
 
Órgano de Examen de las Políticas Comerciales 
10 y 12 de diciembre de 2007 
 
EXAMEN DE LAS POLÍTICAS COMERCIALES 
TURQUÍA 
Acta de la reunión
 
Addendum  
Presidente:  Excmo. Sr. Vesa Himanen (Finlandia) 
 
 En el presente documento figuran las pre guntas presentadas anticipadamente por escrito, 
junto con las respuestas facilitadas por Turquía.1 
                                                      
1 In English only./En anglais seulement./En inglés solamente.  
 
    WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
 WRITTEN QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS 
QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES  
 
II. TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES 
(4) Investment Framework 
Page 21, paragraph 30:  The Secretariat’s report notes Turkey’s si gnificant efforts since its last TPR to 
improve its investment climate and attract higher leve ls of foreign direct investment, particularly in 
key sectors such as financial services.  The substa ntial increase in FDI inflows into the financial 
services sector demonstrates the success of Turkey’s e fforts; but the Secretariat’s report observes that 
a number of FDI restrictions on financial services remain.  Given Turkey’s success in attracting 
foreign investment into one of its most economic ally vibrant sectors, what are your government’s 
plans to liberalize further the financial sector, particular ly with respect to the restrictions identified in 
Table II.4 of the Secretariat’s report?   
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(2)
  MEASURES  DIRECTLY  AFFECTING  IMPORTS 
(i) Customs procedures, clearance, and valuation 
 
Page 27, paragraph 9:   The Secretariat’s report mentions th at Turkey computes all customs duties on 
the c.i.f. value of the import.  Nevertheless,  Turkey has established "reference prices" for; inter alia , 
rice, sunflower seeds, pulses, and walnuts.  Turkey charges ad valorem  tariffs on these reference 
prices regardless of the declared c.i.f. value.  However, the Customs Valuation Agreement ("CVA") 
provides the agreed methodology and procedures fo r determining the customs value of imports.  
Please explain how Turkey’s use of "reference prices " for rice, sunflower seeds, pulses, and walnuts is 
consistent with Turkey’s obligations under the CVA.  We urge Turkey to review its customs 
procedures, including its valuation methods, to ensu re that they are consistent with the CVA.  
 
In respect of Turkey’s reference prices, how does Turkey calculate these reference prices?  How often 
does Turkey change its reference prices?  How do es Turkey communicate any changes to traders?  
Does your government notify or consult with in terested parties before imposing these reference 
prices?  (iii) Tariffs, Other duties, and Taxes 
 
Page 29, paragraph 16
 briefly describes Customs Law No. 474 th at allows Turkey to set "statutory 
tariffs" to provide "adequate" protection to domes tic industries.  How does Turkey calculate these 
statutory tariffs?  What circumstances would trigger statutory tariffs?  What is an "adequate" measure 
of protection?  When do statutory tariffs return to  MFN rates? How does Turkey  ensure that statutory 
tariffs do not breach its WTO bindings?  How does the government notify these tariff changes?  
MFN bound tariffs 
 
On Page 33, paragraph 21,
 The Secretariat notes that Turkey’s non- ad valorem  tariffs do not 
necessarily equal its WTO-bound ad valorem  tariff rates.  In addition, the Secretariat notes, Turkey’s 
tariff regime "would gain in transparency and pr edictability through extension of the scope of 
products covered by the binding commitments, an d reduction of bound rates."  The United States 
encourages Turkey to examine its ad valorem  and non- ad valorem  tariffs to ensure their consistency 
with its WTO tariff bindings.  We hope that you will consider adopting the Secretariat’s 
recommendation to reduce your bound rates.  Please show how Turkey’s tariff rates fall within your 
government’s bindings.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 4  
 
 (e) Other duties and taxes 
 Internal Taxes 
 
Page 38, paragraph 30 :
  Turkey assesses either (1) the Special Consumption Tax (SCT) on distilled 
spirits imports or (2) a minimum specific rate per litr e of pure alcohol, whichever one is higher.  We 
note that the tax rate applied to alcohol categori es where imports dominate is higher.  Does Turkey 
plan to adopt a single tax rate based on alcohol cont ent for all categories of distilled spirits to address 
this issue?  (iv)  Import prohibitions, quotas, and licensing  
Page 40, paragraph 37:
  Turkey seems to require import licenses for "several categories of products, 
including some motor vehicles, transmission appara tus, chemicals, fertilizers, endangered species of 
wild fauna and flora, solvent and petroleum produc ts, and certain sugar substitutes," as well as for 
some agricultural and foodstuff products.  The Secret ariat notes U.S. concerns about the transparency 
of Turkey’s import licensing system for some agricu ltural products and distilled spirits.  Lack of 
transparency in Turkey’s import licensing system ca n stifle trade due to costly delays and other 
uncertainties.  Is Turkey in the process of revising its import licensing requirements for distilled spirits?  Please provide an update.   (vi) Standards and other Technical Requirements (a) Overview 
 
Page 46, paragraph 50:
 The Secretariat report highlights that Turkey is in the process of transposing 
elements of EC technical requirements into its domest ic law.  We note that, since joining the WTO in 
1995, Turkey has only notified five measures (four  SPS measures and one TBT measure) to the WTO 
-- the most recent of which was notified in 2004.  As  Turkey continues to amend many of its technical 
requirements to reflect those of the EC, we rema in concerned that these changes are neither being 
notified to the WTO nor being published in the Offi cial Gazette.  What actions is Turkey taking to 
remedy this situation and carry out its transparency  obligations under Article 7 of the SPS Agreement, 
and Articles 2.9 and 5.6 of the TBT Agreement?   
 
(c) Marking, labelling, and packaging 
 
Page 50-51, paragraph 62:  Recently, the Government of Turkey instituted a strip stamp requirement 
for alcoholic beverages and cigarettes.  The fee for imported products was anywhere from twice to 
100 times higher than the fee charged to domestic firms.   What steps is Turkey taking to ensure that 
the fees charged for imported and dom estic products are equivalent?  
 
(d) Sanitary and Phytosa nitary Restrictions 
 
Page 51, paragraph 66  mentions Turkey’s continued harmonizati on of its standards with international 
standards.  When does Turkey plan to conclude  that process?  How does Turkey plan to begin 
notifying trading partners outside of th e EU of future changes in measures? 
 Page 51, paragraph 67
:  When will Turkey align its heat-treatme nt standard for pou ltry products (such 
as pet food) with OIE guidelines? 
 
(vii) Government Procurement 
 
Pages 52-53, paragraphs 71-78:  Turkey has been an observer to the Government Procurement 
Agreement since 1996.  Does Turkey pl an to accede to this Agreement?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 5 
 
 
 (3)  M EASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS  
 
We urge Turkey to notify its various government  support and incentive programs in accordance with 
Article 25 of the Subsidies Agreement.  We are particularly concerned about the various programs 
described in the Report at pp. 61-65; i.e. "Free Z ones" and "Incentives".  How will Turkey address its 
Article 25 notification requirements? 
 
(4) M EASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(iv)  Protection of intellectual property rights (b) Patents 
 
In paragraph 143, the government of Turkey explains that the da ta protection period cannot exceed 
that granted for patents.  How does Turkey protect  data against unfair commercial use, in accordance 
with TRIPS Article 39.3, if the expiration of a pa tent cuts short the term  of data protection? 
 (d)  Copyright 
 
Page 73: paragraphs 140-146
:  Turkey’s intellectual property regime has improved in recent years, but 
still contains serious problems.  In addition to insufficient protection of proprietary data for 
pharmaceutical and agricultural products, copyright en forcement is inadequate.  What actions have 
your authorities taken this year to combat book, optical disk, and business software piracy? 
 
According to paragraph 140 , Turkey’s copyright law entered into force on 5 December 1951.  Turkey 
amended the law on 3 March 2004.  Does the government  of Turkey plan to amend the copyright law 
further to prohibit the act of circumvention of tech nological protection measures and the trafficking in 
circumvention devices?  If not, does the government of Turkey intend to amend the copyright law in 
the near future to prohibit such acts? 
 
Although the Turkish copyright law provides for pr esumption of ownership in copyright cases, judges 
and prosecutors have asked right holders to prove copyright ownership in infringement cases.  Is the 
government of Turkey addressing this  inconsistency between its law as written and its application in 
Turkish courts?  (f) Other areas 
 
Geographical Indications 
 Paragraph 142:
  How does Turkey protect trademarks from confusingly similar geographical 
indications that have been granted protection later in time in Turkey, as required by Articles 16(1) and 
24(5) of the TRIPS Agreement? 
 
(g) Enforcement  
 Pages 74-75, paragraphs 146-150:
  Please provide information identifying (1) the number of people 
convicted for violating IP crimes by the IP cour t and (2) how many of those defendants received 
sentences requiring imprisonment.  The Report states that police have ex officio authority to fight 
piracy.  Do police also have ex officio authority to seize counterfeit goods?  
 On page 74, paragraph 143
, the Secretariat states: "Turkey's new data protection legislation provides 
data protection for pharmaceutical products in any EC member."  Does this mean that only EC 
members are entitled to data protection?  Please clarify.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 6  
 
 Paragraph 146
 states that "Foreigners can also challenge pa tent holders in Turkish courts."  Does this 
mean that foreign nationals cannot pursue other t ypes of intellectual property infringement actions?  
Please explain how your government affords nationa l treatment to foreign nationals as required under 
Article 3 of the TRIPS Agreement.  
Paragraph 147
 explains the penalties available to pers ons making false ownership claims to an 
industrial property right.  Is there a similar provision for copyrights?  If not, has Turkey considered implementing such a provision?  
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(2)  AGRICULTURE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES 
(ii) Policy Developments  
Page 82, paragraph 25
:  According to the Secretariat, the share of support for Turkey’s producers fell 
from 100% to 83% in 2003-05.  Is Turkey planning further to reduce producers’ support?  (3) Mining and Energy (iii) Energy (a) Overview 
 
Paragraphs 48-52:
  A constitutional court decision in 1997 made it illegal for oil companies to 
repatriate their profits, as provided for in the Petr oleum Law.  Does Turkey plan to reintroduce 
legislation to allow foreign companies to repatriate profits from oil production?   
 
(5) Services  
 
Page 1, paragraph 3; page 9, pa ragraph 19; page 97, paragraph 81:   The Secretariat’s report notes that 
services constitute the most important sector of th e Turkish economy.  The report also notes, "For 
Turkey, agriculture is the key issue of DDA;  and Turkey attaches utmost importance to non-
agriculture market access (NAMA) negotiations" w ith no reference to services (page 13, paragraph 
12).  Given the importance of services to Turkey’s economy, is the services sector a DDA priority for 
Turkey?  (ii)  Financial services (a) Banking 
 
Page 98, paragraph 89:  
The Secretariat’s report notes that the establishment of the first branch of a 
foreign bank requires "approval".  Wh at does this approval process entail? 
 
(iii) Telecommunications and postal services 
 
Page 104, section 109:  The United States would like to confirm that Turkey’s national postal 
operators administer financial services in a compe titive and transparent manner relative to competing 
products and services that the private sector offers.  With this in mind, could Turkey please elaborate 
on the following statement from the Secretariat’s report?  
"In 2004, under the PTT-Bank logo, Turkish Post  started offering postal financial services on 
behalf of banks (e.g. collection of bills and credit card payments), with the aim of making 
such services available in remote areas.  This is under the condition of not offering traditional 
banking services, such as granting loans and opening saving accounts." 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 7 
 
 
 WT/TPR/G/192 
 
Page 11, paragraph 44 :  Please describe the current ownership structure of Turk Telecom.  What 
percentage (if any) do foreigners hold and what is the current statutory limit on foreign investment in 
telecommunications licensees?  Please also indicate whether Turk Telecom continues to provide any 
services on a monopoly basis, what such services are, and when said monopoly is scheduled to end.  
 
QUESTIONS FROM SWITZERLAND  
 
Report by the Secretariat 
 
III. Trade policies and practices by measures  
(2) Measures directly affecting imports (i) Customs procedures 
Para. 6 of the Report states that the customs authority may grant permission to simplify formalities 
and procedures (Simplified Procedure Authorization) , including by waiving the requirement for some 
documentation. Could Turkey indicate whether and as appropriate where such simplified procedures 
are formalized in a regulation and indicate who woul d be eligible to use such simplified procedures? 
(iii) Tariffs, other duties, and taxes 
According to Para. 16 , Law No. 474 on customs tariff schedule enables the Government to increased 
applied MFN tariff rates when they are deemed not  high enough to provide "adequate" protection to 
domestic industries. Could Turkey specify which are the criteria to determine that the NFM tariff rates 
are not high enough? What are the criteria used to determine that "ade quate" protection is not 
provided to domestic industries? 
 
According to Para. 21  the imposition of non-ad valorem tariff rates does not ensure compliance by 
Turkey with its WTO binding commitments made at valorem rates. As the binding commitments 
represent the upper limit of what can be levied at the border, how does Turkey in tend to ensure that its 
non-ad valorem tariff rates are not higher than its ad valorem WTO binding co mmitments? In the case 
that such non-ad valorem rates would exceed ad valorem binding commitments, it would represent a breach of Turkey's WTO obligations (article II GATT).What measures has Turkey taken to ensure 
that there is no breach of article II GATT?  
According to Para. 30 and footnote 30 the new ad valorem excise duty on tobacco products is not in 
line with the EC acquis . How does Turkey intend to bring its excise duty on tobacco products in line 
with the EC acquis ? 
(v) Contingency trade remedies 
In para. 41 and footnote 39 , the Secretariat's report suggests that the Turkish authorities could in the 
case of fragmented industries involving an exceptionally  large number of producers decide to initiate 
an investigation ex officio  provided there is sufficient evidence of dumping, injury, and a causal link. 
While we understand that the Turkish authorities ha ve not so far used this possibility, could the 
Turkish authorities indicate on the basis of what spec ific criteria the investigation authorities would 
decide that there is indeed dumping and a causal  link between this dumping and the presumed injury 
in the absence of a petition from the domestic i ndustry? Also, what minimum standing threshold 
would have to be considered in order to proceed with such an ex officio investigation? WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 8  
 
 (3) Measures directly affecting exports 
(i) Registration and documentation 
According to Para. 86 , exporters are required to register w ith the Exporters Union and their local 
chamber of commerce. A fee of between 0.05% and 0.5%  of the f.o.b. value of exports is charged as a 
service commission. Could the Turkish government cl arify in which cases such a registration is 
required? Could they also explain how such a fe e based on a percentage of the value of exports 
without mentioning any ceiling, is consistent with GATT Article VIII? 
(4) Measures Affecting Production and Trade 
(iii) Competition policy and price controls 
In para. 128 , the Secretariat's report indicates that some of the most serious problems for competition 
law and policy in Turkey are, inter alia , the lack of a mechanism to cont rol state aid, and the fact that 
some of the state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are vested with monopoly concessions or anti-competitive privileges. Do the Turkish authorities have  any plans to submit notably SOEs also to the 
competition law and policy in the near future?  QUESTIONS FROM BRAZIL
 
 
According to the Government Report (WT/TPR/G /192), in paragraph 124, under Turkey's GSP 
regime, "preferences are granted to industrial goods and some agricultural goods (...) classified 
according to their 'sensitivity'".  How is this "s ensitivity" determined?  How does the methodology 
differ from the EC GSP, with which Turkey aims to  align itself?  In Turkey's GSP, is there any 
provision for "graduation" of count ry or products?  If positive, how is this provision implemented? 
 According to Chapter IV of the Secretariat Report (WT/TPR/SW/192), paragraph 14, Agricultural 
Law No. 5488 "moves Turkey further away from th e principles of the EC's reformed Common 
Agricultural Policy (CAP) by defining support linked to production as a key instrument of agricultural 
policy".  If one of the main goals of Turkey's trade policy is to align itself with the EC rules, why does 
Turkey intend to increase its reliance on agricultural support linked to production? 
 
QUESTIONS FROM KOREA
 
 
I. Trade Polices and Practices by measure 
1. Specialized Customs Offices for Cert ain Goods (WT/TPR/S/192 p.27, para.8) 
 
The importation of certain goods continues to be allowed only through specialized customs offices. 
This arrangement incurs additional time and e xpenses for importers. The recent reduction in the 
number of customs offices for textile products have  especially caused great inconvenience to relevant 
importers.   
Does the Turkish Government have any plans to alleviate these problems? 
 2. Strict Labeling Restrictions (WT/TPR/S/192 p.50 para.62) 
 
Most imported products must be labeled with detailed information in Turkish. Moreover, importers 
are not allowed to correct any mistakes in labe ling and are forced to send back the products 
concerned. This leads to great loss for importers. 
  Does the Turkish Government have any plans to ease these labeling restrictions?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 9 
 
 
 II. Trade Polices by Sector 
 
3. Competition in the Telecommunications Sector (WT/TPR/S/192 p.102, para.102) 
 
According to the Secretariat's report, the monopoly of Turk Telecom (TT) in the basic 
telecommunications services ended on 31 December 2003 and the Turkish Government sold 55% of 
its TT's shares in November 2005. In spite of these efforts to liberalize the telecommunications sector, 
TT still maintains the status of significant market player in the Turkish telecommunications market. 
 
Please provide us with the regulatory framework and/or  plans to lessen the influence of TT and foster 
competition in the telecommunications sector.  
QUESTIONS FROM HONG KONG, CHINA
 
 
Trade Agreements 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 13, Para. 10) 
 
We note from the Secretariat Report that "Turkey’s membership in several arrangements makes its 
trade regime complex and difficult to manage.  Futu re trade agreements could further complicate the 
trade regime and detract from multilateral efforts, given Turkey’s limited resources."  We would like 
to know Turkey’s response to the Secretariat's observations. 
 
Customs Procedures, Clearance and Valuation 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 27, Para. 6) 
 
We note from the Secretariat Report that Turkey ’s customs authority may grant permission to 
simplify formalities and procedures (Simplified Procedure Authorization) including waiving the 
requirement for some documentation.  We woul d like to know whether the Simplified Procedure 
Authorization is granted to the import of particular  products or to specific importers.  Grateful if 
Turkey would provide further information on the Authorization concerned. 
 
Standards and Technical Requirements 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 48, Para. 54) 
 
We note that EC-origin products which conform to the EC’s Customs Union Decision (CUD) and 
bearing a CE mark do not have to be inspected by the Turkish Standards Institution.  We would like to 
know whether this arrangement woul d be equally applicable to non-EC-origin products which also 
conform to the same EC’s Decision and bearing a CE mark.  If not, is there any plan to extend this arrangement to such non-EC products in future? 
 
Contingency Trade Remedies 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. viii, Para. 12; P. 43, Para. 43) 
 
We note that Turkey has increasingly resorted to th e use of anti-dumping measures.  According to the 
WTO statistics, it ranked second (with 21 cases) in the imposition of anti-dumping measures in 2006.  
The Secretariat Report also pointed out that as of August 2007, 93 definitive anti-dumping duties 
were in force, compared with only 27 at the end of 2002.  The overwhelming majority of the active 
measures were imposed after 2002.  We would like to  know whether there are any special reasons or 
factors that may have led to the significant increase.   
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 10  
 
 Tourism and Travel-related Services 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 112, Para. 137 - 138) 
 
We note from the Secretariat Report that investors in tourism have access to incentives granted under 
the Investment Encouragement Programme.  We ar e interested to know the types of incentives 
involved in the Programme and whether they apply to foreign investors on a non-discriminatory basis 
as well. 
 We note from the Secretariat Report that "there is no limitation on foreign investment".  In Turkey’s 
GATS commitments, various national treatment li mitations have been inscribed for foreign 
companies supplying travel agenci es and tour operators services.  We would like to seek Turkey’s 
clarification on whether such limitations still exist. 
 
The Secretariat Report also mentions that forei gn and domestic companies in tourism set their own 
maximum prices, which must be cleared annually by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (MCT).  
We would appreciate it if Turkey could elaborate in which tourism sub-sector(s) these maximum 
prices now apply and the basis with which the MCT clears these maximum prices.  QUESTIONS FROM ARGENTINA
 
 
WT/TPR/S/192, REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
A. MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  
(iii) Tariffs, other duties, and taxes Paragraph 22, page 33 
 
This paragraph refers to an "I nvestment Encouragement Programme (IEP)".  Could Turkey please list 
the requirements for a company to be entitled to this  benefit?  Since the entry into force of this 
mechanism, have any foreign enterprises benefited from it?  
Paragraph 24, page 35 
 
This paragraph mentions an inward processing sch eme which allows Turkish manufacturers/exporters 
to import materials free of duties.  The system works through the suspension of duties and VAT until 
the exportation of the products, provided there is a "substantiated" intention to re-export the goods in 
the form of compensating products.  Could Turkey  please explain what is meant by "substantiated 
intention"?  What is the procedure by which a manufacturer/exporter makes such a request? 
 
(v) Contingency trade remedies 
Paragraph 45, page 45 
 This paragraph states that Turkey has promulgated new legislation that modifies its procedures for the 
application of safeguard measures, and indicates th e content of each one of these new laws.  Could 
Turkey please explain what substantial changes have been introduced with resp ect to the procedures 
previously in force?   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 11 
 
 
 (ix) Countertrade 
Paragraph 80, page 55 
 
 According to this paragraph, Turkey continues to use two main types of countertrade:  barter/counter-purchase, and offset.  Do these practic es apply to all products, or are there exceptions? 
 
QUESTIONS FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
 
 
I.  ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
(4) MAIN STRUCTURAL POLICY DEVELOPMENTS  
(iv) Labour  
WTO Secretariat's Report, page 9, para. 21 
 
It is stated that "Turkey is taking steps to move to a competitive market economy through an 
acceleration of structural reforms, including comp letion of the privatization agenda and sectoral 
reforms (e.g. labour, education, health)"  Could Turkey elaborate further on the planned refo rms and programmes regarding the labour market? 
 
II. TRADE POLICY REGIME: FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES   
(8) FOREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME 
(ii) Basic framework  WTO Secretariat's Report, page vii, para.   
The Secretariat's report indicates that "[s]ome restric tions to foreign investment have been introduced 
over the last few years on real estate acquisition, and a number of sectors are still subject to FDI restrictions (e.g, broadcasting, fishing, petroleum, mining, and financial services).  Could Turkey confirm whether it intends to eliminate the investment restrictions currently applied in 
the abovementioned sectors?   II.  TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  (2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  (iii) Tariffs, other duties and taxes (e) Other duties and taxes 
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page  38, para. 30 
 
Turkey's excise tax system, the Special Consump tion Tax (SCT) on alcoholic beverages appears to 
discriminate against imported products. Different  tax rates apply depending on the category of 
alcoholic beverages. In effect, major categories of alcoholic beverages produced predominantly in 
Turkey, are subject to significantly lower rates of  excise tax than the main categories of alcoholic 
beverages generally imported. The system appear s to indirectly discriminate against imported 
products and appears to be contra ry to GATT Article III (2).  
Does Turkey have plans to re form the excise tax system? 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  38, para. 31 
 
The Secretariat report indicates that 'the VAT is levied at 1%, or 8% on agricultural and basic goods, 
and at 18% on some non-agricultural products and l uxury items (including cosmetics, furs, television, 
and automobiles). The EC notes that Turkey h as reduced the VAT rate to 8% on contract WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 12  
 
 manufacturing for textile and ready-to-wear works,  restaurant services, services provided in care 
houses and rest-homes.  Could Turkey confirm this information? 
 
(a) Import licensing and prohibition  
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  40, para. 37 
 
The Secretariat's report notes that "[c]oncerns have b een expressed about the lack of transparency in 
Turkey's import licensing system for some agricultural products and distilled spirits".  
 In this context, could Turkey elaborate furthe r on the reasons for applying import restrictions on 
aromatized wines and when it plans to eliminate these restrictions? 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  41, para. 38 
 Could Turkey confirm whether it applies im port restrictions on second-hand products?  
 
(vi) Standards and other technical requirements  
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  52, para. 68 
 
The Secretariat's report indicates that "Turkey maintains a temporary import ban on live animals 
(dairy and beef, cattle, sheep, goats and poultry) and meat (beef, sheep, goat, and poultry) based on 
sanitary consideration (Article 7 of the Law on Animal  Health)". We would like to stress that these 
measures are not in line with the OIE recommendations. 
 What scientific evidence can Turkey  present to motivate its application of a more restrictive SPS 
regime, regarding trade of live animals and m eat than current international standards? 
 
(vii) Government procurement  
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page  52, para. 71 
 
When is Turkey expecting to apply procurement ru les also with respect to entities operating in the 
utilities sectors?  
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  53, para. 74 
 
Which are the rules of origin app lied when establishing the domestic or igin of tendered products with 
a view to granting the 15% preference?  
Does the price preference also apply to domestic services? If so, which are the criteria used to 
determine what constitutes a domestic service? 
 
The EU notes that the 15% price preference for domestic tenderers is relatively elevated when 
compared to other such schemes practised in certain countries.  
 
Has Turkey calculated the extra surcharge to  the public budget resulting from applying this 
preference?   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 13 
 
 
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 54, para. 78  
 
Since June 1996, Turkey has participated as an  observer in the WTO Committee on Government 
Procurement. However, it is not yet a member of the Government Procurement Agreement.  
 
Does Turkey have any plan to join the WTO Ag reement on Government Procurement as a Party? 
 
(4) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(iv) Protection of Intellectual property rights 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page 74-75 para.146-150 
 
The EC notes that Turkey has made progress in en forcing its IPRs commitments over the last few 
years. Nevertheless, piracy and counterfeiting of copyright and trademarks are still problematic. 
 
Could Turkey spell out the measures it considers implementing in order to further improve the 
enforcement of its IPR commitments?   In addition, is Turkey encountering problems rega rding the enforcement of the Data Exclusivity 
legislation in pharmaceuticals? If so, how is Turkey addressing these problems?   IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  (2) OVERVIEW  Turkey's report, page 31, para. 185 
 Turkey indicates that the share of medium and high tech products in Turkish exports moved up from 
26% to 35%.   Could Turkey define the sc ope of high tech products? 
 
(5) SERVICES 
(ii) Financial services 
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 98, para. 89  
 
The EC is aware that foreign banks are not allo wed to offer cross border investment services to 
private retail clients residing in Turkey due to legisl ative restriction in Turkey. The offering of cross 
border investment services to Turkish residents requires permission from the Capital Markets Board 
(CMB) according to article 37 of Communiqué Seri al:V, No. 46. However, no new intermediary 
institution license has been granted by the Board si nce 1991. Therefore, all applications from foreign 
financial institutions to the CMB requesting permissi on to provide services to the investor residing in 
Turkey have been reject by the CMB.  
 
Does Turkey envisage reforming this procedure so as to facilitate the entry of foreign banks in the 
financial services market?   
(iv) Transport  
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page 105, para. 112  
 
Turkey faces challenges in modernising its port in frastructure in order to accommodate international 
maritime freight transport.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 14  
 
 Could Turkey comment on its plans to address such challenges? 
 Could Turkey provide informati on on its policy concerning access to port services, notably with 
regard to whether services rendered could be ma de available on reasonable and non-discriminatory 
terms? 
 
(iv) Telecommunications and Postal Services 
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 104, para. 109  
 It is stated that the "Turkish Postal Administra tion, under the Ministry of Transport (MT), is the 
regulatory and operational body for postal services.  According to the postal law, its monopoly covers 
open and closed letters, postcards, and telegraphs for domestic or fo reign destinations. The Turkish 
Postal Administration is carrying out reorganization work and automation of counter services to align the quality of its services on the Universal Postal Union (UPU) standards. In 2004, under the PTT-
Bank logo, Turkish Post started offe ring postal financial services on beha lf of banks (e.g. collection of 
bills and credit card payments), with the aim of making such services available in remote areas." 
The EC notes that there is no reference to Expr ess Delivery Services. In this regard, we would 
appreciate if Turkey could provide fu rther information in this regard. 
 Could Turkey confirm that foreign courier service providers can conduct business in Turkey, 
including Express Delivery services? 
 Could Turkey confirm its intention to establish an  independent regulatory body and a new licensing 
regime?  QUESTIONS FROM CHILE
 
 
II. TRADE POLICIES 
Implementation of WTO Agreements:  Trade in Goods, Investment Paragraph 81 
 Could the delegation of Turkey please provide more background on the implementation of the 
Investment Encouragement Programme (IEP), and more specifically on the measures aimed at encouraging, supporting and orienting investme nts relating to environmental research and 
development and environmental protection b ased on provisions of related legislation? 
 II. TRADE POLICIES B. T
URKEY 'S ACCESSION PROCESS TO THE EU 
(ii) Turkey's current status of harmonization with the EC policies (a) Harmonization in commercial policies Paragraph 122 
 Turkey mentions that it will align itself progressive ly with the preferential customs regime of the 
Community.  In this connection, could Turkey please tell us:  Where do the tariffs applied by Turkey to agricu ltural products, processed agricultural products and 
fisheries products (extracted and processed) curren tly coincide with those of the EU, and where do 
they differ? 
 Are there products that are exempted from this alignment?  If so, what are they? 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 15 
 
 
 Is there an established programme with a specific  time-frame for the comple te alignment of the two 
preferential regimes?  If so, what is it?  
II. TRADE POLICIES 
B. T
URKEY 'S ACCESSION PROCESS TO THE EU 
(ii) Turkey's current status of harmonization with the EC policies 
(a) Harmonization in commercial policies Paragraph 126 
 
Graph 1 lists the countries with which Turkey h as concluded free trade agreements.  Could Turkey 
provide more background information on its experien ce in the administration and implementation of 
those agreements?  
II. TRADE POLICIES 
B. T
URKEY 'S ACCESSION PROCESS TO THE EU 
(ii) Turkey's current status of harmonization with the EC policies 
(a) Harmonization in commercial policies Paragraph 126 
 
Graph 1 names the countries with which Turkey is currently negotiating free trade agreements.  Could 
Turkey bring us up to date on the status of those negotiations? 
 
Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/192) 
 
SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS 
Paragraph No. 5 
 
According to this paragraph, Turkey is a net e xporter of services.  What type of services does it 
export, and under what mode of supply?  
SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS 
Paragraph 11 
 
According to this paragraph, Turkey maintains a so -called "statutory" tariff.  What, exactly, is this 
tariff, and when is it applicable?  
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
C. M
EASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS  
Paragraph 89  
Turkey applies export taxes on raw skins and hazelnut s.  What is the basis for applying these taxes? 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
D. M
EASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE , INCENTIVES  
 
With reference to Table III.18 (Key features of the State aid programmes, 2007) on page 64, could the delegation of Turkey please provide more backgr ound information on the State aid programme for 
environmental protection activities? 
 
According to the table, this programme includes financial support for all SMEs in the manufacturing 
sector and software companies to improve e nvironmental management systems and during 
certification of quality assurance and CE marking.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 16  
 
 Although we realize that this is a relatively ne w programme, we would appreciate some background 
information on the following:  Has there been any thought of reproducing this programme with the agricultural SMEs? 
What are the main obstacles that have been  encountered in implementing this programme? 
How would you assess the results thus far? 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(2)(ii) Agriculture and related activities, policy developments by sector 
 Regarding the information provided in paragraphs 11 and 13, could the delegation of Turkey please 
provide more background concerning the Conser vation Reserve Payment Programme (CATAK)? 
 What kind of agricultural policy measures are bei ng implemented in vulnerable areas (for example 
areas subject to toxic residues and/or erosion, polluted water zones)? 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(3)(iii) Energy, overview 
 
Regarding paragraphs 43 and 45, could the delegation of Turkey please provide further background 
information on its energy policy? 
 
Among the objectives mentioned are the sustainable and environment-friendly exploitation of local 
energy resources, inter alia  from new and renewable sources.  As there are ongoing discussions in 
Chile on these matters, we would appreci ate further background information on: 
 
(a) The Law on the Utilization of Renewable Energy Sources for the Purpose of Generating 
Electrical Energy (No. 5346 of 18 May 2005).  This Law provides for the granting of a Renewable Energy Resource Certificate (RER Certificate), which entitles certain enterprises to benefit from the incentives provided by th e Law.  What are those incentives? 
(b) The Law on Geothermal Resources and Natural Mineral Waters (No. 5686 of 13 June 2007), 
which aims to encourage exploration, resear ch, development and pr oduction of geothermal 
and natural mineral water resources in  an environment-friendly manner. 
 
QUESTIONS FROM CANADA
 
 
Report by Turkey (WT/TPR/G/192) 
II. Trade Policies; (1) Implementation of WT O Agreements; (iii) Trade-related intellectual 
 property rights (TRIPs); page 19, paragraph 98:  
According to the Report by Turkey, "[a] Twinning Project "To Support Turkey’s Efforts in the Full 
Alignment and Enforcement in the Field of Intell ectual Property Rights with a Focus on Fight Against 
Piracy"" has been initiated in May 2006 and scheduled to end by November 2007".   
 
Canada would be grateful for a status report on the Project and, if possible, a summary of its findings 
in relation to the fight against piracy.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 17 
 
 
 Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/192) 
III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure;  Section 2; Measures Directly Affecting 
 Imports  (iii) Tariffs, other duties and taxes; page 29, paragraph 16:  
The Secretariat Report describes Law No. 474 on Customs Tariff Schedule, which enables the 
government to increase the applied MFN tariff rate by imposing a so-called statutory tariff in 
instances when MFN tariffs are not deemed high en ough to provide "adequate " protection to domestic 
industries.  (a) Could Turkey please explain what is meant by "adequate protection" and describe in more detail 
the circumstances under which the statutory tariff would be applied? 
 (b) Could Turkey please further explain how law No. 474 is implemented? Specifically could Turkey 
indicate if there a system in place to notify WTO me mbers when tariffs are increased and explain how 
the Law is consistent with th e WTO Agreement on Safeguards? 
 
III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure; (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports; (iv) 
 Import prohibitions, quotas and licensing; page 39, paragraph 34: 
 
The Secretariat Report refers to Turkey’s impor t prohibition on certain imports from countries 
considered to be risks for diseases, including t hose related to Bovine Sp ongiform Encephalopathy 
(BSE). The report further notes that Turkey’s deci sion to ban imports of live animals and meat 
products was based on World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) risk classification.  Canada would like to take this opportunity to un derscore Canada’s OIE categorization as controlled 
risk for BSE. Canada received this categoriza tion in May 2007 as a result of a comprehensive 
evaluation of Canada’s BSE risk mitigation, surve illance and eradication measures, as carried out by 
the OIE’s panel of BSE experts. Having achieve d the designation of controlled BSE risk, OIE 
guidelines provide for safe trade in a broad range of  commodities, under condi tions to which Canada 
is able to certify.  Therefore, Canada would request that Turkey lift its ban on Canadian live cattle and beef products as 
per OIE guidelines. 
 
III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure; Section 2;  Measures Directly Affecting 
 Imports; (vi) Standards and other technical requirements; (d) Sanitary and  phytosanitary regulations; page 51, paragraph 66: 
 The Secretariat Report describes how Turkey is  continuing to harmonize its sanitary and 
phytosanitary regulations with recognized international norms.  Canada would request that Turkey elaborate on th is harmonization process and provide any available 
information on legislative timetables and/or action plans. 
 
III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure; (4) Measures Affecting Production and Trade; 
 (IV) Protection of intellectual property rights; page 73, paragraph 136:  
 
According to the Secretariat Report, the Decree  Law No. 551 on the Protection of Patent Rights 
allows for "the granting of patents by examination and non-examination." 
 Canada would appreciate if Turkey could provide  further details on the procedure concerning the 
granting of patents by non-examination.      WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 18  
 
 III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure; (4) Measures Affecting Production and Trade; 
 (IV) Protection of intellectual property rights; pages 73-74, paragraph 140: 
According to the Secretariat Report, related to copy right enforcement, "[i]n the event of recurrence, 
jail sentences can no longer be postponed or converted into a fine."  
Canada would appreciate knowing Tu rkey’s experience and/or views of whether this practice has 
resulted in a reduction of repeat offences.   
IV. Trade Policies by Sector; (2) Agricult ure and Related Activities; (ii) Policy 
 developments; page 82, paragraph 25: 
 The Secretariat Report states that up to 2000 nearly  100% of Turkey’s producer support was aid that 
potentially has the most production distorting effects and that this share fell to 83% in 2003-2005. While Canada welcomes this re duction, we note that production distorting forms of producer support 
(such as price support, payments based on output and export subsidies) remain key instruments of 
Turkey’s agriculture policy. 
 Could Turkey please provide more information on its plans to phase out distortionary forms of 
producer support?  
 
IV. Trade Policies by Sector; (2) Agricult ure and Related Activities; (ii) Policy 
 developments; page 82, paragraph 27:  
The Secretariat Report notes that Turkey’s average applied MFN tariff in agriculture is 28.3% which 
represents an increase from 2003 when th e same average tariff rate was 25%. 
 
Could Turkey please explain the reasons for this incr ease in protection of the agriculture sector since 
2003 with specific reference to the increase in tariff rates on grains and vegetable oils?  
 
IV. Trade Policies by Sector; (5) Services; (i v) Transport; pages 106-107, paragraph 115:  
 
The WTO Secretariat Report in paragraph 115 discu sses the Turkish International Ship Registry.  
 
Canada would be grateful if Turkey could clarify wh at the policy rationale is behind the restriction to 
ships "owned by Turkish and/or foreign persons r esident in Turkey and companies registered under 
Turkish legislation"? From Canada ’s understanding, this would necessarily limit the number of ships 
that can be registered under the International Regist ry.  In that extent, what is the proportion between 
Turkish-owned and foreign-owned ships in that registry? 
 
IV. Trade Policies by Sector; (5) Services; (v) Tourism; pages 111- 112, paragraph 137: 
 
The Report states that the Government grants in centives for tourism investments in accordance with 
the Tourism Encouragement Law. As well, inv estors have access to incentives granted under the 
Investment Encouragement Programme. 
 1Please confirm if foreign investors in tourism are qualified to avail of the incentives under both the Tourism Encouragement Law and the I nvestment Encouragement Programme. 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 19 
 
 
 IV. Trade Policies by Sector; (5) Services;  (v) Tourism; page 112, paragraph 138: 
 
The Report states that foreign and domestic companies can set their own maximum prices, but that 
they must be cleared annually by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (MCT). The Report further 
notes that enterprises are not required to charge uniform prices but cannot exceed their maximum 
approved prices. 
 What does the Ministry of Culture and Tourism take into account when reviewing and approving 
maximum prices set by different tourism companies?  QUESTIONS FROM JAPAN
 
 
Secretariat Report (WT/TPR/S/192) 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(1) INTRODUCTION (2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS 
(iii) Tariffs, other duties, and taxes 
(Question 1: page 26, paragraph 2, page29, paragraph 16)  
According to the Secretariat report, in addition to applied and bound tariffs, Turkey also maintains the 
so-called statutory tariff. Under the Law, the Government can replace applied MFN tariff rate by 
150% of the corresponding rates of the statutory tariff, with a view to ensuring higher protection to 
local industries. In the case of products subject to ta riff bindings, when the new rate (i.e. 150% of the 
statutory tariff rate) is higher than the corres ponding bound tariff rate, then the latter applies. 
 
Please provide information on the operational results of that tariff, including how many times and to 
what sectors the statutory tariff has been applied.  
 
Could Turkey clarify the reason why the rate of the statutory tariff is set at the level of 150 %?  
Please explain specific criteria to decide whether a pplied tariff rates are deem ed not high enough to 
provide ‘adequate’ protection to domestic industries.  (iii) Tariffs, other duties, and taxes (Question 2:page33, paragraph 21)  
The Secretariat report states that as a result of the Uruguay Round, 46.3% of Turkey’s tariff lines were 
bound (all tariff lines for agricultural products (WTO definition), and about 36% of the lines for non-
agricultural products). Japan is of the view th at a number of unbound tariff lines should be improved 
because of remarkably lack ing the predictability.   
 Could Turley provide specific view on this issue? 
 
QUESTIONS FROM AUSTRALIA
 
 
II. TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES 
(3) TRADE AGREEMENTS  (i) WTO 
 Australia notes from the Secretariat’ s report (WT/TPR/S/192, page 14, Table II.1) that Turkey’s last 
agriculture domestic support notification, coveri ng 2001, was made in 2002, and its last export 
subsidy notification, covering 2000, was made in 2 001.  Australia notes the wide ranging agricultural WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 20  
 
 policies Turkey has implemented since the last Tr ade Policy Review and encourages Turkey to bring 
its notifications to the Committee on Agriculture up-to-date.    In particular, Australia would appreciate advice fro m Turkey as to when it will be in a position to 
submit notifications concerning domestic support commitments for the years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 
2005, and export subsidy notifications for the years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. 
 
(ii) Regional Agreements 
 
Australia notes that the Customs Union between Tu rkey and the EC excludes agricultural goods, and 
there is no firm timetable for the integration of agriculture (WT/TPR/S/192, page 17, paragraph 14).  
Australia further notes that Turkey’s average pr eferential tariff for non-agricultural goods (by the 
WTO definition) imported from the EC is 0.8 per cent (WT/TPR/S/192, page 35, paragraph 14).   
 Could Turkey provide details of the non-agricu ltural goods, using the WTO definition, for which 
duties and other quota arrangements have not been  eliminated under the Customs Union between 
Turkey and the EC.  Over all goods, for what proportion of HS 6-digit subheadings has Turkey not eliminated customs duties and quota arrangements on imports from the EC?  
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS 
(iii) Tariffs, other duties and taxes  
Turkey’s applied tariff schedule currently comprises 18,253 lines under a 12-digit national nomenclature based on the 6-digit HS system (WT/TP R/S/192, page 29, paragraph 15).  Such a high 
number of tariff lines adds considerable complexity to  Turkey’s schedule.  We note, in contrast, that 
the EC’s tariff nomenclature is at 8-digit leve l and consists of only around 9,800 tariff lines in 
HS2007, although this is still a relatively high numb er.  What is the reason for the extremely high 
number of tariff lines in Turkey’s schedule, includ ing in comparison to the EC common external 
tariff, and does Turkey have any plans to reduce subs tantially the number and complexity of its tariff? 
 Australia notes that Turkey’s simple average applie d rate of agricultural tariffs is not only among the 
highest of any WTO Member, but has increased sin ce Turkey’s last trade policy review (to 47.6%, 
compared with 43.3% in 2003, WT/TPR/S/192, page 31, paragraph 19).  Could Turkey explain how it 
intends to address this within the stated objectiv e of Turkey’s trade policies to "effectuate the 
principle of free and fair trade" (W T/TPR/G/192, page 13, paragraph 55). 
 
Turkey has extremely high tariffs for some products, including, for example, ad valorem  tariffs of 225 
per cent for beef and sheep meat.  While some ot her WTO Members maintain similarly prohibitive 
duty rates, generally these are in the context of MFN tariff quotas, with at least some MFN imports 
under lower in-quota tariffs, which appears not to be  the case for Turkey.  What plans does Turkey to 
address such extreme tariffs in its tariff schedule so as to allow some level of MFN imports at lower 
duty rates?  
 
(iv) Import prohibitions, quotas and licensing 
 
The Secretariat’s report (WT/TPR/S/192, page 51 , paragraph 65) sets out the documentation which 
must be submitted to obtain a certificate of control for imports of agricultura l products and foodstuffs.  
Could Turkey outline the circumstances under wh ich certificates of control can be refused? 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 21 
 
 
 (4) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE 
(ii) State trading, state-owned enterprises; and privatization 
 
We note that many of Turkey’s state-owned purchasi ng agencies in the agricultural sector, as listed in 
the Secretariat’s report (WT/TPR/S/192, page 66, Table III.19 and page 79, paragraph 16), have not 
been included in Turkey’s notifications to th e Working Party on State Trading Enterprises under 
Article XVII of GATT 1994.  What is the reason fo r this, and does Turkey intend to include these 
entities in its future notifications?  
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(2) AGRICULTURE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES  
Australia welcomes Turkey’s efforts to provide l ess distorting measures of support to its agriculture 
sector under the Agricultural Reform Implementa tion Project (ARIP) (WT/TPR/G/192, page 15, 
paragraph 70). 
 
i) Does Turkey intend to extend similar reforms to other support measures referred to on pages 
77-83 of the Secretariat’s report? For ex ample, support linked to production under 
Agricultural Law 5488, and deficiency paymen ts for agricultural products such as wheat. 
 
ii) Referring to the ARIP, can Turkey provide furt her details on the one-time grants made to 
farmers switching out of crops experiencing excess supply (WT/TPR/S/192, page 78, 
paragraph 12)? In particular, which crops, other than hazelnuts and tobacco, have been 
identified as experiencing excess supply, how much is the grant per farmer, and are farmers free to use the grant to enter another agricultura l industry or must they exit the agricultural 
sector? 
 
Australia notes that, according to the Turkish aut horities, the main policy objective regarding export 
subsidies is to develop Turkey’s export potentia l in processed agricultural products (WT/TPR/S/192, 
page 80, paragraph 22).  Australia understands that in the past Turkey has provided export subsidies 
to wheat flour, which is included in the 44 agricu ltural product groups within Turkey’s WTO schedule 
of export subsidy reduction commitments, although Tu rkey has not notified export subsidies on wheat 
flour since calendar year 1995 (G/AG/N/TUR/1).  Given the absence of any export subsidy 
notification by Turkey for any year since 2000, c ould Turkey confirm whether any export subsidies 
have been provided to wheat flour export s since 2000, and if so, provide details. 
 Australia notes that state purchasing agencies, incl uding the Turkish Grain Board (TMO) set prices 
before the purchasing campaign (WT/TPR/S/192, pa ge 79, paragraph 15).  Could Turkey provide 
details of the factors that are taken into account  by the TMO in setting the price for wheat purchases, 
including the relationship between this price and the world market price, and the price at which these 
purchases are then on sold? Could Turkey also pr ovide details of the process according to which 
TMO wheat purchases are sold or otherwise disposed of?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 22  
 
 QUESTIONS FROM THE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND 
MATSU  
 
Report by the Government of Turkey - WT/TPR/G/192 
II. TRADE POLICIES 
(1)  IMPLEMENTATION OF WTO AGREEMENTS (i) Trade in goods 
(d)  Technical barriers to trade 
(page 16, paragraphs 77-78) 
The report states that "In order to render the distri bution of notifications timely and effective, and 
information about draft regulations easily accessed by all actors of trade, the notifications have been 
exchanged by means of electronic communication sin ce the end of 2002. To complement this process, 
in 2006, a website www.teknikengel.gov.tr has been introduced in order to ensure the efficient 
administration of that notification system."  Howeve r, this website has only one page of information 
in English and our business community has been ha ving some difficulty in accessing the information 
they need.  
Could Turkey please provide details of the system for exchanging notifications electronically.  
 How can our business community more easily gain access via the Internet to the latest Turkish 
standards and technical regulations? 
 
Report by the WTO Secretariat - WT/TPR/S/192  
II.  TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES 
(4)  INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK 
(page 21, paragraph 30) 
 
As stated, some restrictions to foreign investment in  real estate have been introduced over the last few 
years. Furthermore, a number of sectors are still subj ect to FDI restrictions (Table II.4). For example, 
in the real-estate trading sector, foreign legal and real persons in Turkey can acquire land above a 
certain size in accordance with the mutuality principle.  
As we understand it, Taiwan citizens still cannot freel y buy office or residential property in Turkey. 
Could Turkey please provide us with more details of  this regulation and expl ain how we might qualify 
under the mutuality principle?  
III.  TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE (4) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE 
(i) Incentives 
(page 62, paragraph 105)  
The Report refers here to "resident companies" supplying inputs and/or services to "free zone 
companies" not being eligible for the same incentiv es. In a previous description, the two terms of 
"resident companies" and "free zone companies" have not been clearly defined and this has created confusion as to how the business transactions among them are being conducted.  
Are these two entities different in terms of their le gal status within the Free Zones Regulation of 
1993? Could either Turkey or the WTO Secretariat  please provide more information in this regard?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 23 
 
 
 IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(1) OVERVIEW 
(page 76, paragraph 1) 
 The Report indicates that the simple average a pplied MFN tariff in agriculture is 28.3%.  
Please could Turkey inform us of the simple av erage binding tariff in agriculture for 2006? 
(2) AGRICULTURE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES (i) Main features  
(page 76, paragraph 5) 
 
The Report states that there are more commercial farms emerging.  
What is the definition of "commercial farms"? Could Turkey please clarify whether it supports only 
family farms or both commercial and family farms? 
(page 76, paragraph 6) 
The Report also states that Turkey is self-sufficient in food.  
We would appreciate knowing what its food self-suffi ciency rates (including rice, wheat and corn) 
were in 2006. 
(page 77, paragraphs 7 - 9) 
Could Turkey please provide us with details of th e composition of its agriculture production in the 
years 2003 and 2006, including crop, forestry, livestock and fishery products?  
(pages 78 & 79, paragraphs 11 - 16) 
Under the Agricultural Reform Implementation Proj ect (ARIP), Turkey has taken measures in four 
main areas.  
We would appreciate knowing: 
Whether the phasing out of price support and replacing it with a less distortionary direct income 
support to farmers, based on a uniform per-hect are payment, is blue box or green box. 
When the phasing out of price support will be completed. What the output intervention purchase is, how it is operated, and which products are included. 
 
In 2004, Turkey adopted the ASP, which fixed th e budgetary funds and targeted the allocation of 
these funds for, amongst others, DIS payments, defi ciency payments and compensatory payments.  
We would like to know:  
What the deficiency and compensatory payments are, and how they are operated? 
If there was any difference between Turkey’s a nd the EU’s compensatory payments in 1992. 
 
Turkey has some large purchasing agencies, such as the Turkish Gr ain Board (TMO) and the Turkish 
Sugar Factories Corporation (TSFAS), which are st ill State-owned. These agencies continue to set 
prices before the purchasing campaign.  
Could Turkey please provide details of the operations of the TMO and the method used for setting the 
purchase prices of grain? WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 24  
 
 Could Turkey please elaborate on the main points of its recently launched Agricultural Strategy Paper 
for 2006-10? 
 
(3)  MINING AND ENERGY  
(i) Overview  
(page 84, paragraph 32) 
 We note from the Report that several public instituti ons are engaged in mining and energy activities, 
which causes difficulties in coordination within the sect or even though these institutions are liaising.   
Do the Turkish authorities have any firm plans fo r improving the efficiency of  coordination by 
reducing the apparent over-me ticulous division of labour? 
(iii) Energy 
(a) Overview (page 87, Table IV.5) 
 To protect consumers, the government heavily in tervenes in and regulates the tariffs on energy 
products and services in Turkey, and this is likel y to hamper the liberalization process and deter 
private investment.   
Does Turkey envisage deploying further count er-measures to overcome these disadvantages? 
(page 88, paragraph 47) 
The Report mentions that power shortages may be cau sed partly by the lack of adequate investment, 
therefore the Government is turning to the private sector for new investment and restructuring of the 
sub-sector to increase the country’s electricity generating capacity. We would be interested in 
knowing:  
What preferences or incentives provided to private or foreign investors are most effective at 
prompting new investment in the power generation sector.  
 In terms of restructuring the power sector, what th e Turkish government is planning to do to achieve 
further market liberalization . 
 
(page 89, paragraph 51) 
According to the Report, companies controlled or owned by foreign States may invest in oil and 
natural gas upstream activities only with the permissi on of the Council of Ministers.  Approval by the 
Energy Market Regulatory Authority (EMRA) Board is also required for investment in refining, 
transportation through pipelines, and storage.   
Could Turkey please describe the concrete conditions or review criteria that  are considered by these 
two agencies in deciding whether or not to issue their permission or approval? 
Report by the WTO Secretariat - WT/TPR/S/192  
II. TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES (4) INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK  
(page 23, paragraph 30) 
 
As stated in Table II.4, Foreign direct investment restrictions, 2007,   the Law relating to private 
employment offices stipulates that "The persons w ho have the binding author ity to represent, act on 
behalf of, and manage real and le gal persons that will set up a private employment office should be  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 25 
 
 
 Turkish.  A foreign company can be established provid ed that the person authorized to represent it in 
Turkey be a Turkish national."  
 
It would be appreciated if the Turkish government could clarify for us the scope and definition of 
‘private employment offices’ and state whether or not this term covers the private employment service sector. 
Could Turkey please also explain the rationale behi nd such restriction and advise us of any future 
government plan for it to be lifted for foreign companies as part of its further liberalization 
programme.   
 
QUESTIONS FROM MEXICO
 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR / (5) Servi ces / (ii) Financial services / (a) Banking 
 
Paragraph 89 indicates that the establishment of th e first branch of a foreign bank requires approval 
from the Banking Regulation and Supervision Authority (BRSA).  Mexico wishes to know what are 
the requirements for BRSA authorization for the establishment of a foreign bank.  Paragraph 89 
further states that under Law No. 5411, establishm ent of a bank engaged exclusively in offshore 
banking is subject to Board decision.  In the case of establishment of a bank engaged exclusively in offshore activities, we would like to know which Bo ard is being referred to and what would be the 
requirements for the latter's decision. 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR / (5) Servi ces / (ii) Financial services / (c) Insurance 
 
Paragraph 96 mentions that once established, fo reign insurance and reinsurance companies must 
obtain a licence from the Undersecretariat of Trea sury.  Mexico wishes to know what are the 
requirements for obtaining such a licence. 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR / (5) Services / (iv) Transport / (a) Maritime transport 
 
Paragraph 114 indicates that the tendering processes for the concession of the ports of Bandirma, 
Derince, İzmir, Samsun and İskenderun have been launched.  Me xico would like to know when the 
invitation to tender will be issued. 
 Paragraph 115 mentions that ships a nd yachts owned by Turkish or fore ign persons resident in Turkey 
and companies incorporated under Turkish legisl ation, may be registered with the Turkish 
International Ship Registry in Is tanbul, and fly the Turkish flag.  Mexico would like to know the 
requirements for entry in the International Ship Registry. 
 Paragraph 118 states that special tax incentives are provided to Turkish investors in the maritime 
transport subsector.  Mexico wishes to know whethe r foreign as well as national investors are eligible 
for such incentives.  IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR / (5) Services / (v) Tourism 
 
Paragraph 137 mentions that the Turkish Governme nt grants incentives for tourism investments in 
accordance with the Tourism Encouragement Law.  We would like to know in greater detail what 
these incentives consist of and whether they apply to foreign investors. 
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 26  
 
 QUESTIONS FROM CHINA
 
 
Secretariat’s Report 
III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measures 
(2) (v) Contingency trade remedies 
Transitional special textile safeguard measures 
 In December 2004, immediately after promulgati ng the Regulation on Surveillance and Safeguard 
Measures against Textile Specific Imports, Turkey  announced that, in accordance with the above 
Regulation, 42 items of textile products of Ch inese origin would be placed under import quota 
restrictions, which was later extended to 44 items in 2006. In December 2006, Turkey circulated an 
official announcement claiming that imports of tex tile from China had caused or threatened to cause 
market disruption, hence decided to continue th e quota on those 44 items of textile products from 
China in 2007.  Moreover, Turkey authorized the Secretariat of th e Istanbul Union of Exporters to administer the 
allocation and management of quot as for the above-mentioned items.  
 Could Turkey explain how they define "market disruption" in the Regulation on Surveillance and 
Safeguard Measures against Textile Specific Imports?  
 Could Turkey clarify what evidences were found af ter the investigation of the above-mentioned 44 
items to substantiate that such restrictions were in conformity with various WTO provisions, 
including Paragraph 242  of the Report of the Working Pa rty on the Accession of China?  
 
Could Turkey explain what regulations or pro cedures the Secretariat of the Istanbul Union of 
Exporters should follow while administering the allocation and management of quotas for the above-
mentioned items?  
 Could Turkey also explain how such provisions or procedures have been appr opriately applied by the 
Secretariat of the Istanbul Union of Exporters, a pa rty with substantial interests on textiles and even a 
potential applicant for safeguard measures against im ported textiles, in conformity with various WTO 
provisions, particularly Article 1.3 of th e Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures? 
 
Safeguard measures  
 
In 2006, the Undersecretariat of the Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade (UFT) adopted 5 safeguard 
measures on motorcycle, shoe, electric iron, vacuum cleaner and salt. These safeguard measures mainly took the form of tariff quotas for a time period of three years. In August 2006, Turkey initiated 
safeguard investigations on imported motorcycle s  and in the meanwhile applied provisional 
safeguard measures to impose a deposit requirement ranging from US ＄200 to US ＄300 on imported 
motorcycles.  
 Could Turkey explain the reason for such increasingl y frequent application of safeguard measures?  
 
Could Turkey explain how its provisional safegua rd measures using deposit requirement on imports 
of motorcycle are in conformity with the Agreemen t on Safeguard Measures, particularly Article 6 of 
that Agreement which stipulates that "Such measu res should take the form of tariff increases…"? 
 National interest considerations in the safeguard investigation  
According to the WTO Secretariat Report, safeguard measures may be applied by Turkey, subject to a 
national interest clause.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 27 
 
 
 Could Turkey please clarify the definition of "national interest"? 
 What are the criteria to define "national interest"?   To what extent would "national interest" considerati ons impact the result of safeguard investigations?  
 
Would all interested parties be provided ample oppor tunity to provide comments on this, and how?  
 Could Turkey provide an example to illustrate the proceedings of investigation with regard to the 
determination of "national in terest" in a safeguard case? 
 Sunset reviews of anti-dumping measures  
In the next few years, dozens of Turkey’s anti-dumpi ng measures are expected to come to their expiry 
of five years of application.  
 
Could Turkey clarify its laws, regulations or pr ocedures that apply to th e furtherance of such 
measures, i.e. their termination or sunset review?   If they are subject to sunset reviews, what laws , regulations or procedures exist in Turkey’s anti-
dumping system to would ensure that interested parties in expiry proceedings have sufficient 
opportunities to present and rebut arguments, as required by Articles 6 and 11 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, and that they have adequate acce ss to critical documents and information?  
 Will the sunset review be completed before th e expiry date of an anti-dumping measure? Could 
Turkey provide a timetable to illustrate its sunset  review process? If a sunset review goes beyond the 
expiry date, would anti-dumping measures continue to apply after this date? If the answer is yes and, a 
negative determination is ma de after the sunset review, what steps will Turkey take to refund any anti-
dumping duties collected beyond that date?   III. (2) (i) Customs procedures, clearance and valuation  Import surveillance   
Turkey places some imports under customs clearance restriction by means of import surveillance. 
According to pertinent Turkish regulations, if th e price of imported products subject to import 
surveillance is lower than the "minimum surveilla nce prices", importers have to apply for import 
surveillance license issued by the Undersecretariat of the Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade (UFT). In 
2006, 14 new product items were added to the surveill ance list, including furniture, tableware, kitchen 
utensils, color TV sets and polyethylene. Moreover, UFT issued Official Gazette No.26399 on 
January 10, 2007, and decided to put 12 categorie s of products under import surveillance, including 
shoes, bags, tableware, kitchen utensils, etc.  In addition, Turkey also exercises surveillance ove r toy imports by setting quantitative restrictions. 
 
Could Turkey please clarify the basis and method for the calculation of "minimum surveillance price" 
and the rationale and legal basis for such surveillance measures? 
 With regard to the quantitative restrictions on imports  of toys under surveillance, could Turkey clarify 
how such practice is in consistence with Article XI of GATT? 
 
Disputes on cargo ownership  
 According to Turkey’s customs rules, goods imported into Turkey should be cleared and picked up 
within 45 days after arrival. Otherwise the goods w ill be confiscated and put on auction in which case WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 28  
 
 the original importer shall have priority to purchase them. As a result, some importers refuse to pick 
up the imported goods under various pretexts for the purpose of buying them at a considerably lower 
price when the customs put the imported goods on au ction. However, this customs regulation runs 
counter to normal trade rules and practices in intern ational trade, and puts exporters in an extremely 
disadvantaged position. Such a regula tion has, so far, given rise to many trade disputes, causing heavy 
losses to foreign exporters including Chinese exporters.  
The Chinese government has raised this issue with  the Turkish customs authorities on a number of 
occasions, but no satisfactory results have been reached. 
 
Is Turkey prepared to abolish such practice?   Certification requirement  
Turkey has established a series of complicated t esting and certification requirements for imports of 
ceramic tableware. Imported ceramic tableware mu st go through mandatory testing and certification 
conducted by the Turkish Standards Institution (TSE).  The testing sometimes la sts several months and 
the cost is very high. Moreover, importers must  provide both sanitation records issued by local 
veterinary offices and product content lists issued by local Chambers of Commerce.  
 Does Turkey plan to take necessary measures to re duce the burden for imported ceramic tableware?   
 
Tariff quotas  
 
Turkey applies tariff rate quotas ("TRQ") to rice im ports. According to Turkey’s legislation, Turkish 
importers are required to purchase certain amount of  domestic rice, and only under this pre-condition 
could they get the import license for a certain amount of imported rice at the in-quota rate. This 
practice has hampered the access of foreign rice to Turkish market.   
Is Turkey going to abolish this quota management system? 
 
Moreover, information regarding the volume of tariff quotas, the implementation, the updating of 
timetables and the issuance of import licenses is not readily available.  
 Could Turkey provide the corresponding information for the years 2003 to 2007? 
 
(2) (vi) Standards and other technical requirements 
Unequal treatment 
 China fully understands the necessity for labeling requirements by Turkey for imported products such 
as toys, medical equipment, machinery, low voltage equipment and electromagnetic exchange 
products where a CE sign should be affixed.  
However, products from EU, after being affixed the si gn, immediately enters into the Turkish market, 
while the same products from other countries have to  go through additional testing. This has created 
an unequal treatment between products fro m EU and those from other countries.  
 
Could Turkey commit itself to take necessary measures to abolish such practice and to comply with 
the WTO’s MFN principle?  (2) (vii) Government procurement  National treatment in government procurement  
The Public Procurement Act of Turkey stipulates that  local bidders, compared with joint ventures, can 
enjoy a price priority of 15%. This provision provides unequal treatment for foreign bidders.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 29 
 
 
 Meanwhile, the requirement for eligibility certifi cation in bidding for government procurement 
involves high cost and complicated procedures, and has made many enterprises unable to participate 
because of the difficulty to obtain certification.  
 
Is Turkey considering granting national treatment to  foreign enterprises in government procurement?  
 IV Trade Policies by Sector (5) Services 
Barriers to trade in services  
 
Many Chinese companies investing in Turkey report th at Turkey applies very strict requirements and 
procedures to the issuance of worki ng visas to Chinese service suppliers and that it is sometimes even 
difficult for Chinese service suppliers who have been living in Turkey for a long time to get work 
permits. In recent years, it has become increasingl y difficult for Chinese service suppliers to be 
granted work permits, which has caused much inconv enience to Chinese service suppliers in Turkey.  
 Does Turkey have any plan to improve its visa re quirements and procedures as to provide effective 
market access to foreign service providers? 
 
QUESTIONS FROM PAKISTAN
 
 
The importers of rice in Turkey are required to obtain a permit from the Ministry of food & Agriculture at Ankara, which is issued on the basi s of purchase and sale of local rice. Would Turkey 
like to share the rationale of such a measure and how  Turkey views this vis-à-vis its obligations under 
Article III of the GATT?  Customs duty and other border taxes on importation of  rice and certain textile products are levied on 
the basis of minimum prices, also referred to as "Reference Pricing". Such minimum prices are subject to annual revision on the basis of the price of local product in the domestic market. How would Turkey justify this measure in the light of  provisions of Agreement on Customs Valuation? 
   
  
 
   
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 30  
 
 REPLIES PROVIDED BY TURKEY 
 
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON THE REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT (WT/TPR/S/192) 
 
ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
 
(3) TRADE PERFORMANCE AND INVESTMENT 
 
Question (Indonesia):
 
 Based on the Secretariat Report about Economic Envir onment paragraph 18, it is stated that Turkey 
has started the submission of the new commercial code to  the Parliament. It is also stated that the new 
code is not yet been adopted. Indonesia would kind ly request for clarification of when it will be 
implemented, and among the new code which part will make significant difference to the inward 
foreign investment to Turkey. Moreover, following the new code, Indonesia needs clarification on the 
propose regulations following the Law and its purpos e to support the future investment regime. 
 
Answer: 
The discussions on the new Commercial Code a re currently ongoing under the Trade Commission of 
the Turkish National Assembly and the adoption of th e Code will take place shortly. The main purpose 
of the new Commercial Code is to replace the cu rrent code, which came into force in 1957, and 
reflect the needed modifications in accordance with the emerging developments in business life during 
the last 50 years, covering also the establishment of  companies with foreign stakeholders. The rapid 
development of e-commerce and internet, Turkey’s requi rement to align its relevant legislation with 
those of the EU, as well as the recent changes in  relevant legislation in Turkey made it necessary to 
adopt a new Commercial Code.  
(4) OUTLOOK 
 Question (European Communities): 
 
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 9, para. 21  
It is stated that "Turkey is taking steps to move to a competitive market economy through an 
acceleration of structural reforms, including comp letion of the privatization agenda and sectoral 
reforms (e.g. labour, education, health)" Could Tu rkey elaborate further on the planned reforms and 
programmes regarding the labour market? 
Answer: 
Labor market flexibility and creating a balance between  job security and labor market flexibility have 
been regarded as main issues for the labor market reform. The strategy will stand on the reduction of 
tax burden on the wages, improvement of active empl oyment policies and technical training. In this 
framework, social security premium paid by th e employers will be reduced progressively beginning 
from 5 percentage points in 2008; administrative and legal burden on employment will be decreased; 
access to unemployment insurance will be eased; active labor market programs will be implemented 
extensively; business opening and closure costs w ill be reduced and vocational training programs will 
be better matched with the needs of labor markets.
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 31 
 
 
 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
(1) GENERAL FRAMEWORK Question (Indonesia):
 
Based on the Secretariat Report about Trade and Investme nt Regimes, it is stated that in para 4, the 
private sector and NGOs provide inputs to trade policy formulation. In the point of view of the 
Turkish Government, how significant the influence of the business entity to the policy formulation 
and does the government also consult with Internatio nal parties like Business Associations or Foreign 
Business Practitioners in formulating the trade policy. 
Answer: 
In the process of trade policy formulation and p eriodical reviews, the Undersecretariat for Foreign 
Trade (UFT) consults with the related NGOs and pr ivate sector associations in order to analyze the 
impact of trade policies. The UFT takes into consid eration the views of all relevant ministries, NGOs 
and private sector associations operating in Turkey to formulate and review the trade policies. To 
that end, meetings are organized, working groups are constituted and c onsultations are made with the 
representatives of the private sector in addition to the exchange of views in written format. 
 
(2) POLICY OBJECTIVES  
Question (Indonesia):  
Indonesia is happy to see how significant the refo rmation and development process of the Turkey 
economy, we see that Turkey is moving forward to a wide development throughout the country. 
Based on Paragraph 8 of the Trade and Investment Regime report of the Secretariat Report, Turkey is 
trying to reduce the informal economy. Indonesi a would kindly request for more details on the 
program set to reduce the informal economic ac tivities and the reformation made in business 
regulations for both domestic a nd foreign business practitioners. 
Answer: 
Important steps have so far been taken to reduce the informal economy. Regulations were introduced 
to reduce bureaucracy, in implementation of inflation accounting, in transition to automation in 
customs, social security and tax transactions, to fi ght against smuggling, for protection of intellectual 
property rights and to encourage employment increase in underdeveloped provinces.  
 Regulations towards the utilization of the financial system within the scope of the fight against the 
informal economy were realized. In this framew ork, it has become obligatory to use the tax 
identification numbers in financial transactions since September 2001. On the other hand, the 
condition that transactions of collections and payments exceeding 8000 YTL (6900 USD) should be 
conducted through banks or Turkish Postal, Teleph one, Telegraph System (PTT) offices has been 
introduced. In addition, a database application, which takes financia l records as basis towards the 
determination of informal trans actions, has been developed.  
 
The usage of tax identification numbers has beco me widespread and the number of identification 
numbers granted has reached 41,114, 357 as of 30 April 2006.  
 
Usage of receipts in gas stati ons and the practice of connecting fuel oil pumps to electronic cash 
register devices have been started as an important  step in the fight against informal economy. 
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 32  
 
 On the other hand, in scope of the 9
th Development Plan, the fight against informal economy will be 
continued with the preparation of a comprehensive st rategy driven by a strong social and political 
will with the participation of all segments of the society.  With the aim of ensuring efficiency in supervisi on, activities towards increasing the implementation 
capacity of public administrations  will be emphasized and the human and technological infrastructure 
of administrations will be improved.  (3) TRADE AGREEMENTS 
Question (Hong Kong, China):
 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 13, Para. 10) 
We note from the Secretariat Report that "Turkey’s membership in several arrangements makes its 
trade regime complex and difficult to manage.  Futu re trade agreements could further complicate the 
trade regime and detract from multilateral efforts, given Turkey’s limited resources."  We would like to know Turkey’s response to the Secretariat's observations.  Answer: Turkey, taking into account its obligations con cerning transparency and predictability, carries out its 
trade regime without any complications. Wh ile carrying out FTA negotiations, Turkey also 
contributes to the multilateral efforts. In this c ontext, Turkey allocates its resources effectively to 
conduct its foreign trade policy in both areas.   
On the other hand, it is a well-known fact that there has been a great increase in the number of 
regional trade agreements (RTAs) in recent years. In 1996, the number of RTAs was accounted as 150 
while this number has increased to 367 in 2006. Therefore, Turkey will continue to utilize such 
instruments, as a complementary tool to multilate ral liberalization process, in order to create new 
trade opportunities for all.  
 
(i) WTO 
Question (Australia):  
 Australia notes from the Secretariat’ s report (WT/TPR/S/192, page 14, Table II.1) that Turkey’s last 
agriculture domestic support notification, coveri ng 2001, was made in 2002, and its last export 
subsidy notification, covering 2000, was made in 2001.  Australia notes the wide-ranging agricultural 
policies Turkey has implemented since the last Tr ade Policy Review and encourages Turkey to bring 
its notifications to the Committee on Agriculture up-to-date.   
 
In particular, Australia would appreciate advice fro m Turkey as to when it will be in a position to 
submit notifications concerning domestic support commitments for the years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 
2005, and export subsidy notifications for the years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. 
 
Answer:  
The most recent notification of Turkey concerning expor t subsidies was made in 2001. On the other 
hand, the export subsidy programme  for agricultural products is notified every two years to the SCM 
Committee. Our notifications, which include export subsidy and domestic support  will be submitted to 
the Committee of Agriculture as soon as possible.  
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 33 
 
 
 (ii) Regional Agreements 
 Question (Australia): 
 
 
Australia notes that the Customs Union between Tu rkey and the EC excludes agricultural goods, and 
there is no firm timetable for the integration of agriculture (WT/TPR/S/192, page 17, paragraph 14).  
Australia further notes that Turkey’s average pr eferential tariff for non-agricultural goods (by the 
WTO definition) imported from the EC is 0.8 per cent (WT/TPR/S/192, page 35, paragraph 14).   
 Could Turkey provide details of the non-agricu ltural goods, using the WTO definition, for which 
duties and other quota arrangements have not been  eliminated under the Customs Union between 
Turkey and the EC.  Over all goods, for what proportion of HS 6-digit subheadings has Turkey not eliminated customs duties and quota arrangements on imports from the EC?  
Answer: 
In accordance with the WTO definition, 2,6 % of HS  6-digit tariff lines of non agricultural goods have 
not been eliminated under the Customs Union between Turkey and the EC. For over all goods, 12,7% 
of the HS 6-digit tariff lines have not been eliminated. There are no quota arrangements between 
Turkey and the EC.  
 
(4) INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK 
 
Question (European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page vii, para. 4 
The Secretariat's report indicates that "[s]ome restric tions to foreign investment have been introduced 
over the last few years on real estate acquisition, and a number of sectors are still subject to FDI 
restrictions (e.g., broadcasting, fishing, petrol eum, mining, and financial services). Could Turkey 
confirm whether it intends to eliminate the inv estment restrictions currently applied in the 
abovementioned sectors?  
Question (The United States):  
 Page 21, paragraph 30:  The Secretariat’s report notes Turkey’s significant efforts since its last TPR to 
improve its investment climate and attract higher levels of foreign di rect investment, particularly in 
key sectors such as financial services.  The substa ntial increase in FDI inflows into the financial 
services sector demonstrates the success of Turkey’s  efforts; but the Secretariat’s report observes that 
a number of FDI restrictions on financial services remain.  Given Turkey’s success in attracting 
foreign investment into one of its most economically vibrant sectors, what are your government’s 
plans to liberalize further the financial sector, particul arly with respect to the restrictions identified in 
Table II.4 of the Secretariat’s report?  
Answer: 
The elimination of current investment restrictions  applied in the above-mentioned sectors will be 
evaluated during Turkey’s negotiations with the EU fo r accession. In this connection, elimination of 
investment restrictions will be dealt within the context of Chapter on "Free Movement of Capital". WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 34  
 
 Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan
, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
 (page 21, paragraph 30) 
As stated, some restrictions to foreign investment in  real estate have been introduced over the last few 
years. Furthermore, a number of sectors are still subj ect to FDI restrictions (Table II.4). For example, 
in the real-estate trading sector, foreign legal and real persons in Turkey can acquire land above a 
certain size in accordance with the mutuality principle.  
As we understand it, Taiwan citizens still cannot freel y buy office or residential property in Turkey. 
Could Turkey please provide us with more details of  this regulation and expl ain how we might qualify 
under the mutuality principle?  
Answer: 
Detailed information about the ac quisition of real estate by foreigners is given in the attached 
document
1.   
 
Question (Argentina):  
 Paragraph 22, page 33 
This paragraph refers to an "I nvestment Encouragement Programme (IEP)".  Could Turkey please list 
the requirements for a company to be entitled to this  benefit?  Since the entry into force of this 
mechanism, have any foreign enterprises benefited from it? 
 
Answer: 
The Turkish Investment Encouragement System, which is  currently in force, consists of an integrated 
program called "The Investment Encouragement Program (IEP)", which contains encouragement 
measures to encourage, support and or ient all types of investments with various objectives including 
regional development, support of SMEs, R&D and en vironmental protection based on the provisions 
of the "Decree Concerning State Encourageme nts to Investments" (Decree No: 2006/10921
2, dated: 
August 28th, 2006 which has been amended by Decree No: 2007/121423). 
It should be noted that, as far as the mechani sm is concerned, domestic and foreign investors are 
equally treated; the companies having foreign capita l can benefit from all encouragement measures 
granted to domestic companies with the same conditions.  
In order to qualify for investment encouragement  measures offered under IEP, investors are entitled 
to take an investment encouragement certificate. Foreign investors must first apply and qualify to 
receive an investment encouragement certificate from the General Directorate of Foreign Investments 
(GDFI); domestic investors must also apply, qua lify and receive their certificates from the General 
Directorate of Incentives and Implementation (GDII).  Both of these General Directorates are sub-
branches of the Undersecretariat of Treasury entitled to implemen t the Investment Encouragement 
Program.  
For investment projects to be granted an investment  encouragement certificate the amount of total 
fixed investment should be; 
Minimum 200 thousand YTL and maximum 2 million YTL for SMEs’ investments, 
Minimum 200 thousand YTL for investments to be made via financial leasing, 
                                                      
1 See Annex 1. 
2 Published on the Official Gazette dated 06.10.2006 and No: 26311. 
3 Dated May 21st, 2007, published on the Official Gazette dated 01.06.2007 and No: 26539.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 35 
 
 
 Minimum 1 million YTL for all other investments. 
For a detailed description of the IEP (legisla tive basis, scope, purpose, eligibility criteria) and 
encouragement measures offered under the progr am, please refer in the Secretariat Report to 
section III (2)(iii)(c) (WT/TPR/S/192, p.33, para.22- 23) and section III (4)(i) (WT/TPR/S/192, p.62, 
para.110-111).  
Please see the Table below for the second part of the question. 
Investment Incentive Certificates Issued for Companies with International Capital (2000-07)  
 
Investment value is prescribed  in the investment certificate that is issu ed for companies with foreign capital. 
 
Source: Undersecretar iat of Treasury. 
 
Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan , Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
 
(page 23, paragraph 30) 
As stated in Table II.4, Foreign direct investment restrictions, 2007,   
the Law relating to private employment offices s tipulates that "The persons who have the binding 
authority to represent, act on behalf of, and manage  real and legal persons that will set up a private 
employment office should be Turkish.  A foreign co mpany can be established provided that the person 
authorized to represent it in Turkey be a Turkish national." 
 
It would be appreciated if the Turkish government could clarify for us the scope and definition of 
‘private employment offices’ and state whether or not this term covers the private employment service 
sector. 
Could Turkey please also explain the rationale behi nd such restriction and advise us of any future 
government plan for it to be lifted for foreign companies as part of its further liberalization 
programme.   
 
Answer: 
The mediation services for matching suitable empl oyees and employers in the labor market can also 
be executed by the private employment offices est ablished by natural and legal persons upon the 
permission of the Turkish Employment Agency.  T hus, this term covers the private employment service 
sector. 
 
Within the framework of Turkish Commercial Code  No.6762, foreign nationals can found or co-invest 
in private employment offices. However, the p erson authorized to represent these offices in Turkey 
shall be a Turkish national since these companies conduct their activities in Turkish Labour Market 
and provide services for job seekers who are Turkish Citi zens and thus should have the authority to 
draw up employment contract with employers.  
 On the other hand, the provisions regarding priv ate employment offices under the Law on Turkish 
Employment Agency No.4904, are currently under evaluation.  
  2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 
(January-
September)
Number of Incentive Certificates (Number) 217 169 208 211 231 206 151 148
Amount of Investment* (Million $) 11,728,2 2.517,8 1.408,8 1.729,5 3.834,2 3.484,7 1.802,8 3.901,5
Equity Share of Foreign Direct Investor 
(%) 49,4 48,6 51,0 71,8 41,7 51,7 36,1 41,3WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 36  
 
 TRADE
 POLICIES  AND  PRACTICES  BY MEASURES 
 (1) INTRODUCTION  Question (Indonesia):
 
 Based on the secretariat report about Trade Policies a nd Practices by Measure, on para 3 it is stated 
that government still has an influence on the ec onomy, mainly through its control of public 
enterprises, although the implementation of its priv atization programme has been accelerated recently. 
Indonesia needs clarification whether unfair practices and conflicts of interest are avoided by 
excluding state owned enterprises from government procurement regulations. 
Answer: 
Turkish Public Procurement Regi me which has been amended in 2002 according to EC Directives, 
UNCITRAL and the other best practices has no provis ion regarding the favouring of any state-owned 
enterprises in competing public tenders. Furtherm ore, when a state-owned enterprise submits a 
tender, it enjoys the same rights and obligations of its private counterparts. On the other hand, under 
the Turkish Public Procurement Regime, by means of  complaint to Public Procurement Authority and 
trial to the courts, any private operator can clai m damages caused by unfair practices. Additionally, 
It should also be mentioned that, although stat e-owned enterprises are not totally excluded from 
submitting tenders in public procurement, it is not  common and usual for them to participate in 
tenders because of the nature of the goods and services they produce.  
The provision of 2
nd para of the article 11th of Law No: 4734 stipulat es: "Whatever their purposes of 
establishment are, the foundations, associations, uni ons, funds and other entities included within the 
body of the contracting entity carrying out the procu rement, or related with the contracting entity and 
the companies to which such entities are partners, cannot participate in the procurement held by 
these contracting entities." Therefore these kinds of companies which have close ties with contracting 
entities are excluded from participa ting in public procurement.  
 
(2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS 
 (i) Customs procedures, clearance, and valuation  Question (The United States): 
 
 Page 27, paragraph 9:   The Secretariat’s report mentions that Turkey computes all customs duties on 
the c.i.f. value of the import.  Nevertheless,  Turkey has established "reference prices" for; inter alia , 
rice, sunflower seeds, pulses, a nd walnuts.  Turkey charges ad valorem  tariffs on these reference 
prices regardless of the declared c.i.f. value.  However, the Customs Valuation Agreement ("CVA") 
provides the agreed methodology and procedures fo r determining the custom s value of imports.  
Please explain how Turkey’s use of "reference prices " for rice, sunflower seeds, pulses, and walnuts is 
consistent with Turkey’s obligations under the CV A.  We urge Turkey to review its customs 
procedures, including its valuation methods, to ensu re that they are consistent with the CVA.  
 
In respect of Turkey’s reference prices, how does Turkey calculate these refe rence prices?  How often 
does Turkey change its reference prices?  How doe s Turkey communicate any changes to traders?  
Does your government notify or consult with interested parties before imposing these reference 
prices? 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 37 
 
 
 Question (Pakistan):  
 
Customs duty and other border taxes on importation of  rice and certain textile products are levied on 
the basis of minimum prices, also referred to as "Reference Pricing". Such minimum prices are subject to annual revision on the basis of the price of local product in the domestic market. How would Turkey justify this measure in the light of  provisions of Agreement on Customs Valuation? 
 
Answer: As it is mentioned in the Secretariat’s Report and th e question, the customs administration computes 
all the duties on the CIF value of the import, not  on the reference prices determined before the 
importation of the goods regardless of the declared CI F value as it is claimed in the afore mentioned 
question.  
 In importation of some goods the reference price lists congruent to the world trade markets, 
commodity market, commodity exchange etc. obtained from  various Public Institutions are distributed 
to the local customs offices to check the a ccuracy of the decla red customs value. 
 
In case where the local customs o ffice has substantial doubts about th e declared value of those kinds 
of imported goods, the procedu re harmonious with the Decision 6.1 of The WTO Valuation 
Committee is applied to verify the accuracy of the d eclared value. (A circular numbered 2006/6 is in 
force). 
 
Question (Switzerland): 
 
 
Para. 6 (p. 27)  of the Report states that the customs authority may grant permission to simplify 
formalities and procedures (Simplified Procedur e Authorization), including by waiving the 
requirement for some documentation. Could Turkey  indicate whether and as appropriate where such 
simplified procedures are formalised in a regulation and indicate who would be eligible to use such 
simplified procedures? 
Question (Hong Kong, China):  
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 27, Para. 6)  
We note from the Secretariat Report that Turkey’s customs authority may grant permission to simplify formalities and procedures (Simplified Pr ocedure Authorization) including waiving the 
requirement for some documentation.  We woul d like to know whether the Simplified Procedure 
Authorization is granted to the import of particular  products or to specific importers.  Grateful if 
Turkey would provide further information on the Authorization concerned.  
Answer: 
The simplified procedures in Turkey a re formalised under Article 71 and 73 of The Customs Law No. 
4458, and Articles 136 to 163 of The Customs Regulati ons, as well as within the context of General 
Customs Notice (Simplified Procedu res No.1) [Published in the Turkish Official Gazette No: 26622, 
dated 23.08.2007]  
With regard to the above mentioned customs le gislation; permission to simplify formalities and 
procedures is granted to export companies, m anufacturing companies, and subsidiary companies 
which import and/or export goods on behalf of  a manufacturing parent company.  Simplified 
Procedure Authorisation is granted to companies that  fulfil the following criteria laid down in brief: 
(1) Customs compliance : The applicant should not have committed serious infringement or repeated 
infringements of customs rules over the last 2 years preceding the submission of the application. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 38  
 
 (2) Judicial Reliability: The applicant’s board of  management and legal representatives in customs 
matters and major share holders should have no criminal  sentences related to anti-smuggling act or 
to certain acts regulating the acts against the Stat e including bribery, corruption, embezzlement etc. 
(3) Proven Financial Solvency: 
 - The applicant  should have certain quantity of paid-in capital, 
 -The applicant should have no tax debts and social security premium debts,  
 -The applicant should have a certain import / export capacity  
 -The applicant should have a certain number of employees (for manufacturers only)  
 -The applicant should have a proven pro duction capacity (for manufacturers only)  
 
Question (The Republic of Korea): 
 
(WT/TPR/S/192 p.27, para.8) 
The importation of certain goods continues to be al lowed only through specialized customs offices. 
This arrangement incurs additi onal time and expenses for importers. The recent reduction in the 
number of customs offices for textile products has especially caused great in convenience to relevant 
importers. Does the Turkish Government ha ve any plans to alleviate these problems?  
Answer: 
Release for free circulation operations of some pr oducts are executed through specialised customs 
directorates. The aims of regulating specialised  customs directorates are preserving the obligatory 
standards required for import goods, providi ng efficient, quick and effective controls. 
 
Besides, the number of customs o ffices specialised in the import of textile products was increased 
from 5 to 9 since the start of the application in 2001.Therefore, there is no reduction in the number of 
customs offices specialised in textile products.   Designation of the specialised customs offices is  a dynamic process and c hanges are done according 
to recent developments. 
Question (China):
 
Turkey places some imports under customs clearance restriction by means of import surveillance. 
According to pertinent Turkish regulations, if th e price of imported products subject to import 
surveillance is lower than the "minimum surveilla nce prices", importers have to apply for import 
surveillance license issued by the Undersecretariat of the Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade (UFT). In 
2006, 14 new product items were added to the surveill ance list, including furniture, tableware, kitchen 
utensils, color TV sets and polyethylene. Moreover, UFT issued Official Gazette No.26399 on 
January 10, 2007, and decided to put 12 categorie s of products under import surveillance, including 
shoes, bags, tableware, kitchen utensils, etc.  
In addition, Turkey also exercises surveillance ove r toy imports by setting quantitative restrictions. 
Could Turkey please clarify the basis and method for the calculation of "minimum surveillance price" 
and the rationale and legal basis for such surveillance measures? 
With regard to the quantitative restrictions on imports  of toys under surveillance, could Turkey clarify 
how such practice is in consistence with Article XI of GATT? 
Answer: The purpose of import surveillance system of Tu rkey is to collect specific data regarding the
 imported 
products of which the imports are sharply increasing and causing price pressure on domestic  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 39 
 
 
 producers. Since the producers’ claims focused on th e low priced imports, only the products having a 
CIF value under certain limits have been  covered by the surveillance system.  
In importation of certain toys, Turkey has been im plementing surveillance, which was promulgated by 
the Communiqué No: 2007/5 published in the Turki sh Official Gazette dated 10 January 2007. Since 
there is no quantitative restriction on imports of said products, the topic of surveillance on toys is out 
of the scope of Article XI of GATT. 
Question (China):  
According to Turkey’s customs rules, goods imported into Turkey should be cleared and picked up 
within 45 days after arrival. Otherwise the goods w ill be confiscated and put on auction in which case 
the original importer shall have priority to purchase them. As a result, some importers refuse to pick 
up the imported goods under various pretexts for the purpose of buying them at a considerably lower 
price when the customs put the imported goods on au ction. However, this customs regulation runs 
counter to normal trade rules and practices in intern ational trade, and puts exporters in an extremely 
disadvantaged position. Such a regula tion has, so far, given rise to many trade disputes, causing heavy 
losses to foreign exporters including Chinese exporters.  
The Chinese government has raised this issue with  the Turkish customs authorities on a number of 
occasions, but no satisfactory results have been reached.  
Is Turkey prepared to abolish such practice?  
Answer: 
Customs clearance rules and procedures are in fu ll alliance with the EU legislation. The 45 days 
period is for importation through maritime transpor t. For importation through road, railway and air 
transportation, on the other hand, the mentioned period is 20 days.  It is the importers that are 
responsible for the completion of customs clearance procedures.  
Moreover, the confiscation of th e goods and the auction process a re last-resort options. Upon the 
demand of the importer, it is possible to prolong the above-mentioned period provided that such 
demand is based on reasons other than the negligen ce of the importer himself. In addition, re-export 
is also an available option for importers.  
   Where they are not involved in administrative or j udicial proceedings, goods, in respect of which the 
necessary formalities are not initiated within the periods determined in the Customs Law, shall be 
disposed of in accordance with related legislation.    
If goods are disposed by selling in an auction, th e declarant of the goods shall reserve the right to 
apply the free circulation entry procedure until the da te on which the announcement of the auction is 
published.   But in this case, the importer must pay the fine at the rate of 1 percent of the CIF value of the goods 
on foreign currency.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 40  
 
 (iii) Tariffs, other duties, and taxes 
 Question (Chile): 
 
 Paragraph 11 
According to this paragraph, Turkey maintains a so -called "statutory" tariff.  What, exactly, is this 
tariff, and when is it applicable?  
 
Question (The United States): 
 
 
Page 29, paragraph 16 briefly describes Customs Law No. 474 that allows Turkey to set "statutory 
tariffs" to provide "adequate" protection to domest ic industries.  How does Turkey calculate these 
statutory tariffs?  What circumstances would trigge r statutory tariffs?  What is an "adequate" measure 
of protection?  When do statutory tariffs return to  MFN rates? How does Turkey ensure that statutory 
tariffs do not breach its WTO bindings?  How does the government notify these tariff changes?  Question (Switzerland):
  
 
According to Para. 16, Law No. 474 on customs ta riff schedule enables the Government to increased 
applied MFN tariff rates when they are deemed not  high enough to provide "adequate" protection to 
domestic industries. Could Turkey specify which are the criteria to determine that the NFM tariff rates 
are not high enough? What are the criteria used to determine that "ade quate" protection is not 
provided to domestic industries?  
Question (Canada): 
 
 
page 29, paragraph 16:The Secr etariat Report describes Law No. 474 on Customs Tariff Schedule, 
which enables the government to increase the ap plied MFN tariff rate by imposing a so-called 
statutory tariff in instances when MFN tariffs are not deemed high enoug h to provide "adequate" 
protection to domestic industries.  Could Turkey please explain what is meant by "ade quate protection" and describe in more detail the 
circumstances under which the statutory tariff would be applied? 
 Could Turkey please further explain how law No. 474 is implemented? Specifically could Turkey 
indicate if there a system in place to notify WTO me mbers when tariffs are increased and explain how 
the Law is consistent with th e WTO Agreement on Safeguards? 
 Question (Japan): 
 
 (page 26, paragraph 2, page29, paragraph 16) 
According to the Secretariat report, in addition to applied and bound tariffs, Turkey also maintains the 
so-called statutory tariff. Under the Law, the Government can replace applied MFN tariff rate by 
150% of the corresponding rates of the statutory tariff, with a view to ensuring higher protection to 
local industries. In the case of products subject to ta riff bindings, when the new rate (i.e. 150% of the 
statutory tariff rate) is higher than the corres ponding bound tariff rate, then the latter applies. 
Please provide information on the operational results of that tariff, including how many times and to 
what sectors the statutory tariff has been applied.  
 Could Turkey clarify the reason why the rate of the statutory tariff is set at the level of 150 %? 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 41 
 
 
 Please explain specific criteria to decide whether a pplied tariff rates are deem ed not high enough to 
provide ‘adequate’ protection to domestic industries.  Answer: During the adjustment of tariff rates, Turkey takes into account not only the supply and demand 
dynamics of the market, domestic production and consumption levels, domestic and world market 
prices and the exchange rates but also the commitments  stemming from the WTO membership and the 
Customs Union Decision (CUD).  
As is known, as a result of the Uruguay Round, Turkey bound all tariff lines (100 %) for agricultural 
products. As for the non-agricultural products (3 6% bound), due to the CUD commitments, Turkey 
applies the Common External Tariffs (CET) of the EC which is already far below the statutory tariff 
rates and WTO commitment levels.  
Turkey is well aware of its WTO commitments and bound rates. The statutory tariffs are not applied 
more than the bound rates. As indicated in Para 16  of the Secretariat’s Report, "…In the case of 
products subject to tariff bindings, when the new rate  (i.e. 150% of the statutory tariff rate) is higher 
than the corresponding bound tariff rate, then the latter applies".  
Here "adequate protection" refers to the protection level  that is sufficient to make the market operate 
efficiently taking into account the economic c onditions such as supply and demand, domestic and 
world prices and so on. "Statutory tariff" is onl y applied for the tariff lines which are unbound or out 
of the CUD. As for the tariff lines that are bound to  the WTO or covered by the CUD, the amount of 
adequate protection cannot be more than the commitment levels.     The Council of Ministers is authorized to make the ade quate changes in the tariff duties.  Due to the 
international commitments, Law No. 474 is only effective for tariff lines which are either unbound or 
outside the CUD. The Article 2 of the aforementi oned law authorizes Council of Ministers to increase 
or decrease statutory tariff rates and states that pr ovisions of international agreements signed by 
Turkey is respected. The Decisions of the Council of Ministers are published in the Official Gazette.  
 Question (The United States):
  
 
On Page 33, paragraph 21, The Secretariat notes that Turkey’s non- ad valorem  tariffs do not 
necessarily equal its WTO-bound ad valorem  tariff rates.  In addition, the Secretariat notes, Turkey’s 
tariff regime "would gain in transparency and pr edictability through extension of the scope of 
products covered by the binding commitments, an d reduction of bound rates."  The United States 
encourages Turkey to examine its ad valorem  and non- ad valorem  tariffs to ensure their consistency 
with its WTO tariff bindings.  We hope that you will consider adopting the Secretariat’s 
recommendation to reduce your bound rates.  Please show how Turkey’s tariff rates fall within your 
government’s bindings.  
 
Question (Switzerland):  
 
According to Para. 21 the imposition of non-ad valo rem tariff rates does not ensure compliance by 
Turkey with its WTO binding commitments made at valorem rates. As the binding commitments 
represent the upper limit of what can be levied at the border, how does Turkey in tend to ensure that its 
non-ad valorem tariff rates are not higher than its ad valorem WTO binding co mmitments? In the case 
that such non-ad valorem rates would exceed ad valorem binding commitments, it would represent a 
breach of Turkey's WTO obligations (article II GAT T). What measures has Turkey taken to ensure 
that there is no breach of article II GATT?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 42  
 
 Answer: 
Turkey does not apply non-ad valorem tariff rates fo r the basic agricultural products which are not 
covered by the Customs Union Decision (CUD). As part of the CU commitments, for certain products 
(processed agricultural products and industrial goods) Turkey appli es non-ad valorem customs duties 
as Common External Tariffs within the boundaries of the CUD.  
 
Question (The United States):
  
 
Page 38, paragraph 30 :  Turkey assesses either (1) the Special Consumption Tax (SCT) on distilled 
spirits imports or (2) a minimum specific rate per litre of pure alcohol, whichever one is higher.  We 
note that the tax rate applied to alcohol categori es where imports dominate is higher.  Does Turkey 
plan to adopt a single tax rate based on alcohol conten t for all categories of distilled spirits to address 
this issue?  
Question (European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  38, para. 30 
Turkey's excise tax system, the Special Consump tion Tax (SCT) on alcoholic beverages appears to 
discriminate against imported products. Different  tax rates apply depending on the category of 
alcoholic beverages. In effect, major categories of alcoholic beverages produced predominantly in 
Turkey, are subject to significantly lower rates of  excise tax than the main categories of alcoholic 
beverages generally imported. The system appear s to indirectly discriminate against imported 
products and appears to be contra ry to GATT Article III (2). Does Turkey have plans to reform the 
excise tax system?  
Answer:  
According to Excise Duty Law numbered 4760 alcoholic beverages are subject to excise duty in 
respect of their CN Codes. All the alcoholic bever ages at the same CN Code whether domestic or 
imported are applied at the same excise duty rate s. Specific Tax Amount is established as a tax 
security precaution. Since proportional taxation is  applied in the excise system for alcoholic 
beverages, the calculated tax cannot be lesser t han the tax calculated according to the minimum 
specific tax amount. Therefore major categories of alcoholic beverages produced predominantly in 
Turkey, are not subject to significantly lower rates of  excise tax than the main categories of alcoholic 
beverages generally imported.    Question (Switzerland): 
 
According to Para. 30 and footnote 30  the new ad valorem excise duty on tobacco products is not in 
line with the EC acquis . How does Turkey intend to bring its excise duty on tobacco products in line 
with the EC acquis ? 
Answer: 
On excise duty, Turkey has made progress. The minimum specific tax amounts on tobacco products 
were raised. Taxation of tobacco and tobacco produc ts is based on the levying of ad valorem duty, 
provided that the calculated tax is not less than th e tax calculated accordi ng to the minimum specific 
tax amount. The tax base for tobacco is retail-selling price of these goods to final customers including 
VAT.  
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 43 
 
 
 Question (European Communities):  
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  38, para. 31 
The Secretariat report indicates that 'the VAT is levied at 1%, or 8% on agricultural and basic goods, and at 18% on some non-agricultural products and l uxury items (including cosmetics, furs, television, 
and automobiles). The EC notes that Turkey h as reduced the VAT rate to 8% on contract 
manufacturing for textile and ready-to-wear works,  restaurant services, services provided in care 
houses and rest-homes. Could Turkey confirm this information? 
 
Answer: 
Turkey has reduced the VAT rate to 8% on contra ct manufacturing for textile and ready-to-wear 
works, services provided in pr ivate care houses and rest-homes, restaurant services but reduction of 
tax rate for restaurant services will co me into force on January 1, 2008. 
 
Question (Japan):
  
 
(page 33, paragraph 21) 
The Secretariat report states that as a result of the Uruguay Round, 46.3% of Turkey’s tariff lines were 
bound (all tariff lines for agricultural products (WTO definition), and about 36% of the lines for non-
agricultural products). Japan is of the view th at a number of unbound tariff lines should be improved 
because of remarkably lack ing the predictability.   
 
Could Turkey provide specific view on this issue? 
 
Answer: 
Turkey’s tariff system is based on commitments stemming from the WTO and Customs Union Decision 
(CUD). It is transparent, predictable, and availabl e to the public. The import tariff system is applied 
on MFN basis without any discrimination. The Import Regime Decree is issued annually, and amended only for some exceptional cases. Regarding the binding of unbound tariffs, this is an issue of 
ongoing NAMA negotiations.    
Question (Australia): 
 
 
Turkey’s applied tariff schedule currently comprises 18,253 lines under a 12-digit national 
nomenclature based on the 6-digit HS system (WT/TP R/S/192, page 29, paragraph 15).  Such a high 
number of tariff lines adds considerable complexity to  Turkey’s schedule.  We note, in contrast, that 
the EC’s tariff nomenclature is at 8-digit leve l and consists of only around 9,800 tariff lines in 
HS2007, although this is still a relatively high numb er.  What is the reason for the extremely high 
number of tariff lines in Turkey’s schedule, includ ing in comparison to the EC common external 
tariff, and does Turkey have any plans to reduce subs tantially the number and complexity of its tariff? 
 
Answer:  
Turkey adapted the EC’s tariff nomenclature as part of the Customs Union Decision which is at 8-
digit HS level. Regarding the number of tariff lines,  the number of Turkey’s 8-digit HS lines is the 
same with that of the EC’s. In our 12-digit national nomenclature, 9th and 10th digits are for execution 
of duties; 11th and 12th digits are for national statistical purposes. Meanwhile, a study has been 
initiated to reduce statistical sub-digits.  
 
Question (Australia):  
 
Australia notes that Turkey’s simple average applie d rate of agricultural tariffs is not only among the 
highest of any WTO Member, but has increased sin ce Turkey’s last trade policy review (to 47.6%, 
compared with 43.3% in 2003, WT/TPR/S/192, page 31, paragraph 19).  Could Turkey explain how it WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 44  
 
 intends to address this within the stated objectiv e of Turkey’s trade policies to "effectuate the 
principle of free and fair trade" (W T/TPR/G/192, page 13, paragraph 55).  
 
Answer: Turkey adjusts the tariff levels of agricultural prod ucts according to the market conditions; supply 
and demand, domestic production a nd consumption levels, domestic and world prices within the 
boundaries of its commitment levels. 
 
Turkey has extremely high tariffs for some products, including, for example, ad valorem tariffs of 225 
per cent for beef and sheep meat.  While some other WTO Members maintain  similarly prohibitive 
duty rates, generally these are in  the context of MFN tariff quotas, with at least some MFN imports 
under lower in-quota tariffs, which appears not to be the case for Turkey.  What plans does Turkey to 
address such extreme tariffs in its ta riff schedule so as to allow some  level of MFN imports at lower 
duty rates?  
 
Turkey determines the tariff levels of  agricultural products accordi ng to the market conditions; supply 
and demand, domestic production a nd consumption levels, domestic and world prices within the 
boundaries of its commitment levels. Turkey obviously  evaluates the market access issue in scope of 
the ongoing agricultural negotiations at the WTO.  Question (Argentina): 
 
 
Paragraph 24, page 35 
This paragraph mentions an inward processing scheme, which allows Turkish 
manufacturers/exporters to import materials free of duties.  The system works through the suspension 
of duties and VAT until the exportation of the products , provided there is a "substantiated" intention 
to re-export the goods in the form of compensati ng products.  Could Turkey please explain what is 
meant by "substantiated intention"?  What is th e procedure by which a manufacturer/exporter makes 
such a request?  
Answer: 
In order to benefit from inward processing reg ime, manufacturer-exporte rs/exporters should apply 
for authorization certificate to the Undersecretaria t of Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade with the 
information required to evaluate the applicatio n. The applicant should fill an inward processing 
project form identifying the goods to be imported and  exported. Together with this project form, the 
applicant should submit the necessary documents; i.e.  list of raw materials, capacity report about the 
production of export goods (compe nsating products), trade registration journal, circular of 
authorized signature and information about p revious authorization certificates. The relevant 
authorities evaluate the correctness and completeness of  information and docum ents submitted by the 
applicants. If the intention to export the compen sating products is substantiated, an inward 
processing authorization certificate is issued. So,  import duties and VAT are suspended until the 
exportation of the compensating products.  
 
(iv) Import prohibitions, quotas, and licensing  Question (The United States): 
 
 
Page 40, paragraph 37:   Turkey seems to require import licenses for "several categories of products, 
including some motor vehicles, transmission appara tus, chemicals, fertilizers, endangered species of 
wild fauna and flora, solvent and petroleum pr oducts, and certain sugar substitutes," as well as for 
some agricultural and foodstuff products.  The Secr etariat notes U.S. concerns  about the transparency 
of Turkey’s import licensing system for some agri cultural products and distilled spirits.  Lack of 
transparency in Turkey’s import licensing system can stifle trade due to costly delays and other  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 45 
 
 
 uncertainties.  Is Turkey in the process of re vising its import licensing requirements for distilled 
spirits?  Please provide an update.   
Answer: 
The legal arrangements concerning agricultural products and distilled spirits are mentioned in 
Chapter III, Articles 64 and 65 of this report. It  should firstly be underlined that "Control 
Certificates" regulated by the Ministry of Agricu lture are not import licenses. These certificates are 
documents stipulating the product safety before im portation by the company in the scope of SPS. 
"Conformity Certificates" for distilled spirits, regulated by Tobacco and Alcohol Supreme Council 
(TAPDK), are not import licences either.  
The basic rationale behind the requirement of Conform ity Certificate for distilled spirits has been to 
avert possible negative externalities that might have occurred after the termination of the 
monopolistic structure of the market with a view to  ensure efficient market su rveillance.  With this 
implementation, companies and products that en ter the market have been registered and the objective 
of establishing a smooth functioning market s ystem has to a large extent been achieved.  
 
In this context, Conformity Certificate requireme nt will eventually be replaced with a simple 
notification system. TAPDK is currently  working on the new regulation.  
 Question (The European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  40, para. 37 
The Secretariat's report notes that "[c]oncerns have b een expressed about the lack of transparency in 
Turkey's import licensing system for some agricultural products and distilled spirits".  
In this context, could Turkey elaborate furthe r on the reasons for applying import restrictions on 
aromatized wines and when it plans to eliminate these restrictions?  Answer:  
The legal arrangement concerning aromatized wines is  legislated in the scope of the Turkish Food 
Codex. These products can be freely imported in  conformity with the mentioned legislation. 
 
Question (The European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  41, para. 38  
Could Turkey confirm whether it applies im port restrictions on second-hand products?  
 
Answer: 
As is stated in page 41, para. 38 of the Secretariat’ s Report, [under the Article 7 of the Import Regime 
Decree] the importation of old, used, renovated, fa ulty and obsolete goods is subject to permission by 
the Undersecretariat for Foreign Trade (UFT).  
The provision of Article 7 does not constitu te a ban on the imports of such goods. 
 Under this system, most of the used goods (in genera l, capital goods used in different sectors such as 
food, packaging, textile, machinery, mining and me tal, construction, trans portation etc.) can be 
imported freely provided that they a re not older than 10 years of age.  
In relation to the goods described as "old", there is  no need to get any authorization from the UFT. 
Import applications are concluded directly by the Turkish Customs Authorities and there is no 
difficulty in the functioning of that system. More specifically, with the exception of main automotive WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 46  
 
 industry products (motor vehicl es) and construction machinery such as excavators, shovel loaders, 
loaders; the old goods can be impor ted without prior authorization. 
 
Question (Canada): 
 
 
page 39, paragraph 34 :The Secretariat Report refers to Turkey ’s import prohibition on certain imports 
from countries considered to be risks for diseases, including those related to Bovine Spongiform 
Encephalopathy (BSE). The report further notes that Tu rkey’s decision to ban imports of live animals 
and meat products was based on Wo rld Organization for Animal Health (OIE) risk classification. 
 
Canada would like to take this opportunity to un derscore Canada’s OIE categorization as controlled 
risk for BSE. Canada received this categoriza tion in May 2007 as a result of a comprehensive 
evaluation of Canada’s BSE risk mitigation, surve illance and eradication measures, as carried out by 
the OIE’s panel of BSE experts. Having achieve d the designation of controlled BSE risk, OIE 
guidelines provide for safe trade in a broad range of  commodities, under condi tions to which Canada 
is able to certify. 
Therefore, Canada would request that Turkey lift its ban on Canadian live cattle and beef products as 
per OIE guidelines.  
Answer: 
According to Article 7 of The Law of Animal Health  Protection numbered 3285, and  Article 15 of the 
Regulation of Animal Health Protection; importatio n of live animals and meat are permitted from the 
countries for which no restriction has been imposed due to BSE disease. 
 
Question (Pakistan):
 
  
The importers of rice in Turkey are required to obtain a permit from the Ministry of food & Agriculture at Ankara, which is issued on the b asis of purchase and sale of local rice. Would Turkey 
like to share the rationale of such a measure and how  Turkey views this vis-à-vis its obligations under 
Article III of the GATT? 
Question (China):
 
Turkey applies tariff rate quotas ("TRQ") to rice im ports. According to Turkey’s legislation, Turkish 
importers are required to purchase certain amount of  domestic rice, and only under this pre-condition 
could they get the import license for a certain amount of imported rice at the in-quota rate. This practice has hampered the access of foreign rice to Turkish market.  
Is Turkey going to abolish this quota management system? 
Could Turkey provide the corresponding information for the years 2003 to 2007? 
Answer: 
The legislation on the application of tariff quota for rice was abolished on July 31, 2006. 
Moreover, information regarding the volume of ta riff quotas, the implementation, the updating of 
timetables and the issuance of import licenses is not readily available.  
As mentioned in the answer to previous question, ta riff quota for rice was abolished on July 31, 2006. 
On the other hand, the legal basis on the applica tion of the tariff quotas were Decree No: 2004/7135 
(published in Official Gazette dated 20/4/2004 and No: 25439), D ecree No: 2004/7756 (published in 
Official Gazette dated 27/8/2004 and No: 25565), Decree No: 2005/9315 (published in Official  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 47 
 
 
 Gazette dated 13/9/2005 and No: 25935), and the related Communiqués were published in Official 
Gazettes dated 27/4/2004 and No: 25445, 8/9/2004 and No: 25577, 21/9/2005 and No: 25943, which are available in the official website of Official Gazette ( http://rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr
). 
(v) Contingency trade remedies 
 
Question (Switzerland):  
 
In para. 41 and footnote 39, the Secretariat's repor t suggests that the Turkish authorities could in the 
case of fragmented industries involving an exceptionally  large number of producers decide to initiate 
an investigation ex officio  provided there is sufficient evidence of dumping, injury, and a causal link. 
While we understand that the Turkish authorities ha ve not so far used this possibility, could the 
Turkish authorities indicate on the basis of what spec ific criteria the investigation authorities would 
decide that there is indeed dumping and a causal  link between this dumping and the presumed injury 
in the absence of a petition from the domestic i ndustry? Also, what minimum standing threshold 
would have to be considered in order to proceed with such an ex officio investigation? 
Answer:  
In Turkish legislation, there is no provision whic h indicates that an ex-officio investigation may be 
initiated exclusively in case of a fragmented industry.  According to Article 4 of Law on the Prevention of Unfair Competition in Imports (the Law), whether 
the industry fragmented or not, the Authorities ma y, upon complaint or where  necessary, ex-officio, 
initiate a dumping or subsidy examination. Consequent  to this examination, an investigation shall be 
initiated if it is determined that sufficient evide nce on dumped or subsidized imports and injury 
resulting thereof exist (Article 10 of the Law and Article 20 of the Regulation on the Prevention of Unfair Competition in Imports -the Regulation-).   
Second, Article 19 of the Regulation indicates that the above mentioned evidence shall include 
information on the evolution of the volume of the dumped or subsid ized imports, the effect of these 
imports on prices of the like product in the domestic  market and the consequent impact of the imports 
on the domestic industry as demonstrated by relevant  factors and indices listed in Article 17 of the 
Regulation.  
Third, mainly in response to the qu estion; according to Article 20 of the Regulation, in investigations 
covering fragmented industries that involve an excep tionally large number of producers, support and 
opposition of the domestic industry may be determ ined by using statistically valid sampling 
techniques. And again, there is no difference be tween investigations coveri ng fragmented industries 
and investigations covering countable number of complain ants in terms of evidence or procedure.  
 
As it is mentioned before, Turkey has not so far initia ted an ex-officio investigation. However, in case 
of such a circumstance the rul es of the Turkish legislation, Agreement on the Implementation of 
Article VI of GATT 1994 and Agreement on Subsid ies and Countervailing Measures which indicate 
that it is necessary to have sufficient evidence of dum ping/subsidy, injury and a causal link to justify 
the initiation of an investigation will be applied. 
Question (Hong Kong, China): 
 
 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. viii, Para. 12; P. 43, Para. 43) 
We note that Turkey has increasingly resorted to th e use of anti-dumping measures.  According to the 
WTO statistics, it ranked second (with 21 cases) in the imposition of anti-dumping measures in 2006.  
The Secretariat Report also pointed out that as  of August 2007, 93 definitive anti-dumping duties 
were in force, compared with only 27 at the end of 2002.  The overwhelming majority of the active WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 48  
 
 measures were imposed after 2002.  We would like to know whether there are any special reasons or 
factors that may have led to the significant increase. 
 
Answer:  
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of G ATT 1994 (the Agreement), bestows some rights to 
the Members while imposing some liabilities. In this respect, Turkey has so far used its rights 
stemming from the Agreement while stri ctly complying with its liabilities. 
 In this respect, with regard to the anti-dumping implementations of Turkey, only one consultation 
request has been received. On the other hand, the aforementioned request did not go beyond the 
consultation stage.  
Question (Argentina): 
 
 Paragraph 45, page 45 
This paragraph states that Turkey has promulgated new legislation that modifies its procedures for the 
application of safeguard measures, and indicates th e content of each one of these new laws.  Could 
Turkey please explain what substantial changes have been introduced with resp ect to the procedures 
previously in force? 
Answer: 
The main purpose of the amendment is  to ensure the clarity in the a pplication of safeguard measures.  
 
By the amended Decree, it is stated clearly that safeguard measures can take the form of customs 
duties. Another important modification is the cl earer definition of conditions that are necessary to 
enforce safeguard measure when there is properl y documented safeguard a pplication lodged by 
domestic producers. 
 
In addition to these, the provisions on "the standard application form" (which was not convenient for 
each sector) and "one month preliminary exami nation time limit" were amended by the new 
legislation.   Question (China):
 
In December 2004, immediately after promulgati ng the Regulation on Surveillance and Safeguard 
Measures against Textile Specific Imports, Turkey  announced that, in accordance with the above 
Regulation, 42 items of textile products of Ch inese origin would be placed under import quota 
restrictions, which was later extended to 44 items in 2006. In December 2006, Turkey circulated an 
official announcement claiming that imports of tex tile from China had caused or threatened to cause 
market disruption, hence decided to continue th e quota on those 44 items of textile products from 
China in 2007.  
Moreover, Turkey authorized the Secretariat of th e Istanbul Union of Exporters to administer the 
allocation and management of quot as for the above-mentioned items.  
Could Turkey explain how they define "market disruption" in the Regulation on Surveillance and 
Safeguard Measures against Textile Specific Imports?  
Could Turkey clarify what evidences were found af ter the investigation of the above-mentioned 44 
items to substantiate that such restrictions were in conformity with various WTO provisions, 
including Paragraph 242 of the Report of the Working Party on the  Accession of China?  
Could Turkey explain what regulations or pro cedures the Secretariat of the Istanbul Union of  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 49 
 
 
 Exporters should follow while administering the allocation and management of quotas for the above-
mentioned items?  
Could Turkey also explain how such provisions or procedures have been appr opriately applied by the 
Secretariat of the Istanbul Union of Exporters, a pa rty with substantial interests on textiles and even a 
potential applicant for safeguard measures against im ported textiles, in conformity with various WTO 
provisions, particularly Article 1.3 of th e Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures? 
 
Answer: "Market disruption" is used in the Regulation with  its meaning in paragraph 242 of the Report of The 
Working Party on The Accession of China. 
In the framework of the paragr aph 242 of the Report of The Working Party on The Accession of 
China, Turkey requested consultations with China. At the time of request, Turkey provided Chinese 
side with a detailed report indicating the existen ce and threat of market disruption and the role of 
products of Chinese origin in that disruption. Si nce no mutually satisfact ory solution was reached 
during the consultation period, Turkey could apply q uotas for specific textiles and textile products in 
the categories subject to the consultations.  
The regulations and procedures for the administra tion, allocation and management of quotas for the 
above-mentioned items were indicated in Communiqu é No: 2005/9 published in the Turkish Official 
Gazette dated December 17, 2005 and no.26026 for the quotas applied in 2006 and Communiqué No: 
2006/6 published in the Turkish Official Gazette  dated December 24, 2006 and no.26386 for the 
quotas applied in 2007. 
The General Secretariat of Istanbul Textile and A pparel Exporter Associations is an affiliated 
institution of the Undersecretariat of the Prime Mi nistry for Foreign Trade (UFT) and it is authorized 
by the UFT for the allocation of quotas in the Communiqué No: 2006/6 published in the Turkish 
Official Gazette dated December 24, 2006 and no.26386.  
Question (China):
 
In 2006, the Undersecretariat of the Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade (UFT) adopted 5 safeguard 
measures on motorcycle, shoe, electric iron, vacuum cleaner and salt. These safeguard measures mainly took the form of tariff quotas for a time period of three years. In August 2006, Turkey initiated 
safeguard investigations on imported motorcycle s  and in the meanwhile applied provisional 
safeguard measures to impose a deposit requirement ranging from US ＄200 to US ＄300 on imported 
motorcycles.  
Could Turkey explain the reason for such increasingl y frequent application of safeguard measures?  
Could Turkey explain how its provisional safegua rd measures using deposit requirement on imports 
of motorcycle are in conformity with the Agreemen t on Safeguard Measures, particularly Article 6 of 
that Agreement which stipulates that "Such measu res should take the form of tariff increases…"? 
Answer: 
All the initiation proceedings by Turkey are rules- based and legally determined. Necessary conditions 
to initiate a safeguard investigation and to introduc e a safeguard measure are clearly stated in the 
Turkish safeguard legislation. Concerning the sa feguard investigations on five different products 
stated in the question, the domestic producers concerned made properly documented safeguard 
applications, and the findings of the investigations led to the
 measures.    
For the case of motorcycles, considering the critic al circumstance where delay would cause damage  
which would be difficult to repair, Turkey had a p reliminary determination providing clear evidence WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 50  
 
 that increased imports have caused or are threa tening to cause serious injury to the domestic 
producers of like or directly competitive products; and then Turkey imposed a provisional safeguard 
measure in the form of additional financial charge. In the application, the additional financial charge 
as a provisional safeguard measure was collected  as a security in acco rdance with the relevant 
provisions of customs legislation.  
At the end of the investigation, for the products  which were decided that safeguard measures are 
necessary, the amount collected as se curity was forfeited to the Trea sury; for the products which were 
decided that safeguard measures are not necessary, th e amount previously collected as a security was 
refunded in accordance with the provisions on the re payment of the secured customs duties of customs 
legislation.  
Question (China):
 
 
According to the WTO Secretariat Report, safeguard measures may be applied by Turkey, subject to a 
national interest clause.  
Could Turkey please clarify the definition of "national interest"?  What are the criteria to define "national interest"?  
To what extent would "national interest" considera tions impact the result of safeguard investigations? 
Would all interested parties be provided ample oppor tunity to provide comments on this, and how?  
Could Turkey provide an example to illustrate the proceedings of investigation with regard to the 
determination of "national in terest" in a safeguard case? 
 
Answer: 
In a safeguard investigation, when it is determined that the product concerned is imported into Turkey 
in such increased quantities and/or on such terms or  conditions as to cause or threaten to cause 
serious injury to Turkish producers as to justify taking of safeguard measures, a decision as to 
whether the national interest calls for intervention s hall be made based on an appreciation of all the 
various interests taken as a whole, including the interests of the domestic industry, users and 
consumers of the product concerned. 
 Analysis of national interest is done during the inves tigation, and is explained in the final report of 
investigation in each case.   In order to provide a sound basis on which the Undersecretariat can take account of all views and 
information in the decision as to whether or not the imposition of measures is in the national interest; 
all producers, importers, their representative associations, rep resentative users and representative 
consumer organisations, provided that there is an objective link between their activity and the product 
concerned, may make them selves known and provide the Undersecretariat with information.  
The producers, importers, users, exporters, their representative associations, representative users and 
representative consumer organizations who have m ade themselves known within the safeguard 
investigation may provide information during the inve stigation, and may come together in the hearing 
to make themselves known and understood by al l interested parties to the investigation.  
 
Question (China):  
In the next few years, dozens of Turkey’s anti-dumpi ng measures are expected to come to their expiry 
of five years of application.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 51 
 
 
 Could Turkey clarify its laws, regulations or pr ocedures that apply to th e furtherance of such 
measures, i.e. their termination or sunset review?  
If they are subject to sunset reviews, what laws , regulations or procedures exist in Turkey’s anti-
dumping system to would ensure that interested parties in expiry proceedings have sufficient 
opportunities to present and rebut arguments, as required by Articles 6 and 11 of the Anti-Dumping 
Agreement, and that they have adequate acce ss to critical documents and information?  
Will the sunset review be completed before th e expiry date of an anti-dumping measure? Could 
Turkey provide a timetable to illustrate its sunset  review process? If a sunset review goes beyond the 
expiry date, would anti-dumping measures continue to apply after this date? If the answer is yes and, a 
negative determination is ma de after the sunset review, what steps will Turkey take to refund any anti-
dumping duties collected beyond that date?  
 
Answer: As is known, in cases where dumping results in mat erial injury to the domestic industry, anti-dumping 
measures may be taken. In Turkish  system, the procedures and rules related to the very subject are 
governed by the Law No.3577 on the Prevention of Unfair Competition in Importation and the 
concerned Decree and Regulation in Turkey. The cited Legislation has been in force since October 1, 
1989 and necessary amendments have been made in lin e with the WTO Agreements since that date. 
 
Furthermore, the WTO Agreement together with th e Annexes, including the Anti-Dumping Agreement, 
was ratified and has acquired the force of law in Turkey since March 26, 1995.  
 
In this respect up to now, the implementations including expiry reviews have been carried out 
in accordance with the provisions of both the Anti-Dumping Agreement and the above 
mentioned Turkish Legislation. 
Turkey uses its rights stemming from the Agreement while carefully acting in accordance with its 
liabilities within the framework of the Agreemen t. In this respect, Turkey complies with, the 
notification obligations of the Agreement. Further in formation about all investigations is included in 
Turkey’s notifications at the WTO. 
(vi) Standards and Other Technical Requirements 
 Question (The United States):
  
 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Restrictions 
Page 51, paragraph 66 mentions Tu rkey’s continued harmonization of its standards with international 
standards.  When does Turkey plan to conclude  that process?  How does Turkey plan to begin 
notifying trading partners outside of th e EU of future changes in measures? 
 
Question (Canada):  
 
page 51, paragraph 66:The Secretariat Report descr ibes how Turkey is continuing to harmonize its 
sanitary and phytosanitary regulations with rec ognized international norms . Canada would request 
that Turkey elaborate on this harmonization pr ocess and provide any available information on 
legislative timetables and/or action plans. 
Question (The United States)   
 Page 46, paragraph 50: The Secretariat report highlig hts that Turkey is in the process of transposing 
elements of EC technical requirements into its dome stic law.  We note that, since joining the WTO in WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 52  
 
 1995, Turkey has only notified five measures (four  SPS measures and one TBT measure) to the WTO 
-- the most recent of which was notified in 2004.  As Turkey continues to ame nd many of its technical 
requirements to reflect those of the EC, we rema in concerned that these changes are neither being 
notified to the WTO nor being published in the Offici al Gazette.  What actions is Turkey taking to 
remedy this situation and carry out its transparency  obligations under Article 7 of the SPS Agreement, 
and Articles 2.9 and 5.6 of the TBT Agreement?   
 
Answer:  
A new legal arrangement is being prepared by th e Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA) 
-inquiry point for SPS notifications- to work effectiv ely with the SPS Committee. In this direction, a 
notification mechanism will be operational. 
 Regarding the TBT notifications, the Customs Union between Turkey and the EC stipulates the full harmonization of Turkish technical regulations with  that of the EC. The Customs Union was notified 
to the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (W T/REG22) and information on this harmonization 
process was provided at the Committee Meetings. 
 Throughout the process, Turkey transposed 232 EC direc tives regarding technical regulations into its 
legal system and each of them was published in the official gazette and in the internet. 
On the other hand, The technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures that have been 
harmonized in order to transpose the EU’s ac quis communautaire are applied by the EU itself.  
Question (The United States)
  
 Page 50-51, paragraph 62: Recently, the Government of Turkey instituted a strip stamp requirement 
for alcoholic beverages and cigarettes.  The fee for imported products was anywhere from twice to 
100 times higher than the fee charged to domestic firms.   What steps is Turkey  taking to ensure that 
the fees charged for imported and dom estic products are equivalent?  
 Answer: In order to ensure that the taxes of tobacco pr oducts and alcoholic beverages are paid and to prevent 
tax fraud in certain products, Turkey introduced a regulation which requires these products bear strip stamp whether imported or locally produced. Regar ding the implementation of the regulation there 
have been a few concerns from the relevant parti es and proper revisions have been made accordingly. 
Since then we have received no comp laints on the implementation of the system or no request for 
further consultation from the interested parties. The system has thus been working smoothly since 
November 5, 2007; starting date for full implementation.  The strip stamps could be applied on the impor ted alcoholic beverages at the production plants 
abroad, at the same price with the locally produced  ones. Furthermore, from July 24, 2007 onwards 
the importers were permitted to apply the strip stamps at their customs warehouses or free trade 
zones in Turkey, without any price difference.  As far as beer is concerned, the tracking syst em is conducted through c oding and activation facilities 
established at the production plants. A code is be ing applied on the cap of the product with special 
ink. However, it is not possible to establish this  application and activation system at the beer 
production plants abroad. Therefore, the firm responsible  for the implementation of the strip stamps 
system created a special stamp, which contains an ac tivated code to be app lied on the imported beers 
at their own production plants. Nevertheless, the pri ce of the stamp includes the costs of the special 
ink and the stamp, while the price of the codes applied on locally produced beers includes just the 
cost of the special ink.    WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 53 
 
 
 Question (The United States):   
 
Page 51, paragraph 67:  When will Turkey align its heat-treatment standard for poultry products (such 
as pet food) with OIE guidelines?  Answer: The steps concerning the subject will be taken shortly.  Question (The Republic of Korea): 
 
 
(WT/TPR/S/192 p.50 para.62) 
Most imported products must be labelled with deta iled information in Turkish. Moreover, importers 
are not allowed to correct any mistakes in labe lling and are forced to send back the products 
concerned. This leads to great loss for importers . Does the Turkish Government have any plans to 
ease these labelling restrictions? 
Answer: 
In case of missing information on the labels, the importers are not required to fulfil all the 
requirements of the legislation in the importation pha se, provided that they stipulate to comply with 
the legislation in 2 months after the impor tation in respect of missing information.   
 On the other hand, the label mentioned in Article 12 of the Turkish Consumer Protection Law is only 
price indication or price label, and not necessarily an integral part of th e product. It can be placed on 
the sale shelf or it can be displayed as a list in an easily visible and legible manner.  
 Question (Hong Kong, China): 
 
 
(WT/TPR/S/192, P. 48, Para. 54) 
We note that EC-origin products which conform to the EC’s Customs Union Decision (CUD) and 
bearing a CE mark do not have to be inspected by the Turkish Standards Institution.  We would like to 
know whether this arrangement w ould be equally applicable to non-EC-origin products which also 
conform to the same EC’s Decision and bearing a CE mark.  If not, is there any plan to extend this arrangement to such non-EC products in future? 
 
Question (China):
 
China fully understands the necessity for labeling requirements by Turkey for imported products such 
as toys, medical equipment, machinery, low voltage equipment and electromagnetic exchange 
products where a CE sign should be affixed.  
However, products from EU, after being affixed the si gn, immediately enters into the Turkish market, 
while the same products from other countries have to  go through additional testing. This has created 
an unequal treatment between products fro m EU and those from other countries.  
Could Turkey commit itself to take necessary measures to abolish such practice and to comply with 
the WTO’s MFN principle?  Answer: The Customs Union between Turkey and the EC stipulates the elimination of not only trade restricting measures but also the barriers arising from diff erent regulatory practices. Thus, based on the free 
movement of goods principle of the Customs Un ion, products, which are certified according to 
directives of the European Communities, and which are freely circulated in the European Union, are 
not subject to any inspection procedure at the import stage.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 54  
 
 Question (The European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  52, para. 68 
The Secretariat's report indicates that "Turkey maintains a temporary import ban on live animals (dairy and beef, cattle, sheep, goats and poultry) and meat (beef, sheep, goat, and poultry) based on 
sanitary consideration (Article 7 of the Law on Animal  Health)". We would like to stress that these 
measures are not in line with the OIE recommenda tions. What scientific evidence can Turkey present 
to motivate its application of a more restrictive SPS regime, regarding trade of live animals and meat 
than current international standards? 
 
Answer: 
According to Article 7 of The Law of Animal Health  Protection numbered 3285, and  Article 15 of the 
Regulation of Animal Health Protection; importatio n of live animals and meat are permitted from the 
countries for which no restriction has been imposed due to BSE disease. 
 
Question (Australia): 
 
 
The Secretariat’s report (WT/TPR/S/192, page 51 , paragraph 65) sets out the documentation which 
must be submitted to obtain a certificate of control for imports of agricultura l products and foodstuffs.  
Could Turkey outline the circumstances under wh ich certificates of control can be refused? 
 
Answer:  
In case there is missing and/or wr ong information on the Control Certificate Form; such as the 
incompatibility of the imported good with the cust oms code, or the incompatibility of the information 
stated on the documents such as the country of or igin, name of the product etc., the relevant Company 
is informed of the problem by official corres pondence and it is provided with the right to 
complete/correct the missing/wrong information in the stated time frame.   
In case the problem stated in the official corres pondence is not removed, the file of application is 
returned to the Company with offic ial correspondence indicating denial. 
Question (China):
 
Turkey has established a series of complicated t esting and certification requirements for imports of 
ceramic tableware. Imported ceramic tableware mu st go through mandatory testing and certification 
conducted by the Turkish Standards Institution (TSE).  The testing sometimes la sts several months and 
the cost is very high. Moreover, importers must  provide both sanitation records issued by local 
veterinary offices and product content lists issued by local Chambers of Commerce.  
Does Turkey plan to take necessary measures to re duce the burden for imported ceramic tableware?   
Answer: 
Ceramic tableware products are considered within the context of materials which directly contact 
with foodstuffs. In this respect, these products are subject to consumer health and safety regulations 
which require certain sanitary and hygienic conditions  to be met by producers. Relevant details and 
procedures are determined by the Ministry of Ag riculture and Rural Affairs (MARA) (Standardization 
on Foreign Trade: Communique 2007/21, in Annex V I-B and Communiqué on Approval of Control 
Certificate in Importation of Foodstuff and Packaging Materials which Contact with Foodstuffs and 
the Control Procedures, 2003/31, MARA). Thus, for all products which contact with foodstuffs, 
hygienic and sanitary compliance is compulso ry and necessary certification before the importation 
stage is carried out solely by MARA.  
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 55 
 
 
 (vii) Government procurement 
 Question (The United States): 
 
 
Pages 52-53, paragraphs 71-78: Turkey has been  an observer to the Government Procurement 
Agreement since 1996.  Does Turkey pl an to accede to this Agreement? 
 
Question (The European Communities):  
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 54, para. 78  
Since June 1996, Turkey has participated as an  observer in the WTO Committee on Government 
Procurement. However, it is not yet a member of the Government Procurement Agreement. Does 
Turkey have any plan to join the WTO Agre ement on Government Procurement as a Party? 
 
Answer: 
Turkey maintains its observer status in the WTO Committee on Government Procurement. In line with 
the accession process to the EU, Turkey will cons ider to join this Agreement as a party. 
 Question (The European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  52, para. 71 
When is Turkey expecting to apply procurement ru les also with respect to entities operating in the 
utilities sectors?  
Answer: 
According the government action plan for the 2008, it is declared that a draft law on utilities will be 
submitted to the Parliament in 2008.  
 Question (The European Communities): 
 
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page  53, para. 74 
Which are the rules of origin app lied when establishing the domestic or igin of tendered products with 
a view to granting the 15% preference? 
 Does the price preference also apply to domestic services? If so, which are the criteria used to 
determine what constitutes a domestic service?  
The EU notes that the 15% price preference for domestic tenderers is relatively elevated when 
compared to other such schemes practised in cer tain countries. Has Turkey calculated the extra 
surcharge to the public budget resulti ng from applying this preference?  
 
Answer:  
Products,  
-fully produced or obtained, 
-whose essential producing process took place, -whose final essential assembly is made, in Turkey, are deemed as domestic origin.   
Meanwhile, for a good to enjoy the domestic prefer ence privileges, "domestic good certificate" issued 
by affiliated chamber of commerce is required.  Article 63 of the PPL states that in tenders with estimated costs above the threshold values, a price advantage would be applied to all domestic tenderers up to 15%. No differentiation is made between WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 56  
 
 tenders except the rules of origin regarding goods procurement. Therefore the only criterion used in 
services tenders is the definition of "domestic tenderer"  that is "Real persons who are the citizens of 
Republic of Turkey and legal entities established in acco rdance with the Laws of Republic of Turkey".  
 
Out of the 137,857 tenders (29 Billion YTL) held in 2006, price advantage in favour of domestic 
tenderers was applied in only 1 % (1.417) of contract s. Monetary values of those contracts amounted 
to 2,5 Billion YTL (8%).  
Question (China): 
 
The Public Procurement Act of Turkey stipulates that  local bidders, compared with joint ventures, can 
enjoy a price priority of 15%. This provision provides unequal treatment for foreign bidders. 
Meanwhile, the requirement for eligibility certifi cation in bidding for government procurement 
involves high cost and complicated procedures, and has made many enterprises unable to participate 
because of the difficulty to obtain certification.  
Is Turkey considering granting national treatment to  foreign enterprises in government procurement?  
Answer: 
The figures regarding the price advantage applied in  2006 in favour of domestic tenderers are stated 
above.  On the other hand, in Turkish Public Procuremen t System rules on qualification do not constitute a 
"certification system". Requirements for eligibility in Turkish PPL are in line with international 
practices and rules and are applied equally to bot h domestic and foreign tenderers for any tender 
above a certain threshold indicated in Turkis h PPL. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that 
procurement procedures in Turkey are complicated and high in cost. 
(ix) Countertrade  
 
Question (Argentina) 
 
 Paragraph 80, page 55 
According to this paragraph, Turkey continues to use two main types of countertrade:  barter/counter-
purchase, and offset.  Do these practices apply to all products, or are there exceptions? 
Answer :  
According to Communiqué No. 2006/4 which reg ulates exportation made through barter and 
Communiqué No. 2007/6 which regulates civil offset practices, any product can be subject to barter 
and offset arrangements.  
(1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS 
 
(i) Registration and Documentation  Question (Switzerland): 
 
 
According to Para. 86, exporters are required to re gister with the Exporters Union and their local 
chamber of commerce. A fee of between 0.05% and 0.5%  of the f.o.b. value of exports is charged as a 
service commission. Could the Turkish government cl arify in which cases such a registration is 
required? Could they also explain how such a fe e based on a percentage of the value of exports 
without mentioning any ceiling, is consistent with GATT Article VIII?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 57 
 
 
 Answer: 
In order to coordinate the professional activities and relations among the exporters and follow up-to-
date developments in their industries, exporters a re required to register to  the exporters’ unions.  
The fee in question is determined by the General Assemblies of the exporters’ unions, which  consist 
of exporters themselves.  
 
(ii) Export Taxes 
Question (Chile):  
Paragraph 89 
Turkey applies export taxes on raw skins and hazelnut s.  What is the basis for applying these taxes? 
 
Answer: 
The export taxes on hazelnuts and raw skins are applie d with the motives to conserve natural 
resources and encourage value addition. They do no t have any restrictive or prohibitive effect on 
exports.  
 
(v) Free Zones/Incentives 
 Question (The United States): 
 
We urge Turkey to notify its various government  support and incentive programs in accordance with 
Article 25 of the Subsidies Agreement.  We are particularly concerned a bout the various programs 
described in the Report at pp. 61-65; i.e. "Free Z ones" and "Incentives".  How will Turkey address its 
Article 25 notification requirements?  Answer:   
There are no export performance requirements for these programmes. They are not specific in the 
framework of Article 2 of the SCM Agreement and ha ve no direct or indirect effects on exports in 
scope of Article XVI:1 of GATT 1994. Therefore these programmes are not subject to the notification requirement. Besides, all of these programmes are av ailable to all companies regardless of regional 
specification or industrial designation.  
 
(1) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE 
 (i) Incentives  
Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan
, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
 
(page 62, paragraph 105) 
The Report refers here to "resident companies" supplying inputs and/or services to "free zone 
companies" not being eligible for the same incentiv es. In a previous description, the two terms of 
"resident companies" and "free zone companies" have not been clearly defined and this has created 
confusion as to how the business transactions among them are being conducted.  
Are these two entities different in terms of their le gal status within the Free Zones Regulation of 
1993? Could either Turkey or the WTO Secretariat  please provide more information in this regard? 
Answer: 
The term, "resident companies" is used for th e companies residing in Turkey that do not benefit the 
advantages of free zones. The term "free zone co mpanies", on the other hand, is used for the WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 58  
 
 companies operating within the free zones, the loca tions and boundaries of which are determined by 
the Decree of the Council of Ministers, and benefit the advantages offered in free zones. Since the 
trade conducted between Turkey and the free zones is subject to the foreign trade regime, free zone 
users can purchase goods from companies residing in  Turkey subject to Turkish Export Regime and 
free zone firms sell goods to Turkey subject to Turkish Import Regime.   
Question (Chile): 
 
 
With reference to Table III.18 (Key features of the State aid programmes, 2007) on page 64, could the delegation of Turkey please provide more backgr ound information on the State aid programme for 
environmental protection activities? 
 
According to the table, this programme includes financial support for all SMEs in the manufacturing 
sector and software companies to improve e nvironmental management systems and during 
certification of quality assurance and CE marking.  
Although we realize that this is a relatively ne w programme, we would appreciate some background 
information on the following:   Has there been any thought of reproducing this programme with the agricultural SMEs? 
What are the main obstacles that have been  encountered in implementing this programme? 
 
How would you assess the results thus far? 
 
Answer: The objective of this program is to provide suppor t for all SMEs. In this context, SMEs are given 
support with regard to their expenses in certific ation of quality assurance, environmental 
management systems (lSO 9000, ISO 14 000 and ISO 22000) and CE marking. 
 The agricultural SMEs have been recently incorpor ated into the programme with the Communiqué 
No. 2007/4 (28 July 2007, Official Journal No. 26596) on Environmental Protection Activities.  
 No serious obstacle has been encountered regarding the implementation of the programme so far. 
 
This programme motivated more frequent use of above-mentioned certification.  
 (ii) State trading, state-owned enterprises, and privatization  
Question (Australia): 
 
 
We note that many of Turkey’s state-owned purchasi ng agencies in the agricultural sector, as listed in 
the Secretariat’s report (WT/TPR/S/192, page 66, Table III.19 and page 79, paragraph 16), have not 
been included in Turkey’s notifications to th e Working Party on State Trading Enterprises under 
Article XVII of GATT 1994.  What is the reason fo r this, and does Turkey intend to include these 
entities in its future notifications?   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 59 
 
 
 Answer: 
Members are to notify all state trading enterprises in accordance with the definition provided in 
paragraph 1 of the WTO Understanding on Article  XVII. Paragraph 1 covers governmental and non-
governmental enterprises, including marketing boards , which have been granted exclusive or special 
rights or privileges, in the exercise of which th ey influence through their purc hases or sales the level 
or direction of imports or exports. 
 
"K ızılay" (Turkish Red Crescent-TRCS) is the only stat e trading enterprise which falls into this 
definition in Turkey. All other referred trading en terprises, including state-owned purchasing 
agencies in the agricultural sector, operate under free market conditions.  
(iii) Competition policy and price controls 
 Question (Switzerland): 
 
 
In para. 128, the Secretariat's report indicates that some of the most serious problems for competition 
law and policy in Turkey are, inter alia , the lack of a mechanism to cont rol state aid, and the fact that 
some of the state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are vested with monopoly concessions or anti-competitive privileges. Do the Turkish authorities have  any plans to submit notably SOEs also to the 
competition law and policy in the near future?  
Answer: 
Turkey is of the opinion that the framework within wh ich this particular question should be posed is 
rather the ambitious privatization agenda that Turkey has engaged in.  
Competition-related concerns are always addressed by The Turkish Competition Authority (TCA) 
throughout the privatization process as a requirement of the law.   
 
(iv) Protection of Intellectual Property Rights  
 Question (The United States): 
 
 
Patents  
In paragraph 143, the government of Turkey explai ns that the data protection period cannot exceed 
that granted for patents.  How does Turkey protect data against unfair commercial use, in accordance 
with TRIPS Article 39.3, if the expiration of a pa tent cuts short the term  of data protection?  
Answer: 
Turkey’s regulatory data protection regime is in lin e with its WTO TRIPS Agreement as well as its 
Customs Union obligations.  
Protection of undisclosed information is provid ed by four different legal bases in Turkey:  
 Protection under Turkish Commercial Code is pr ovided through unfair competition provisions. 
Articles 58-63 provide civil remedies such as p revention of the infringement, compensation for 
damages resulting from unfair competition related to  inter alia dissemination of undisclosed 
information. Additionally Article 64 stipulates crimi nal sanctions within the form of imprisonment 
and/or fine against unfair competition rel ated to undisclosed information.  
Article 36 of the Regulation on Pharmaceutical Pr oducts brings responsibility on Ministry of Health 
not to divulge the information submitted by the applicant for marketing authorisation. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 60  
 
 Additionally, Article 31 of the Civil Servants Act brings responsibility on civil servants employed in 
the Ministries and in the public institutions not to divulge secret bus iness information related to their 
service. Infringing acts against these legislation br ings responsibility on the public administration. 
Through judicial review the public administrati on may be obliged to pay compensation by the 
Administrative Court.  
Article 83/3 of the Patent Decree states that "Where an application for patent has been filed for 
pharmaceutical or veterinary products/drugs and fo r chemicals destined to agriculture, the 
authorities issuing authorizations/licenses for the manufacture and sale of such products and 
requesting for this purpose information and test resu lts, that were not disclosed to the public and the 
realization and accumulation of which requires c onsiderable expenses and efforts, shall keep such 
information and test results secret/confidential. Th e authority asking for such information and test 
results shall take the necessa ry measures to prevent unjus tified/illegitimate use thereof." 
 
Turkey also applies 6 years data exclusivity  in line with its Customs Union obligations since 1 
January 2005 limited to patent protection. Tu rkey extended the scope of data exclusivity 
retrospectively . Thus original pharmaceuticals which do not have corresponding generic 
license/application at the time of new legislation entered into force can enjoy data exclusivity since 
1 January 2001. 
 
Question (The United States):
 
 
Copyright: Page 73: paragraphs 140-146:  Turk ey’s intellectual property regime has improved in recent years, but 
still contains serious problems.  In addition to insufficient protection of proprietary data for 
pharmaceutical and agricultural products, copyright en forcement is inadequate.  What actions have 
your authorities taken this year to combat book, optical disk, and business software piracy? 
 
Answer:  
The measures carried out by the Ministry of Cultu re and Tourism in order to combat with physical 
and digital piracy and to improve the enforcement of IPR commitments, since the last TPR, and in this 
year are stated below:  
Banderole 
Banderole is an important determination device in di stinguishing the original copy from the pirated 
copy in combating piracy. It is a label with a ho lographic characteristic, c onsisting of serial numbers 
and security band and when peeled off it demolishes th e material on which it is affixed. According to 
the Article 81 of the Law No. 5846, it is obligat ory to use banderole in the reproduced copies of 
cinematographic and musical works and non-periodical publ ications. Furthermore, on copies of other 
groups of work which can easily be reproduced, band erole use is obligatory, when demanded by the 
right holder.  
A "Web-Based Banderole Automation System" has be en activated since 15 May 2006 in 81 provinces. 
It is a web based automation system for giving banderoles to non-periodicals. By this system, the 
application forms can be filled in on the internet for the required number of banderoles to be obtained 
from Provincial Directorates.  
Inspection Commissions 
The establishment of inspection commissions is anoth er effective tool in combating piracy. According 
to the Article 81 of the Law No. 5846 the inspectio n commissions may be formed by the provincial 
administrative authorities, ex-officio or upon request fr om the Ministry in the provinces. The Ministry 
of Culture and Tourism carries out the procedures w ithin its jurisdiction (the issuance of banderol,  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 61 
 
 
 determining its originality, identifying forged band erols etc.) during these inspections.  The Ministry 
of Culture and Tourism provides logistics to insp ection commissions for the enhancement of their 
technical infrastructure.  
The amendment of the Law No. 5846 by the Law 5571 has established a rewarding system for the 
public officers of inspection commissions responsible for combating piracy entered into force on 13 
January 2007. It is aimed that the inspection activiti es will be perpetuated more  effectively with this 
amendment. 
Certification  In the framework of Law No. 5101 which amended the Law No. 5846; the en terprises recording, 
reproducing and selling or disseminating the materi als on which intellectual and artistic works are 
fixed, are obliged to obtain a certificate.  Business premises subject to ce rtification are outlined in the 
related By-Law were put into force in April, 2 005. To ensure an effective monitoring of the 
certification enforcement electronically and enabl e application processing on the Internet, 81 
provinces of Turkey have been furnished with ADSL  connection and necessary technical equipments 
including training programmes for the staff res ponsible for processing certification applications 
during the year 2005.   
Joint Database 
According to the additional article 9 of the Turkish Copyright Act No 5846, a Joint Database should 
be established with the inclusion of the associati ons and institutions concerned so as to provide the 
protection and pursuit of the Intellectual Property rights as well as to use it in the investigations and prosecutions. The information regarding banderol,  registration, certificate systems and information 
concerning collecting societies, works and authors were begun to be transferred to the digital 
environment. After its completion, it will be ope ned to the access of courts and the other units 
concerned. Thereby, it is aimed to accelerate the juridical process with respect to Intellectual 
Property issue, and to activate inter-institutional coordination. 
 Provisions Dealing With Internet Service Providers  
According to Additional Article 4 of Copyright Law no. 5846,   in case where rights of authors and 
related rights holders granted by this Law have been violated by providers of service and content 
through the transmission of signs, sounds, and/or images including digital transmission, the works 
which have been the subject of violation shall, upon the request of the right holders, be removed from 
the content. Natural or legal persons whose rights ha ve been violated shall to this end initially contact 
the content provider and request that the violation be ceased within three days. Should the violation 
continue, a request shall next be made to the public prosecutor requiring that the service being 
provided to the content provider persisting in th e violation be suspended by the relevant service 
provider. The service being provided to the conten t provider shall be restored, if the violation is 
ceased. Service providers shall submit a list of the names of their content providers to the Ministry on 
the first working day of every month. Service prov iders and content providers are obliged to submit 
all kinds of information and documents upon the request of the Ministry.  
Twinning Project 
"Twinning Project to Support Turkey’s Efforts in the full Alignment and Enforcement in the Field of 
Intellectual Property Rights with a Focus on Fight Against Piracy" started in May 2006 and ended in 
November 2007. 
The project has been managed by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and Greece European Public 
Law Center (EPLC), the other beneficiary institutions of  the project are Ministry of Justice, Ministry 
of Interior, Undersecretaries for Cu stoms, and Collecting Societies. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 62  
 
 Within the context of the project; 
- Several seminars and workshops were arranged for a ll staff of beneficiary institutions dealing 
with Intellectual Property Rights and its enfo rcement. They became acquainted with the 
Legislative frame, supervision, legal formation,  glossary of International I.P. protection. 
- A legislative committee comprised of EU experts and Turkish counterparts has been 
established and functioned through five sub-co mmittees, within the framework of EU 
Directives. Legislative Committee came to the last level of its studies and for the aim of 
realization of the full alignment with the Acquis Communautaire, amendment proposals 
regarding the Copyright Law have been s ubmitted to the Ministry for evaluation. 
- Preparation of Manual which includes the le gal framework and enforcement in relation to 
copyright has been commenced. This Manual will be  distributed to the related institutions and 
public. 
- Eight study visits were arranged to Greece, Finland, Estonia, Port ugal and United Kingdom 
for the representatives of Minist ry of Culture and Tourism, Ministry of Interior, Ministry of 
Justice, Undersecretariat for Customs and co llecting societies in order to observe the 
administrative structure and enforcements in  the field of Intellectual Property. 
- An Intellectual Property Coordination Comm ittee, which includes all the institutions 
concerned and authorities as well as universities, was established for the purpose of 
strengthening the inter-institutional coordinat ion. The preparation of strategy document 
containing the existing situation among the beneficiaries, troubles experienced, common 
priorities and suggestions for development of communication and coordination has been 
accomplished.  
- In the framework of fight against Piracy, se minars were arranged in Istanbul, Izmir and 
Antalya with a view to develop public awareness. 
-  A document has been prepared jointly by  the EU experts and the Turkish counterparts 
defining the best suitable status for the in stitution responsible for the implementation of 
Copyright in Turkey, as well as its competences with regard to other stakeholders, based on 
the assessment performed within  the elaboration the reorganiza tion of Directorate General of 
Copyright and Cinema (DGCC) taking into account the best practice of EU Member States.  
All the activities envisaged in the project have been finalized. The project results are found very 
rewarding. A strong communication and cooperati on strategy has been established among the 
Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Ministry of Justi ce, Ministry of Interior, Undersecretariat for 
Customs, and Collecting Societies. During the project  period, the working process and the methods of 
the DGCC have been ascertained and at present it s services mostly comply with the rules and 
practices of the EU intellectual property rights system.   Question (The United States):
 
 
Copyright:  
According to paragraph 140, Turkey’s copyright la w entered into force on 5 December 1951.  Turkey 
amended the law on 3 March 2004.   
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 63 
 
 
 Does the government of Turkey plan to amend th e copyright law further to prohibit the act of 
circumvention of technological protection measures a nd the trafficking in circumvention devices?  If 
not, does the government of Turkey intend to amend th e copyright law in the near future to prohibit 
such acts?  
 Although the Turkish copyright law provides for pr esumption of ownership in copyright cases, judges 
and prosecutors have asked right hol ders to prove copyright ownership in infringement cases.  Is the 
government of Turkey addressing this  inconsistency between its law as  written and its application in 
Turkish courts? 
 
Answer:  
According to Article 73 subparagraph 1(c) of C opyright Law no 5846 any person who intentionally 
possesses for commercial purposes or distributes a tec hnical instrument whose sole purpose is to 
facilitate the neutralization or unpermitted remova l of any technical device used to protect a 
computer program, shall be sentenced to imprisonment from two years to four years or a judicial fine 
between fifty billion TL. and one hundred and fifty billi on TL. or both, considering the severity of the 
damages. 
This provision has been added to the Law No.5846 by aiming alignment of Turkish legislation to the 
European Union legislation (C ouncil Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the Legal Protection 
of Computer Programs).  
 
In addition, Turkey has also ratified WIPO C opyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and 
Phonograms Treaty (The Law on Approval of Ratific ation of Turkey’s Participation in WIPO Treaties 
published in the Official Gazette of 8 May 2007). Th ese two treaties include provisions on prohibition 
of the act of circumvention of technological protection measures and the trafficking in circumvention 
devices. 
 According to the Article 90 of the Turkish Constitutio n, international agreements duly put into effect 
bear the force of law. No appeal to the Constitu tional Court shall be made  with regard to these 
agreements, on the grounds that they are uncon stitutional. In the case of a conflict between 
international agreements in the area of fundamenta l rights and freedoms duly put into effect and the 
domestic laws due to differences in provisions on th e same matter, the provisions of international 
agreements shall prevail.  
Moreover, in the context of harmonizing the Cop yright Law with EU Legislation, Turkey plans to 
make some amendments until the end of 2009 that  include the extension of the provisions on 
technological protection measures for all works protected under Copyright Law.  
Within "the Twinning Project to Support Turkey’s Effo rts in the full Alignment and Enforcement in the 
Field of Intellectual Property Rights with a Focus on Fight Against Piracy", the Legislation 
Committee has been established to review the nati onal law and EU law and to prepare the draft 
report for necessary amendments. By the end of  November, the report regarding the amendment 
proposals on Copyright Law was submitted to the Mi nistry of Culture and Tourism for evaluation.   
 
Article 11, 12 and 80 of Turkish copyright law pr ovide for presumptions of ownership for the authors 
and the related right owners. These presumptions are applied in copyright cases by Turkish courts. In 
a case based on the claim of unauthorized reproducti on of a work, the courts accept that person 
whose name was written on the work is the author of that work. And the courts do not ask right holders to prove authorship by other evidence unless counter-claim has been put and proved.  
 
In criminal cases, the criminal courts are satisfie d with submission of the documents concerning 
copyright and related rights ownership or copies of  the works according to Article 75/1 and 76/3 of WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 64  
 
 Turkish Copyright Law. They do not ask right hold ers to prove authorship by other evidence unless 
counter-claim has been put and proved.   
Specialized IPRs Civil and Specialized IPRs Crim inal Courts were established firstly in Turkey in 
2001. There are 21 specialized IPRs courts in Anka ra, Izmir and Istanbul. Some of the judges working 
in these courts have been trained in IPRs in five different European Union Countries during one year. 
The Ministry of Justice also organizes traini ng programmes for these judges and the others working 
in IPRs. Therefore, Turkey has highly specialized judges who realize national and international 
regulations and improvements in IPRs. They apply presumption of ownership in copyright cases. For 
example, Izmir IPRs Civil Court which has been active since September 2007 has got total 204 cases 
in pending (on November 26
th 2007). Twenty-seven of these cases are copyright cases. The court has 
informed the Ministry of Justice that there is no ca se in which presumption of ownership has not been 
applied i.e. the court has applied presumption of ow nership and has not asked right holders to prove 
authorship by other evidence in these 27 cases.  
 
Moreover, 11th Civil Chamber of Supreme Court, which exami nes appealed decisions of the courts of 
first instance concerning IPRs, decided that the presu mption of ownership provid ed in Article 12/1 of 
the Copyright Law should be applied where the author  of a published work cannot be established 
under Article 11. (Decision No: 2005/166E., 2006/330K., Date 20.01.2006).  
In case of inconsistency between the law as written and  its application in Turkish courts, right holders 
can appeal the decision of the first instance court. 
 
Question (The United States): 
 
 Geographical Indications: 
Paragraph 142:  How does Turkey protect trad emarks from confusingly similar geographical 
indications that have been grante d protection later in time in Turk ey, as required by Articles 16(1) and 
24(5) of the TRIPS Agreement?  Answer: Trademark holders can oppose to the applications of  geographical indications before Turkish Patent 
Institute, and can also challenge before the courts. Articles 7/1-c, 8/5 and 9 of Decree-Law on the 
Protection of Trademarks, and Article 18/5 of Decree-Law on the Protection of Geographical 
Indications are corresponding articles to the Articl es 16/1 and 24/5 of TRIPS Agreement. Article 18/5 
of Decree-Law on the Protection of Geographical Indications is as follows: 
 
The rights granted to the right owner by geographical indication shall not prejudice registration of a trademark, which has been applied for registratio n and use of a trademark in good faith, if an 
application for the registration of the trademark was filed in good faith and registered or the right of 
use was acquired in good faith before coming into  effect of this Decree-Law or before the 
geographical indication has acquired protection in its country of origin.  
According to this article, trademarks shall be protected from confusingly similar geographical 
indications that have been granted protection later in time in Turkey if  
-trademarks were registered before coming into effect  of this Decree-Law or before the geographical 
indication has acquired protection in its country of origin and 
-trademark owner was in good faith. 
The courts which information has been asked conc erning these questions have informed that there has 
been no case on the relationship between tr ademarks and confusingly similar geographical 
indications that have been granted protection later in time in Turkey. However, implementation of the 
courts will be in conformity with the provisions mentioned above.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 65 
 
 
 Question (The United States):  
 Enforcement: 
Pages 74-75, paragraphs 146-150:   Please provide information identif ying (1) the number of people 
convicted for violating IP crimes by the IP cour t and (2) how many of those defendants received 
sentences requiring imprisonment.  The Report states that police have ex officio authority to fight 
piracy.  Do police also have ex officio authority to seize counterfeit goods?  
 
Answer:  
Information on (1) the number of people convicted fo r violating IP crimes by the IP court and (2) the 
number of defendants that received sentences requiri ng imprisonment can be found in the attached 
statistics forms.
4 
 Statistics do not include the figures of newly establishe d four IPRs criminal courts in Istanbul, Izmir 
and Ankara since they have be en active since September 2007 and they lack enough data for the 
statistics. It includes the figures obtained from pre-existing five IPRs criminal courts.  In case of copyright violation, the police can take  ex-officio action according to the Article 81 of 
Turkish Copyright Law, because there is a bandero l system in Turkey and banderols are printed and 
sold by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. In oth er words, the state aims to control of copyright 
violation by using the banderol. This means that  the banderol is an instrument to control of 
unauthorized copy of a work used by the public  authority. Therefore, any act infringing the 
obligations on banderol is considered as infri ngement of public order and the police can take ex-
officio action in case of copyright violation which is the violation of the obligations on banderol. 
In case of violation of industrial property rights (in other words; in case of counterfeiting), there is no 
a public instrument to control of counterfeiting li ke the banderol. Therefore, the police cannot take 
ex-officio action in case of violation of industrial property rights as in many countries. The police can 
take an action upon complaint of the right owners and seize counterfeit goods. 
However, if the counterfeited goods are the products  (for example, food and drugs) that can create 
danger for public health, a prosecution can be made  without complaint of interested parties in 
accordance with the related articles of Turkish Criminal Code.  
 
Question (The United States): 
 
 Enforcement: 
 
On page 74, paragraph 143, the Secretariat states: "Turkey's new data protection legislation provides 
data protection for pharmaceutical products in an y EC member."  Does this mean that only EC 
members are entitled to data protection?  Please clarify.  
Answer: 
The afore-mentioned sentence has  apparently caused confusion between data protection and data 
exclusivity. Data protection is pr ovided in four different legisla tive pieces in Turkish legal system 
without discriminating among countries. Turkish lic ensing regulation for pharmaceuticals provides 
for 6 years data exclusivity for products licensed in  one of the Countries in the EC-Turkey Customs 
Union Area. Turkish data exclusivity provision stem s from Turkey’s obligations under its Customs 
Union with EC and it is different from data protec tion. Concerning data exclusivity, any original 
product regardless of its origin is entitled to have 6 years of data exclusivity starting from the date of 
its authorization in any state within the Customs Union area. 
                                                     
 
 4 Annex 2: Figures on the Decision of Ankara, İzmir, İstanbul 1st, 2nd and 3rd Criminal Courts of 
Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights for 2006 and 2007. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 66  
 
  
Accordingly, paragraph 143 should be revised ta king into account the difference between data 
"protection" and data "exclusivity". The revision re quest of Turkey will be conveyed to the 
Secretariat.  
Question (The United States): 
 
 Enforcement: 
 
Paragraph 146 states that "Foreigners can also challe nge patent holders in Turkish courts."  Does this 
mean that foreign nationals cannot pursue other t ypes of intellectual property infringement actions?  
Please explain how your government affords nationa l treatment to foreign nationals as required under 
Article 3 of the TRIPS Agreement. 
 
Answer:  
The way of expression of paragraph 146 of the Repor t of Secretariat has caused a misunderstanding. 
While the first sentence of the paragraph 146 of the Report mentions that all kinds of intellectual and 
industrial property rights could be challenged in a domestic court, the second sentence states that 
foreigners could  also  challenge patent  holders in Turkish courts. The second sentence should be 
revised as below to remove misunderstandings: "Foreigners can also apply to Turkish courts to pr otect their all kinds of intellectual and industrial 
property rights."  The principle of national treatment to foreign nationals as required under Article 3 of the TRIPS 
Agreement has been transferred into Turkish domestic law. Article 2 of Decree Law on the Protection 
of Patent Rights, of Decree Law on the Protection of Industrial Designs, of Decree Law on the 
Protection of Geographical Indications, Article 3 of Decree Law on the Protection of Trademarks, 
Article 4 of the Law on the Protection of Plant Bree der's Rights for New Plant Varieties, Article 3 of 
the Law on the Protection of Integrated Circuit Topographies and Article 88 of the Law on 
Intellectual and Artistic Works are corresponding artic les to the Article 3 of the TRIPS Agreement
5. 
In accordance with these provisions, foreigners can en joy all the rights including right of application 
to Turkish courts for all kinds of judicial remedie s, legal proceedings etc., to protect their rights 
conferred by the legislation on patent, trademark, industrial design, geographical indication, plant 
breeder's rights for new plant varieties, integrated circuit topographies, copyright and related rights. 
 
Implementation of Turkish courts is in conformity  with these legislation and Article 3 of the TRIPS 
Agreement. There are many cases one of the parties of which is foreigner in  especially specialized 
IPRs courts. 
 
Question (The United States):  
 
Enforcement: 
 
Paragraph 147 explains the penalties available to persons making false ownership claims to an 
industrial property right.  Is there a similar provision for copyrights?  If not, has Turkey considered 
implementing such a provision? 
 
                                                      
 5 Explanatory notes regarding the relevant Turkish legislation is provided in Annex 3.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 67 
 
 
 Answer:  
There is a similar provision for copyrights. Artic le 71/3 of Copyright Law no 5846 states says that 
"Any person, who in contravention of the provisions of this law, intentionally; gives the 
appearance that the work of another person is his ow n or his own work is that of another person 
or who acts contrary to the provision of second paragraph of Article 15 (Article 15 provides for 
the right to designate the name of the author on the original or copies of a work) , shall be sentenced 
to imprisonment from two years to four years, or judicial fine between fifty billion TL. and one 
hundred and fifty billion TL or both consid ering the severity of the damages." 
 
The criminal sanction explained in the Paragraph 147 of the Secretariat Report is just an example of 
existing criminal sanctions in Turkish IPRs legislation. There is a summary of criminal sanctions in  
Turkish industrial property legislation below:  Criminal sanctions in  industrial property legislation (Decree-Laws  No: 551, 554, 555, 556) are very 
similar to each other. They can be classified as in the following:   
Making false declaration with respect to the right owner, or  
Removing, without authority the sign indicating the ex istence of an industrial property right rightfully 
placed on a product or on its packaging; or   Falsely presenting themselves as the right holders of an application for an industrial property right 
or of an industrial property right:  
(Decree-Law No.551 Art.73/A-a, Decree-Law No. 554 Art. 48/A-a, Decree-Law No.555 Art.24/A-a, 
Decree-Law No.556 Art.61/A-a) 
Imprisonment from 1 year to 2 years or judicial  fine between 14.000 YTL and 27.000 YTL or both. 
 Without authority, transferring, entitlin g, placing of security or performing any other such action for 
utilising any one of the rights on patent, tradema rk and design or transferring to some other person 
the license pertaining to such right.   Acting as if there is protected industrial property ri ght even if that right does not exist, (affixing signs 
on a product or on its packaging, or on commercial documents or on advertising material in such a 
way that would convey the impression as if a relationship exists with under protection, or of using to 
the same effect writings, signs or expressions in the newspapers, advertisements and commercials 
without being the right holder or after the expiry of the term of protection or after the invalidation or 
after the termination)  Imprisonment from 2 years to 3 years or judicial  fine between 27.000 YTL and 46.000 YTL or both. 
(Decree-Law No.551 Art.73/A-b, Decree-Law No.554 Art. 48/A-b, Decree-Law No.555 Art.24/A-b, 
Decree-Law No.556 Art.61/A-b) 
 Committing any one of the acts cons isting of infringement in terms of civil procedure (specified under 
Article 136 of Decree-Law No. 551, Article 48 of Decree-Law No. 554, Article 24 of Decree-Law 
No. 555, Article 61 of Decree-Law No. 556).  
Imprisonment from 2 years to 4 years or judicial fine between 27.000 YTL and 46.000 YTL or both.  
 
Furthermore, judgment shall be ru led to close down the premises of their undertaking for a period not 
to be less than one year and to prevent them from practicing any commercial activity during the same 
period. (Decree-Law No. 551 Art.73/A-c, Decree-L aw No. 554 Art. 48/A-c, Decree-Law No. 555 
Art.24/A-c, Decree-Law No. 556 Art.61/A-c) 
 
There are also criminal sanctions provided in the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works.  
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 68  
 
 Question (The European Communities): 
 
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 74-75 para.146-150 
The EC notes that Turkey has made progress in en forcing its IPRs commitments over the last few 
years. Nevertheless, piracy and counterfeiting of copyright and trademarks are still problematic. 
 
Could Turkey spell out the measures it considers implementing in order to further improve the 
enforcement of its IPR commitments?   
 
Answer: 
For the measures implemented by the Ministry of Cult ure and Tourism in order to further improve the 
enforcement of IPR commitments, please see the answ er provided to Question of The United States 
regarding  Page 73: paragraphs 140-146. 
 On the other hand,  
Specialized IPR Courts is one of the most important  elements of the effective enforcement of IPR. 
Turkey established Specialized IPR Courts (one ci vil and one criminal IPR Court) in Istanbul, in 
2001. The number of Specialized IPR Courts was increased by 8 in 2004, 12 in 2006, and 9 in 2007.  
 Turkey will establish new specialized IPR courts wh ere the number of existing specialized IPR courts 
is insufficient.  
 
The Ministry of Justice organizes regular training pr ogrammes by itself or in cooperation with other 
institutions, other ministries and international or ganizations and foreign countries. These training 
programmes are the tools for prov iding the specialisation of th e judges and prosecutors working in 
the general civil and general criminal courts whic h are competent to deal with IPR cases where the 
specialised IPR Courts do not exist. 
 The Ministry of Justice is going to keep on organizing training programmes for judges and prosecutors dealing with IPR cases. 
An Action Plan on IPR is being prepared with partic ipation of all related institutions. The Action Plan 
includes the activities planning to be carried out  to provide effective enforcement of IPR. 
 
In addition, is Turkey encountering problems regardi ng the enforcement of the Data Exclusivity 
legislation in pharmaceuticals? If so, how is Turkey addressing these problems?  
 
No major problem has been experienced regarding th e data exclusivity legislation in pharmaceuticals 
so far.  
 Question (Canada): 
 
 
page 73, paragraph 136: According to the S ecretariat Report, the Decree Law No. 551 on the 
Protection of Patent Rights allows for "the granti ng of patents by examination and non-examination." 
Canada would appreciate if Turkey could provide  further details on the procedure concerning the 
granting of patents by non-examination.      
Answer: 
The applicant shall choose for the system for gran ting the patent with substantive examination or 
without it within three months from the notification of the search report to him. If he opts the non-
examination system, this will be published with the search report in the Bulletin. 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 69 
 
 
 Third parties may submit observations on the contents of  the search report within six months from the 
date of publication of the search report. After the expiry of that period, if there is any observation, the Institute shall notify the applicant. The applic ant may make observations on it or if he deems 
necessary, amend the claims, within three months from the notification. 
 
The Institute decides to grant the patent w ithout examination following the expiry of the time 
period mentioned above, without taking into consideration th e observations of the third 
parties. 
The term of protection for the patents granted w ithout examination is 7 years from the date of filing. 
However if the applicant or third parties request fo r examination within this 7 years time period, the 
non-examined patent shall be converted into a pate nt application. And that application can be 
granted as "patent with examination" with a 20 years term of protection from the date of filing as long 
as the examination report(s) is favourable. 
 
Question (Canada):  
 
pages 73-74, paragraph 140:According to the Secret ariat Report, related to copyright enforcement, 
"[i]n the event of recurrence, jail sentences can no longer be postponed or converted into a fine." 
Canada would appreciate knowing Tu rkey’s experience and/or views of whether this practice has 
resulted in a reduction of repeat offences.  
 
Answer: The Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works (Copyright Law) was last amended by Law No. 5101 of 3 March 2004. The sentence added to Article 75 of the Copyright Law states that: 
 
"If a person who has been convicte d (res juidicata) of an offence specified in this Law recommits the 
same offence within two years, the sentence for the new offence shall be increased by one fold. 
(Addition: 3.3.2004-5101/21) Sentences of impris onment imposed upon a repetition of the offence 
may not be suspended and converted to a fine or an alternative measure for imprisonment…" 
 
This is a special provision on suspension of im prisonment. There is a general provision on the 
suspension of imprisonment in Article 51 of Tu rkish Criminal Code. The special provision on 
suspension of imprisonment in Article 75/last par agraph of the Copyright Law is to the disadvantage 
of the offender and is applied prior to the general pr ovision in Article 51 of Turkish Criminal Code.  
 
However, statistics collected by th e General Directorate of Judicial Registration and Statistics are not 
based on the offenders who recommit the same offen ce within a specific period. Therefore there is no 
statistical data which can be used for the evalua tion objectively whether this practice has resulted in 
a reduction of repeat offences. However, it can be sa id that this provision was transferred to the new 
Turkish Criminal Code which was enacted on Septemb er 26, 2004, since it has been thought that this 
special provision has got deterrent impact on the offenders.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 70  
 
 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
 (1) OVERVIEW  Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
 
(page 76, paragraph 1) 
The Report indicates that the simple average applied MFN tariff in agriculture is 28.3%.  
Please could Turkey inform us of the simple av erage binding tariff in agriculture for 2006? 
Answer:  
The simple average binding tariff in agriculture for 2006 is %72.  
(2) AGRICULTURE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES 
 
(i) Main Features 
 Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
(page 76, paragraph 5) 
The Report states that there are more commercial farms emerging.  
What is the definition of "commercial farms"? Could Turkey please clarify whether it supports only 
family farms or both commercial and family farms? 
Answer: 
In terms of the area, commercial farms comprise less than 1% of the total farmland in Turkey. They 
are defined as integrated farms that have more  than 50 ha land where agricultural production is 
intended to be sold for cash. Commercial farms are considered as part of agricultural development 
but are not treated more favourably than small, s ubsistence family farms in terms of support.  
Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
(page 76, paragraph 6) 
The Report also states that Turkey is self-sufficient in food.  
We would appreciate knowing what its food self-suffi ciency rates (including rice, wheat and corn) 
were in 2006. 
Answer: 
Turkey is among the top 10 wheat-producing countri es. Besides, corn and rice production have 
increased considerably in recent years.  The self-sufficiency rate for whea t is calculated as 106% as of 
2006. The rate for rice and corn are 72% and 97% respectively in 2006.  
Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
(page 77, paragraphs 7 - 9) 
Could Turkey please provide us with details of th e composition of its agriculture production in the 
years 2003 and 2006, including crop, forestry, livestock and fishery products?   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 71 
 
 
 Answer:  
Please refer to Annex 4.   
(ii) Policy Developments 
 
Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
pages 78 & 79, paragraphs 11 - 16) 
Under the Agricultural Reform Implementation Proj ect (ARIP), Turkey has taken measures in four 
main areas.  
We would appreciate knowing: 
Whether the phasing out of price support and replacing it with a less distortionary direct income 
support to farmers, based on a uniform per-hect are payment, is blue box or green box. 
When the phasing out of price support will be completed. What the output intervention purchase is, how it is operated, and which products are included. 
 
Answer: 
Direct income support (DIS) payments are decoupl ed and financed through the allocation of 
resources out of the general budget. In this respect , DIS is a support system which exactly falls into 
the category of green box in accordance with th e provisions of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  
The price support system in Turkey has been abolished with the implementation of the ARIP. On the 
other hand, compensatory payments for limiting the production of hazelnuts and tobacco were also 
phased out by the end of 2007.  
Turkish Grain Board (TMO) is the only institution which involves in grain market in Turkey with an 
objective to regulate the sharp fluctuations in pri ces. The operations of TMO are financed by its own 
resources as well as credits obtained from domestic and/or foreign financial markets.  
Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
pages 78 & 79, paragraphs 11 - 16) 
In 2004, Turkey adopted the ASP, which fixed th e budgetary funds and targeted the allocation of 
these funds for, amongst others, DIS payments, de ficiency payments and compensatory payments.  
We would like to know:  
What the deficiency and compensatory payments are, and how they are operated? 
If there was any difference between Turkey’s a nd the EU’s compensatory payments in 1992. 
 Answer: 
In Agriculture Strategy Paper, deficiency paymen ts are deemed as premiums for some products which 
are short of supply. These products are cotton and oilseeds. Compensatory payments are paid to hazelnuts and tobacco growers that shift to a lternative crops. However, as referred before 
compensatory payments were phased out at the end of 2007.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 72  
 
 Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
pages 78 & 79, paragraphs 11 - 16)  
Turkey has some large purchasing agencies, such as the Turkish Gr ain Board (TMO) and the Turkish 
Sugar Factories Corporation (TSFAS), which are st ill State-owned. These agencies continue to set 
prices before the purchasing campaign.  
Could Turkey please provide details of the operations  of the TMO and the method used for setting the 
purchase prices of grain? 
Answer:  
TMO functions as a regulatory body especially to prevent the sharp fluctuatio ns in the grain market 
by taking into account the external market pri ces. Intervention purchases are made by purchasing 
from the producers, implementing the non-discri minatory quality standards adopted by TMO.  
 
On the other hand, TSFAS is currently under the pr ocess of privatization a nd a considerable number 
of sugar factories have already been privatized.  
Question (Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
pages 78 & 79, paragraphs 11 - 16) 
Could Turkey please elaborate on the main points of its recently launched Agricultural Strategy Paper 
for 2006-10?  
Answer: 
The main objective of the Agriculture Strategy for 2006-2010 is to develop policies for structuring a 
more competitive and sustainable agricultural sector w ithin the context of an integrated approach, 
which takes into account economic, social and environmental aspects of such policies.  
Along with this main objective, the Agriculture Strategy Paper has been prepared as a guiding 
document of principles, priorities and methods to be taken into consideration in the policy making 
process. The strategy has also referenc es to the EU integration process.  
 
The strategic objectives adopted through the Paper are as follows:     
 
• Increase in high quality producti on and provision of food safety and security within the 
framework of the sustainability principle,  
• Increase in the incomes of the producers to ensure sustainability, and increase in the 
competitive power of the producers by taking me asures to decrease production costs and to 
accelerate technological development,  
• Improvement of agricultural marketing infrastruc ture and the access level of farmers to the 
market, improvement of agriculture-industry inte gration, provision of suitable high quality 
raw material, which will increa se the competitive power of the processing industry and taking 
necessary measures to meet the demands of the consumers,  
• Preparation of rural development projects ba sed on participation and responsibility of the 
producers and providing direct support to  the producers and implementation of 
abovementioned projects in such a way to improve rural life, 
• Establishment and improvement of non-profit  Agriculture Producer Unions and other 
agricultural organizations in order to serve the producers in all stages from production to marketing in such a structure that is indepe ndent from the public sector; and to make the 
inspection autonomous in these organizations.     
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 73 
 
 
 Question (The United States):  
 
Page 82, paragraph 25:  According to the Secretaria t, the share of support for Turkey’s producers fell 
from 100% to 83% in 2003-05.  Is Turkey planning further to reduce producers’ support?  Question (Brazil): 
 
 
According to Chapter IV of the Secretariat Report (WT/TPR/SW/192), paragraph 14, Agricultural 
Law No. 5488 "moves Turkey further away from th e principles of the EC's reformed Common 
Agricultural Policy (CAP) by defining support linked to production as a key instrument of agricultural 
policy".  If one of the main goals of Turkey's trade policy is to align itself with the EC rules, why does 
Turkey intend to increase its reliance on agricultural support linked to production? 
Question (Canada):  
 
page 82, paragraph 25: The Secretariat Report states that up to 2000 nearly 100% of Turkey’s 
producer support was aid that potentially has the most production distorting effects and that this share 
fell to 83% in 2003-2005. While Canada welcomes this reduction, we note that production distorting 
forms of producer support (such as price support, payments based on output and export subsidies) 
remain key instruments of Turkey’s agriculture policy.  Could Turkey please provide more information on its plans to phase out distortionary forms of 
producer support?  
 
Answer: A major reform in agriculture was initiated duri ng 1999-2001 period. Phasing out of agricultural 
price support and fertilizer and credit subsidies and th eir replacement by a direct income support 
(DIS) system for farmers through a uniform per hectare payment unlinked to the production of any 
specific crop.  
By the Law on Agriculture no: 5488, issued in 2006, the policy frame and types of supports are 
defined. The policy set is mainly chosen as undi stortive, environment friendly and providing guidance 
to producers. Agricultural support instruments c onsist of; Direct Income Support (DIS) Payments, 
Deficiency Payments (Premium),  Compensatory Payments (Far mer Transition), Livestock Support, 
Agricultural Insurance Support, Rural Developm ent Support, Conservation Reserve Payments and 
others. In order to allocate more to the new suppor t items, the percentage of DIS payments within the 
agricultural budget is declining. In this frame,  rural development support and participatory rural 
investments are given the priority and the budget allocations are increase d for these types of 
supports. 
In Turkey’s perspective, The Law on Agriculture and The Agricultural Strategy Paper are the two 
main policy tools for full alignment with the EC’s CAP.  
Question (Canada): 
 
 
page 82, paragraph 27: The Secretariat Report not es that Turkey’s average applied MFN tariff in 
agriculture is 28.3% which represen ts an increase from 2003 when the same average tariff rate was 
25%. 
 Could Turkey please explain the reasons for this incr ease in protection of the agriculture sector since 
2003 with specific reference to the increase in tariff rates on grains and vegetable oils?  
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 74  
 
 Answer: 
Turkey adjusts the tariff levels of agricultural pr oducts according to the market conditions.  
 
Question (Australia): 
 
 Australia welcomes Turkey’s efforts to provide l ess distorting measures of support to its agriculture 
sector under the Agricultural Reform Implementa tion Project (ARIP) (WT/TPR/G/192, page 15, 
paragraph 70).  Does Turkey intend to extend similar reforms to othe r support measures referred to on pages 77-83 of 
the Secretariat’s report? For example, support lin ked to production under Agricultural Law 5488, and 
deficiency payments for agricu ltural products such as wheat. 
 Referring to the ARIP, can Turkey provide further details on the one-time gr ants made to farmers 
switching out of crops experiencing excess supply (WT/TPR/S/192, page 78,  paragraph 12)? In 
particular, which crops, other than hazelnuts and t obacco, have been identified as experiencing excess 
supply, how much is the grant per farmer, and ar e farmers free to use the grant to enter another 
agricultural industry or must they exit the agricultural sector?  
Answer: 
Turkey is in a reform process during the accession negotiations with the EU. In the coming years, 
Turkey aims to change its agricultural policies in li ne with the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU 
and according to the results of WTO negotiations.   
 
There is no other crop to benefit from crop switch pr ogram as it is mentione d in this question. 
Production quota system is seen as an alternative po licy to the switch program in Turkey to control 
excess supply of agricultural products.  
Under the Alternative Product Program (Project B1  sub component) executed in the scope of ARIP, 
producers quitting hazelnut and tobacco  program and producing anoth er product, are paid support 
payment for only one time. For hazelnut, pr oducers uprooting the hazelnut are paid 65 US 
dollars/dekar (a thousand square meters), after pl anting and sewing new products they are paid 135 
US dollars/dekar. For tobacco, producers quitting tobacco production, abolishing his/her quota or 
contract with TEKEL, in other words producers wh o do not make contracts for the new season, are 
paid 80 US dollars/dekar. Although the project will be over at the end of 2008, tobacco and hazelnut 
program which is Alternative Produc t B1 component of the ARIP project, will be over officially at the 
end of 2007.  
Producers are totally free on choosing any kind of pr oduction and marketing style in accordance with 
their interest, knowledge and skills. 
 
Question (Australia): 
 
 
Australia notes that, according to the Turkish aut horities, the main policy objective regarding export 
subsidies is to develop Turkey’s export potentia l in processed agricultural products (WT/TPR/S/192, 
page 80, paragraph 22).  Australia understands that in the past Turkey has provided export subsidies 
to wheat flour, which is included in the 44 agricu ltural product groups within Turkey’s WTO schedule 
of export subsidy reduction commitments, although Tu rkey has not notified export subsidies on wheat 
flour since calendar year 1995 (G/AG/N/TUR/1).  Given the absence of any export subsidy notification by Turkey for any year since 2000, c ould Turkey confirm whether any export subsidies 
have been provided to wheat flour export s since 2000, and if so, provide details. 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 75 
 
 
 Answer:  
Turkey has not provided any export subsidies to whea t flour since 2000. This information can also be 
verified from the export subsidy notifications of Turkey to th e SCM Committee. An updated 
notification will be submitted to th e Agriculture Committee in due course.  
Question (Australia):  
 
Australia notes that state purchasing agencies, incl uding the Turkish Grain Board (TMO) set prices 
before the purchasing campaign (WT/TPR/S/192, pa ge 79, paragraph 15).  Could Turkey provide 
details of the factors that are taken into account  by the TMO in setting the price for wheat purchases, 
including the relationship between this price and the world market price, and the price at which these 
purchases are then on sold? Could Turkey also pr ovide details of the process according to which 
TMO wheat purchases are sold or otherwise disposed of?    
Answer: 
 
- TMO, determines cereal purchasing prices c onsidering domestic and international market 
prices, product cost, production conditions. 
- Sale price for export sales are det ermined by tendering procedure. 
 
Question (Chile): 
 
 
Regarding the information provided in paragraphs 11 and 13, could the delegation of Turkey please 
provide more background concerning the Conser vation Reserve Payment Programme (CATAK)? 
 What kind of agricultural policy measures are bei ng implemented in vulnerable areas (for example 
areas subject to toxic residues and/or erosion, polluted water zones)? 
Answer: 
Conservation of Agricultural Lands for Environmen tal Purposes (CATAK) is implemented by the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (MARA). The essential objective of CATAK is to protect 
areas that are under the threat of environmenta l degradation or exposed to erosion and water 
pollution at high levels due to intensive agricultura l activities.  Basically, the project consists of 
measures aimed to direct the farmers to grow plants convenient for the ecological conditions, without 
damaging the environment, through supplying them  with the relevant agricultural techniques.  
It should be emphasized that the underlying objective of the project is to protect the environment 
rather than supporting producers.  
(3) MINING AND ENERGY 
 
(i) Overview 
 Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
(page 84, paragraph 32) 
We note from the Report that several public instituti ons are engaged in mining and energy activities, 
which causes difficulties in coordination within the sect or even though these institutions are liaising.   
Do the Turkish authorities have any firm plans fo r improving the efficiency of  coordination by 
reducing the apparent over-me ticulous division of labour? 
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 76  
 
 Answer: 
In the Turkish mining sector, there are 9 state-owned institutions (3 of which are regulators), each 
experienced in a different subsector of mining. Fo r example, while Turkish Hard Coal Enterprises 
focus on hard coal production, Turkish Petroleu m Company deals with onshore and offshore oil and 
gas exploration and exploitation activities, and th e General Directorate of Mineral Research and 
Exploration is experienced on exploration of minera ls and the further analysis process. On the other 
hand the government authorities such as the General Di rectorate of Mining Affairs is in charge of 
issuing exploration and operation licenses and th e Ministry of Energy and Mining Resources 
coordinates all these institutions to improve the efficiency of mining activities in Turkey.  
As explained above these enterprises are experienced in specific area s of mining, which enhances the 
efficiency of these operations. In such an environm ent, there are ongoing efforts for improving the 
efficiency of coordination between these institutions. 
 (iii) Energy  
Question (The United States): 
 
 
Paragraphs 48-52:  A constitutional court deci sion in 1997 made it illegal for oil companies to 
repatriate their profits, as provided for in the Pe troleum Law.  Does Turk ey plan to reintroduce 
legislation to allow foreign companies to repatriate profits from oil production?   
 Answer: There is no prohibition in Turkey for oil companies to repatriate their profits. The Court of Accounts’ 
decision in 1997 – not a Constitutional Court deci sion- and the succeeding Council of State decisions 
made an obligatory comment on the Petroleum La w stating that payments made to foreign oil 
companies in order to compensa te their foreign currency rate losses having depended on the so-
called exchange rate guarantee was illegal since th ere was no explicit clause in the Petroleum Law 
urging these payments. Besides, the decision was not about repatriating the profits but repatriating excess cash funds as a set-off agains t previously imported capital.  
Hence, there is no limitation on the foreign oil com panies to repatriate their profits or excess cash 
funds as a set-off against capital to their homel and provided that they do not claim exchange rate 
difference payments, which is surel y outside the law. Besides, some companies did repatriate their 
profits and capital recently.  
 Consequently, the statement "a constitutional cour t decision in 1997 made it illegal for oil companies 
to repatriate their profits, as provided fo r in the Petroleum Law" is misleading. 
 
On the other hand, Turkey plans to completely renew  the existing Petroleum Law by enacting the new 
Turkish Petroleum Law, which is supposed to include some incen tives to foreign oil companies in 
repatriating profit and capital; but it is unlikely that these incentives will include fixed exchange rate 
guarantee. 
 
Question (Chile): 
 
 
Regarding paragraphs 43 and 45, could the delegation of Turkey please provide further background 
information on its energy policy?  Among the objectives mentioned are the sustainable and environment-friendly exploitation of local 
energy resources, inter alia  from new and renewable sources.  As there are ongoing discussions in 
Chile on these matters, we would appreci ate further background information on: 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 77 
 
 
 The Law on the Utilization of Renewable Energy Sources for the Purpose of Generating Electrical 
Energy (No. 5346 of 18 May 2005).  This Law pr ovides for the granting of a Renewable Energy 
Resource Certificate (RER Certificate), which entitles certain enterprises to benefit from the 
incentives provided by the Law.  What are those incentives? 
The Law on Geothermal Resources and Natural Mine ral Waters (No. 5686 of  13 June 2007), which 
aims to encourage exploration, research, develo pment and produc tion of geothermal and natural 
mineral water resources in an environment-friendly manner. 
Answer:  
Turkey attaches great importance to more efficient and rational functioning of the energy sector for 
promoting the competitiveness of the national economy. Harmonizing the legal and regulatory 
framework with that of the EU is one of the prio rities in this context. Legislative environment has 
been upgraded to be compatible with that of EU  countries since 2001. In this respect, Electricity, 
Natural Gas, Petroleum and LPG Market Laws have been enacted to enforce private sector 
involvement under independent regulation and s upervision of the Energy Market Regulatory 
Authority (EMRA). 
On the other hand, security of electricity supply is on e priority area of our strategies, stemming from 
the significant growth in electricity demand and the substantial need for new capacity additions in a 
timely manner. The limited production capacity of domestic energy sources as compared to the 
growing energy demand results in a high level of dependence on energy imports, primarily oil and 
gas. This necessitates the formulation of concrete policies in the context of security of supply.  
 
The priority areas of the Turkey’s energy policies are; 
- Diversifying resources to minimize negative effects of energy supply concentration,  
- Reforming and liberalising the energy sector to s upport targeted growth, to enhance productivity 
and  efficiency and to ensure transparency,  - Sustainable exploitation of energy sources and efficient  use of energy, by investing in all stages of 
the energy chain, taking into account the envir onmental concerns, while intensifying R&D on energy 
technologies,  - Acting as an important route and terminal for pr ojects aiming at transportation of hydrocarbons. 
Some of these incentives are: 
 - The electricity generated from the renewable ener gy sources shall be purchased by the legal entities 
holding retail sale license on the basis of bilateral agreements  
- Entity, holding retail sale license, shall be en titled to purchase RES certified electrical energy 
considering the proportion of the energy amount which has sold within the previous calendar year to 
the total electrical energy amount - The applicable price for the electricity to be pu rchased in pursuance with  the Law within each 
calendar year shall be the Turkish average wholesal e electricity price in the previous year (not be 
lower than Turkish Liras equivalent of 5 Euro Ce nt/kWh and not higher than Turkish Liras equivalent 
5,5 Euro Cent/kWh) - Priority for access to the grid - Exemption from the license fees at investment stage and for operation stage  - Subsidies for the land use  
The objective of this Law is to lay down the prin ciples and procedures applicable to the exploration, 
research, development, production and protection of geothermal and natural mineral water resources 
as well as to acquiring and transferring rights over such resources, using them for economic purposes 
in an environment friendly manner, and abandoni ng them.  This Law covers the principles, 
procedures and sanctions applicable to the acquisition, of rights over resources, their transfer and WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 78  
 
 abandoning, auctioning,  termination, supervision and protection of detected or to-be-detected 
geothermal and natural mineral water resources and geothermal-origin gases as well as their 
catchments, during exploration and operation stages.  
Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):
 
(page 87, Table IV.5) 
To protect consumers, the government heavily in tervenes in and regulates the tariffs on energy 
products and services in Turkey, and this is likel y to hamper the liberalization process and deter 
private investment.   
Does Turkey envisage deploying further count er-measures to overcome these disadvantages? 
Answer: 
The Turkish Government continues to take consid erable steps to attain the objective of full 
liberalization of the energy sector. To that end, the establishment of the Energy Market Regulatory 
Authority (EMRA) as an autonomous body for en ergy market regulation has been a cornerstone 
together with the enactment of Laws on Elect ricity, Natural Gas, Petroleum and LPG markets.  
Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
(page 88, paragraph 47) 
The Report mentions that power shortages may be cau sed partly by the lack of adequate investment, 
therefore the Government is turning to the private sector for new investment and restructuring of the 
sub-sector to increase the country’s electricity generating capacity. We would be interested in 
knowing:  
What preferences or incentives provided to private or foreign investors are most effective at 
prompting new investment in the power generation sector.  
 In terms of restructuring the power sector, what the Turkish government is pla nning to do to achieve 
further market liberalization . 
 
Answer: 
Some of the incentives given in the Law on Utiliz ation of Renewable Energy Resources for the 
Purpose of Generating Electrical Energy are: -Guaranteed purchase of electricity generated from  the renewable energy sources by the legal entities 
holding retail sale license on the basis of bilateral agreements, 
-Entity holding retail sale license shall be en titled to purchase RES certified electrical energy 
considering the ratio of the energy amount which wa s sold within the previous calendar year to the 
total electrical energy amount. 
-The applicable price for the electricity to be purchased in pursuance with  the Law within each 
calendar year shall be the Turkish average wholesale electricity price in the previous year (not be 
lower than Turkish Liras equivalent of 5 Euro Ce nt/kWh and not higher than Turkish Liras equivalent 
5,5 Euro Cent/kWh). 
-Priority for access to the grid, -Exemption from the license fees at investment and operation stages,  -Subsidies for the land use.  Moreover, The Law on Construction and Operation of  Nuclear Power Plants and the sale of the 
energy (No. 5710) was enacted in the Official Gaze tte on 21 November 2007, which sets the rules for 
the construction and operation of nuclear power pl ants and the sale of energy. The investors can 
participate to the tendering processes for th e construction of nuclear power plants.   
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 79 
 
 
 Concerning coal, the coal fields which are publicly owned are being transferred to the private sector 
by tendering process which bears a provision that c oal fired power plants will be constructed in the 
concerned region.    According to the Provisional Article 2 of the La w No.5710, the electricity to be generated at 
indigenous coal-fired power plants built with an installed power capacity of minimum 1,000 MW by 
companies to be granted coal usage rights as a result of the coal allocation (royalty) tender and 
commissioned by the year 2014, shall be purchased  by retail and wholesale licensees under 15-year 
bilateral contracts. 
 
Creating a liberal and competitive electricity market in line with the EU directives is one of the 
objectives of the Turkish government in the electricity sector. In this  context, the market liberalization 
process has been fostering energy sector. Substantia l progress has been achieved in restructuring and 
liberalizing the Turkish electricity and gas markets in pursuance with the EU Directives for the 
purpose of integration with the EU Internal Energ y Market, since the enactments of Electricity and 
Natural Gas Market Laws in 2001.  With the Petroleum and LPG Market Laws, competition oriented 
mechanisms has been put into place in a diverse range of sectors.  
These market laws have been enacted to enforce private sector involvement under independent 
regulation and supervision of the Energy Market  Regulatory Authority (EMRA). Creating a sound 
investment environment based on competition will conti nue to be one of the major strategies. Hence, 
privatization in generation and distribution segme nts has been considered as a complimentary tool 
for achieving competitive electricity market in Turkey. Participation of the investors to the 
distribution and generation priva tization tenders, which are going to  be managed by Privatization 
Administration, is welcomed.   
Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
(page 89, paragraph 51) 
According to the Report, companies controlled or owned by foreign States may invest in oil and 
natural gas upstream activities only with the permissi on of the Council of Ministers.  Approval by the 
Energy Market Regulatory Authority (EMRA) Board is also required for investment in refining, 
transportation through pipelines, and storage.   
Could Turkey please describe the concrete conditions or review criteria that  are considered by these 
two agencies in deciding whether or not to issue their permission or approval? 
Answer:  
Energy Market Regulatory Authority (EMRA) do es not make any discrimination between foreign and 
domestic or between public and private companies in  its activities. In other words, EMRA applies 
same rules for all parties in the process of licensing.  
As for the petroleum market in Tu rkey, the market has been legally unbundled as 9 activities (refining, 
distribution, transmission, storage, processing, lube  oil, bunker delivery, transportation and vendor 
activity) and 1 usage (eligible consumer). A license s hould be obtained for the performance of the 
legally unbundled activities or uses.  
 The qualifications of the persons to be granted  licenses should comply with the general and the 
special conditions determined for related license type.   
As general qualifications, the persons to be gr anted licenses should be legal or real persons;  
   -  residing in Turkey,     -  having commercial or industrial registry,  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 80  
 
    -  being income or corporate tax payer. 
  Within this scope, the legal persons engaging in market activities in Turkey and qualified as capital 
stock company as per the legislation of foreign c ountries are deemed to be the residents of  Turkey 
regarding their activities in Turkey as per the legisla tion on protecting the value of Turkish currency. 
 
The legal person applying for the licenses of refin ing, transmission, storage, processing, distribution 
and bunker delivery should be founded as joint st ock or limited liability company as per the 
provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code No:6762.   
1) The special qualifications related persons should have according to the license types: 
 
 
1.1) The minimum capital should be:    -Refining license                          50.000.000 YTL,  
-Transmission license                   500.000 YTL,  
-Storage license                       1.000.000 YTL,  -Processing license      500.000 YTL,  -Distribution license   5.000.000 YTL  -Bunker delivery license             2.000.000 YTL, 
 
1.2) The minimum capacity should be (the annual marketing projection as of the date of 
application or capacity for use):  
 -60.000 tones of annual sale for distribution license  -5.000 tones of annual use for eligible consumer license (only for diesel oil and fuel oil types). 
 
 1.3) For transportation license:  
− Should have the possession of at least one road transportation vehicle or have one 
through financial leasing, 
 
− Should have the possession of at least one sea transportation vehicle or have one 
through financial leasing or have a lease- service agreement with the related persons, 
 
− Regarding the railway vehicle, should ha ve a lease-service agreement with the 
related persons.  
 For the licenses subject to Board’s decision, given the applications are duly filed, the licensing 
process is completed within maximum 90 days, whereas license applications for vendor activity, 
eligible consumer and transportatio n via motorways licenses are concluded within a few working 
days upon the examination by the related expert.       
1.4) Other conditions:   
For bunker delivery licenses, permission should be  taken from the authorities and/or organizations 
related with the facilities.   
 The persons who apply to the Authority for vendor activity licenses of newly established liquid fuel 
stations should submit together with all the documents stated in the legislation, a document showing that they meet the minimum distance condition.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 81 
 
 
  
Vendor activity license holders (operating stations) w illing to do sale for agricultural purposes should 
take the necessary measures and should submit and incl ude in their licenses the documents of their 
tankers and village pump/s. 
 
In cases which require a facility to perform the market  activity, it is obligatory to submit the facility’s 
Certificate for Starting and Managing a Business Es tablishment prepared as per the related 
legislation. 
 
Permissions  Permission should be taken from EMRA for liquid fu el trade among the distributors in the petroleum 
market and for the import of petroleum deemed  as product other than liquid fuel.   
 
1)  Permission for trade among distributors
: 
The distributors are obliged to get permission form  EMRA to do liquid fuel trade among each other. 
The permission is granted for three-month periods stating the type and amount of the liquid fuel and 
the place and term of the trade. The issue has been regulated by Board’s Decision. 
 
2)  Import of products other than liquid fuel:  
The materials taken under the scope of the "Co mmuniqué Regarding the Import of Solvent and Some 
Petroleum Products" determined by EMRA and issued  annually by the Undersecretariat for Foreign 
Trade, are evaluated by EMRA according to a formula and taking as a base the capacity and expertise reports and are given certificate of compliance.  
 
Operations Subject to Approval  The service tariffs of transmission facilities and the connected storage facilities (providing service to 
the third parties) should be approved by EMRA in or der to be implemented.  The approval period is a 
calendar year and in case the tariff proposals are not  accepted, the proposal is rejected and the 
implementation of the current tariff is carried on.  
 As for the natural gas market, in order to grant rel evant licenses to engage in market activities, the 
legal entities shall file applications with the Au thority by submitting the necessary information, 
documents and commitments.  In order to co mmence the review and evaluation regarding 
applications that are deemed to be filed in acco rdance with the principles pertaining to license 
applications, the applicants shall be notified in writing to deposit one percent of the licensing fee into 
the account of the Authority within ten days following the date of notification. The license 
applications of the legal entities to engage in natural gas market activities, to the Authority shall be 
responded by the Authority within sixty days following the commencement of the review and 
evaluation process. The results of the review and evaluation process, carried out by the Authority, 
shall be submitted to the Board and the license applica tion shall be finalized by a Board decision. In 
cases where a license application is rejected by a Boar d decision, the justifications for such rejection 
shall be notified in writing to the related app licant within ten working days following the Board 
decision. The legal entity that is deemed eligible for obtaining a license, by a Board decision, as a 
result of the review and evaluation process, shall be notified in writing that the relevant license shall 
be issued upon fulfilment of the relevant obligations within ninety days. Legal entity, which fulfils its 
obligations, shall be granted the relevant licen se as per the aforesaid Board decision. The 
commercial title of the licensee and the type of the li cense acquired shall be published in the Official 
Gazette and announced in the Authority’s websit e. With exceptional ca ses where force majeure 
conditions exist, any license application shall be rej ected by a Board decision upon failure to fulfil 
these obligations within the specified period. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 82  
 
  
The applications regarding imports from the countries other than those with which contracts have 
already been executed by BOTAS, are evaluated within the framework of the procedures and 
principles determined by the Board D ecision numbered 725 and dated 13/04/2006.  
 
For all the license types, except for the distribu tion license, the period of the licensing process, 
excluding the time necessary for the fulfilment of the obligations by the company applying for the 
license, is approximately three months.  
 For more information please visit;  http://www.epdk.org.tr/english/default.asp
 and  
http://www.epdk.org.tr/english/ reports/manualforenergyinvestors.htm  web pages 
 
(5) SERVICES 
 Question (Chile): 
 
Paragraph No. 5 
According to this paragraph, Turkey is a net e xporter of services.  What type of services does it 
export, and under what mode of supply? 
 
Answer:  
Turkey is a net exporter of services amounting to US $ 13.1 billion in 2006, with the tourism services 
being the leading sector. In addition to tourism services,  construction is the only other sector that has 
a trade surplus in Turkey’s services trade.    
 
Question (The United States):   
 
Page 1, paragraph 3; page 9, para graph 19; page 97, paragraph 81:  The Secretariat’s report notes that 
services constitute the most important sector of th e Turkish economy.  The report also notes, "For 
Turkey, agriculture is the key issue of DDA; and Turkey attaches utmost importance to non-
agriculture market access (NAMA) negotiations " with no reference to services (page 13, 
paragraph 12).  Given the importance of services to Turkey’s economy, is the services sector a DDA priority for Turkey? 
 
Answer: 
Agriculture is the key issue of DDA for Turkey as it is  mentioned in the Secretariat’s report. On the 
other hand, Turkey attaches utmost importance to services and participate in DDA negotiations in an 
active and constructive manner so as to achieve progressively higher level of liberalization.  
Question (China):
 
Many Chinese companies investing in Turkey report th at Turkey applies very strict requirements and 
procedures to the issuance of worki ng visas to Chinese service suppliers and that it is sometimes even 
difficult for Chinese service suppliers who have been living in Turkey for a long time to get work 
permits. In recent years, it has become increasingl y difficult for Chinese service suppliers to be 
granted work permits, which has caused much inconv enience to Chinese service suppliers in Turkey.  
Does Turkey have any plan to improve its visa re quirements and procedures as to provide effective 
market access to foreign service providers?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 83 
 
 
 Answer: 
Turkey applies the same requirements  and procedures to the issuance of working visas to foreign 
services suppliers regardless of their nationalities.  These requirements and pr ocedures concerning 
work permits for foreign national persons are regulat ed by the Law on Work Permits of Foreigners 
numbered 4817 and related regulations issued within the terms of that Law. All the work permits are 
given to the foreign services suppliers according to  those criteria set forth in the mentioned 
legislation without making any discrimination.  
Chinese citizens that have received work permits in Turkey appear to rank high, according to the 
statistics on work permits issued to  foreigners by the related Ministry since the entry into force of the 
Law No. 4817. 
 
(ii) Financial services  Question (The United States): 
 
 
Page 98, paragraph 89:  The Secretariat’s report notes that the establishment of the first branch of a 
foreign bank requires "approval".  Wh at does this approval process entail? 
 
Question (Mexico):  
 
Paragraph 89 indicates that the establishment of th e first branch of a foreign bank requires approval 
from the Banking Regulation and Supervision Authority (BRSA).  Mexico wishes to know what are 
the requirements for BRSA authorization for the establishment of a foreign bank.  Paragraph 89 
further states that under Law No. 5411, establishm ent of a bank engaged exclusively in offshore 
banking is subject to Board decision.  In the case of establishment of a bank engaged exclusively in offshore activities, we would like to know which Bo ard is being referred to and what would be the 
requirements for the latter's decision.  
 
Answer: The Article 6 of the Banking Law Nr. 5411 lays do wn the provisions regarding the permission for 
establishment or opening branches and representative offices in Turkey.  
 
"The establishment of a bank in Turkey or the ope ning up of the first branch in Turkey by a bank 
established abroad shall be permitted upon affirmati ve votes of at least five members of the Board 
provided that the establishment conditions laid down in this Law are fulfilled.   
 
The principles and procedures for permission app lications and granting permissions shall be 
determined by a regulation to be issued by the B oard. The decision regarding the permission shall be 
notified to the applicant within three months foll owing the application date or after the applicant 
provides the missing application documents, if any. If any missing document is not  provided within six 
months, then the application shall become invalid.   
 
The details regarding the establishment of a bank to be engaged exclusively in offshore 
banking or the opening of a br anch in Turkey by such bank s established abroad for such 
purposes, and their fields of activity and fi nancial reporting and audit pr ocedures as well as 
the details regarding the tempor ary suspension or revocation of  their activities shall be 
determined by Board decision.   
 
The banks established abroad may open up repr esentative offices in Turkey with the 
permission of the Board provided that they do not accept deposits or participation funds and 
those they operate within the framework of  the principles to be set by the Board ." WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 84  
 
 The Article 9 of the Banking Law Nr. 5411 puts th e provisions regarding the requirements for the 
opening of branches in Turkey by banks headquartered /incorporated abroad. According to the 
Article,   
"Any bank established abroad that will operate in Tu rkey by opening a branch within the framework 
of the principles and procedures set by the B oard shall meet the following conditions:   
a) Its primary activities must not have been  prohibited in the country where they are 
headquartered,  
b) The supervisory authority in the country wherei n the headquarter of the bank is located shall 
not have negative opinions regarding its operation in Turkey,  
c)  The paid-up capital allocated to Turkey shall not be less than the amount indicated in the 
Article 7, 
d) The members of the board of managers shall have adequate professional experience to fulfil 
the requirements laid down in the corporate go vernance provisions and to accomplish the planned 
activities,  
e) It must submit an activity program indicating work plans for the fields of activity which are 
under the scope of the permission, the budgetary plan fo r the first three years as well as its structural 
organization. 
f) The group including the bank must have a transparent and clear partnership structure.  
 
Operating permission cannot be granted for the acti vities prohibited due to the violation of the 
domestic legislation in the country where such institutions are headquartered." 
 
Also the Article 5 of the "Regulation on Activities of Banks Subject to Permission, and Indirect Share Ownership" which was published in Official Jour nal No. 26333 of November 1, 2006 regulates the 
procedures and principles for the opening of first  branches in Turkey by the banks incorporated 
abroad.  According to the Article,  
 
(1) Foreign banks intending to open their first branches in Turkey must enclose the following 
documents to their applications to be submitted to the Agency:   
a) Their articles of association, 
b) Copies of resolutions taken by their compet ent organs for opening up branches in Turkey, 
c) An activity program, which analyses the benefits  expected from opening up a branch in 
Turkey, indicates activities to be carried out and operational plans explaining how to carry 
out internal audit, internal control and ri sk management and involves the financial structure 
of the organization that also c ontains the capital adequacy of the relevant projections thereof,  
d)  Past five years’ balance sheets and profit / loss accounts as well as independent    
          auditing reports, 
e) Detailed information and documents about th eir partners / shareholders, organizational 
structures, organizational charts for activities outside the country where it is established and 
activities in international markets and a report  issued by a rating agency on such banks or 
financial organizations, which also includes the envisaged rating thereof,  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 85 
 
 
 f) Documents obtained from their authorized agenc ies that their banking operations involving 
receipt of deposits or participation funds in the countries of establishment or operation have 
not been banned and / or such activities have not be restricted in any manner, 
g) Minutes of their last general assembly meeting as well as a list of shareholders having more 
than ten per cent of capital, which is duly certified by competent authorities in the countries 
where their head offices are located,  
h)  A letter of commitment which undertakes that  reports concerning aud its to be conducted 
annually by independent auditin g companies authorized as per the legislation in the country 
where their head office is located shall be submitted to the Board. 
(2) The Agency is entitled to request any additional information and documents if deemed necessary 
and similarly the Board is entitled to operate on th e basis of different information and documents 
received.  Regarding the question on "which B oard is being referred to" please note that in all the Articles of the 
Banking Law Nr.5411 including the above mentioned provisions, Agency refers to Banking 
Regulation and Supervision Agency and  Board refers to Banking Regulation and Supervision Board. 
 Last of all, concerning the query about off-shore banks,  please be informed that they are regulated in 
the provision of "The details regarding the est ablishment of a bank to be engaged exclusively in 
offshore banking or the opening of a branch in Tu rkey by such banks established abroad for such 
purposes, and their fields of activity and financial reporting and audit procedures as well as the 
details regarding the temporary suspension or revoca tion of their activities shall be determined by 
Board decision" in the Article 6 of the Bankin g Law Nr. 5411. However, there is no off-shore bank 
operating in Turkey and no Board decision regulatin g the topic has been issued so far.  
 
 Question (The European Communities):
  
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 98, para. 89  
The EC is aware that foreign banks are not allo wed to offer cross border investment services to 
private retail clients residing in Turkey due to legisl ative restriction in Turkey. The offering of cross 
border investment services to Turkish residents requires permission from the Capital Markets Board 
(CMB) according to article 37 of Communiqué Seri al:V, No. 46. However, no new intermediary 
institution license has been granted by the Board si nce 1991. Therefore, all applications from foreign 
financial institutions to the CMB requesting permissi on to provide services to the investor residing in 
Turkey have been reject by the CMB.   Does Turkey envisage reforming this procedure so as to facilitate the entry of foreign banks in the 
financial services market?  
Answer: 
Intermediary institution licences can be obtaine d through acquisitions of or mergers with the 
currently operating ones. This application app lies both to residents and non-residents on non-
discriminative terms.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 86  
 
 (iii) Telecommunications and postal services 
 Question (The United States): 
 
 
Page 104, section 109:  The United States would like to confirm that Turkey’s national postal 
operators administer financial services in a compet itive and transparent manner relative to competing 
products and services that the private sector offers.  With this in mind, could Turkey please elaborate 
on the following statement from the Secretariat’s report?  "In 2004, under the PTT-Bank logo , Turkish Post started offering pos tal financial services on behalf 
of banks (e.g. collection of bills and credit card pa yments), with the aim of making such services 
available in remote areas.  This is under the c ondition of not offering traditional banking services, 
such as granting loans and opening saving accounts." 
 
Answer:  
General Directorate of Post and Telegraph (P TT) offers financial postal services as well as 
traditional postal services on the ba sis of authorization granted by Postal Law No. 5584.  
In Turkey, financial money order services are also offered by private com panies such as Western 
Union that carries out speedy money order transac tions besides public and private banks in the 
framework of Banking Law.   
On the other hand, since 2004, under PTT Bank C oncept, PTT, together with money order service, 
offers financial services such as postal check, bill co llection on behalf of the related institutions, 
credit card and cash collection on behalf of banks,  cash payment transacti ons with an understanding 
of universal service in order to carry away financia l services to the customers in remote areas where 
banking services are not offered. 
 
This PTT Bank Concept does not include the tr aditional banking services such as opening saving 
accounts and giving credit loans.  
 
Question (The European Communities):  
 WTO Secretariat's Report, page 104, para. 109  
It is stated that the "Turkish Postal Administra tion, under the Ministry of Transport (MT), is the 
regulatory and operational body for postal services.  According to the postal law, its monopoly covers 
open and closed letters, postcards, and telegraphs for domestic or fo reign destinations. The Turkish 
Postal Administration is carrying out reorganization work and automation of counter services to align the quality of its services on the Universal Postal Union (UPU) standards. In 2004, under the PTT-Bank logo, Turkish Post started offe ring postal financial services on beha lf of banks (e.g. collection of 
bills and credit card payments), with the aim of making such services available in remote areas." 
The EC notes that there is no reference to Expr ess Delivery Services. In this regard, we would 
appreciate if Turkey could provide fu rther information in this regard. 
Could Turkey confirm that foreign courier service providers can conduct business in Turkey, 
including Express Delivery services? 
Answer: 
Foreign courier service providers can conduc t business in Turkey, including express delivery 
services. According to the Law on Road Transport  No. 4925, these companies are authorized by 
Ministry of Transport and eligible to transport, pick up and deliver items (packages and parcels, etc.) 
that are not covered by the postal monopoly.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 87 
 
 
 Could Turkey confirm its intention to establish an  independent regulatory body and a new licensing 
regime?  
Answer: 
The studies of the new Law, that foresees the establishment of an independent national regulatory body, are in progress. In scope of the new Law the regulatory body will grant licence to the entrepreneurs to operate in  the sector for the postal services out of the reserved area.  
 
Question (The Republic of Korea): 
 
 
(WT/TPR/S/192 p.102, para.102) 
According to the Secretariat's report, the monopoly of Turk Telecom (TT) in the basic 
telecommunications services ended on 31 December 2003 and the Turkish Government sold 55% of 
its TT's shares in November 2005. In spite of these efforts to liberalize the telecommunications sector, 
TT still maintains the status of significant market player in the Turkish telecommunications market. 
Please provide us with the regulatory framework and/or  plans to lessen the influence of TT and foster 
competition in the telecommunications sector. 
 
Answer: 
To lessen the influence of the operators who ha ve significant power in the market, "Ordinance on 
Principles and Procedures for Determination of th e Operators with Significant  Market Power (SMP)" 
was published on 07 January 2007 by Telecommunicati ons Authority (TA). Analyses of the 16 of the 
18 markets which were specified in the EC Directiv e are completed according to above-mentioned 
Ordinance. After the analyses, operators with SMP w ere determined for each  market. In the markets 
where TT has SMP, TA might impose obligations to TT such as transparency, publication of reference 
access and interconnection offers, non-discrimination, accounting separation, to be subject to tariff 
regulation and cost accounting in accordance with the Ordinance. 
(iv) Transport 
Question (The European Communities):  
 
WTO Secretariat's Report, page 105, para. 112  
Turkey faces challenges in modernising its port in frastructure in order to accommodate international 
maritime freight transport.   Could Turkey comment on its plans to address such challenges? 
Answer: 
Modernization of the port infrastructure takes pla ce in scope of the concessions granted by the 
Companies that take on the operating right of  ports through the privatization process.  
Could Turkey provide informati on on its policy concerning access to port services, notably with 
regard to whether services rendered could be ma de available on reasonable and non-discriminatory 
terms? 
Answer: 
Regarding access to port services, it should be mentioned that during the privatization of certain ports via long-term concession contracts for the transfer of operating rights, certain clauses were 
inserted by the Privatization Administration into, fo r instance, the concession contract for the transfer 
of operating rights of Mersin port in southern Turkey, to avoid discriminatory practices following the 
conclusion of the privatization.  
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 88  
 
 The reason for this was the competition-related c oncerns articulated in the Opinion sent by the 
Turkish Competition Authority (TCA) to the Priv atization Administration before the announcement of 
the tender conditions, known as pre-notificatio n stage (see Secretariat Report, paragraph 119, 
footnote 115).   
In addition to such clauses inserted  into the relevant concession contract, discrimination is forbidden 
in the Law no 4054 on the Protection of Competition as  an abuse. Therefore, it can be mentioned that 
access to port services to be offered for instance in Mersin port should be made available on a non-
discriminatory basis according to both the relev ant concession contract and the Law no 4054 on the 
Protection of Competition.  
Such a clause prohibiting discrimination was also inserted into the con cession contract for the 
transfer of operating rights of İzmir port in western Turkey by the Privatization Authority. While 
evaluating acquisition of İzmir port in the authorization stage, the TCA, in order to authorize the 
acquisition by certain bidders, asked the Privatizati on Authority to insert a clause into the concession 
contract that the existing clause prohibiting discrimination do not pre-empt application of the relevant article of the Law no 4054 on the Protect ion of Competition to the same discriminatory 
conduct by the port operator.  
Question (Canada): 
 
pages 106-107, paragraph 115:  
The WTO Secretariat Report in paragraph 115 discu sses the Turkish International Ship Registry.  
 Canada would be grateful if Turkey could clarify wh at the policy rationale is behind the restriction to 
ships "owned by Turkish and/or foreign persons r esident in Turkey and companies registered under 
Turkish legislation"? From Canada ’s understanding, this would necessarily limit the number of ships 
that can be registered under the International Regist ry.  In that extent, what is the proportion between 
Turkish-owned and foreign-owned ships in that registry? 
Answer: 
The rules enshrined in Turkish International Ship Registry (TISR) are in line with the Cabotage Law 
No:815. Thus, there are not any discrepancies betwee n the national regulations. Turkey does not have 
any statistics based on the Turkish or Foreign own ership. In that sense, TISR has no restriction for 
Turkish or foreign owners on condition that they abide with the rules set out by the TISR regulation. 
Question (Mexico):
 
Paragraph 115 mentions that ships a nd yachts owned by Turkish or fore ign persons resident in Turkey 
and companies incorporated under Turkish legisl ation, may be registered with the Turkish 
International Ship Registry in Is tanbul, and fly the Turkish flag.  Mexico would like to know the 
requirements for entry in the International Ship Registry. 
 
Paragraph 118 states that special tax incentives are provided to Turkish investors in the maritime 
transport subsector.  Mexico wishes to know whethe r foreign as well as national investors are eligible 
for such incentives. 
Answer: 
The vessels and yachts owned by Turkish and foreign real persons residing in Turkey and the companies established in Turkey in accordance with Tu rkish legislation may be registered with the 
Turkish International Ship Regist ry. The ships owned by the foreign residents in Turkey or by their 
companies established according to Turkish legisla tion do not have the right to cabotage even if they 
have registered with the Turkish International Ship Registry.   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 89 
 
 
 - All vessels and yachts that are already registered  with the national ship registry on 21/12/1999 
when the law no 4490 entered into force,    - The vessels, yachts and special purpose vessel s built in Turkey regardless of tonnage limit,  
 
- The vessels and yachts, which are built within th e country for export purposes or built within the 
country for Turkish natural or legal persons and then exported abroad and then imported in the 
country shall be accepted as built within the country.   - Any kind of load or open sea fishing vessels above 3.000 DWT to be imported for commercial 
purposes and passenger crafts and specia lly built vessels above 300 gross tons, 
 shall be registered in the Turkish International Ship Registry. 
 
The earnings to be acquired from the operation an d transfer of the vessels and yachts registered in 
the Turkish International Ship Registry shall be  exempt from the income and corporate taxes and 
funds. 
 
Purchase, sales, mortgaging, registration, credit and  freight contracts related to the vessels and 
yachts to be registered in the Tu rkish International Ship Registry shall not be subject to stamp tax, 
fees, taxation for banking and in surance transactions and funds. 
 
In case that the vessels and yachts registered in the Turkish Interna tional Ship Registry are registered 
directly or as dual class to Turkish Lloyd, a disc ount of 50% shall be made for registration fee and 
annual tonnage fee.  
Registration fee:  for each vessel to be registered in Tu rkish International Ship Registry, 10.000 USD 
and the amount of Turkish liras equal to 1 USD shall be collected for each ton. The registration fee to 
be collected for the vessels may be  increased in accordance with th e procedure and amount stipulated 
in subparagraph (a) of paragraph 3 of  article 12 of the Law no 4490. The standard registration fee to 
be paid for the yachts being registered in Turkish International Ship Registry shall be the amount of 
Turkish liras equal to 5.000 USD. Registration s hall not be made unless the registration fee is 
collected. 
 
Annual tonnage fee:  The amount of Turkish liras equal to 1 USD shall be collected for each net ton 
for each calendar year in which the vessels and yach ts are registered in th e Turkish International 
Ship Registry. The Council of Ministers shall be authorized to increase this amount up to ten times. 
This fee shall be collected in two installments, one in January and one in July.  
Question (Mexico):
 
 
Paragraph 114 indicates that the tendering processes for the concession of the ports of Bandirma, 
Derince, İzmir, Samsun and İskenderun have been launched.  Me xico would like to know when the 
invitation to tender will be issued.  
 
Answer: 
Technically the tender process for İzmir and Derince ports have been completed by May 2007 and 
September 2007 respectively, but legal processes are s till on going for final takeover. Invitation to the 
tender of Band ırma and Samsun ports is planned to be issued shortly. Timing for İskenderun port 
privatization is not set yet.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 90  
 
 (v) Tourism 
 Question (Hong Kong, China): 
 
 (WT/TPR/S/192, P. 112, Para. 137 - 138) 
We note from the Secretariat Report that investors in tourism have access to incentives granted under 
the Investment Encouragement Programme.  We ar e interested to know the types of incentives 
involved in the Programme and whether they apply to foreign investors on a non-discriminatory basis 
as well. 
 
Answer: 
For a detailed description of the IEP (legisla tive basis, scope, purpose, eligibility criteria) and 
encouragement measures (incentives) offered und er the program, please refer in the Secretariat 
Report to section III(2)(iii)( c ) (WT/TPR/S/19 2, p.33, para.22-23)  and section III(4)(i) 
(WT/TPR/S/192, p.62, para.110-111) where the incen tives in question are listed as customs duty 
exemption, VAT (Value Added Tax) exemption and interest support. Also please refer in the Turkish 
Government Report to section II.Trade Policies(1) Implementation of WTO Agreements(i)Trade in 
goods(e) Investment (WT/TPR/G/192, pp.17, para.81-82 ). 
In terms of the Investment Encouragement Pr ogramme (IEP), domestic and foreign investors are 
equally treated; the companies having foreign capita l can benefit from all encouragement measures 
granted to domestic compani es with the same conditions. 
We note from the Secretariat Report that "there is no  limitation on foreign investment".  In Turkey’s 
GATS commitments, various national treatment lim itations have been inscribed for foreign 
companies supplying travel agencies and tour opera tors services.  We would like to seek Turkey’s 
clarification on whether such limitations still exist.  
 
Answer: 
A new law related to travel agencies and tour op erators eliminating discriminatory treatment between 
domestic and foreign service suppliers came into force on January 13, 2007. In this context, foreign 
investors can establish firms in Turkey to provide travel agency and tour operation services, in line 
with Turkish Trade Law. Turkey continues to conduc t consultations on how to reflect the amendments 
made by the law to the second revised offer.  
 
The Secretariat Report also mentions that foreign and domestic companies in tourism set their own 
maximum prices, which must be cleared annually by  the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (MCT).  We 
would appreciate it if Turkey could elaborate in wh ich tourism sub-sector(s) these maximum prices 
now apply and the basis with which the MCT clears these maximum prices.  
 
Question (Canada): 
 
 
page 112, paragraph 138: 
The Report states that foreign and domestic companies can set their own maximum prices, but that 
they must be cleared annually by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism (MCT). The Report further 
notes that enterprises are not required to charge uniform prices but cannot exceed their maximum 
approved prices. 
 
What does the Ministry of Culture and Tourism take into account when reviewing and approving 
maximum prices set by different tourism companies? 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 91 
 
 
 Answer: 
Enterprises, certified by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, determine the prices to be applied 
annually in the framework of free market econom y on their own initiative. By the Tariff Card 
Circulars sent, these enterprises a re recommended to consider,  
 
- The competitiveness of the prices with  other competitive countries’ prices 
- Accommodation to prices of peer enterprises 
- The marketability of the prices  
 in the process of price determination.  
 
Based on the presumption that the prices have b een determined taking into account the above-
mentioned criteria, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism only reviews and approves these prices. 
Thus, the maximum prices determined by different enterprises are approved as  they are sent to the 
Ministry. 
 
Question (Canada): 
 
 pages 111-112, paragraph 137: 
The Report states that the Government grants in centives for tourism investments in accordance with 
the Tourism Encouragement Law. As well, inv estors have access to incentives granted under the 
Investment Encouragement Programme. 
 Please confirm if foreign investors in tourism are qualified to avail of the incentives under both the 
Tourism Encouragement Law and the I nvestment Encouragement Programme. 
 
Answer: 
In terms of the Investment Encouragement Pr ogramme (IEP) and Tourism Encouragement Law, 
domestic and foreign investors are equally treated; the companies having foreign capital can benefit 
from all encouragement measures granted to domestic companies with the same conditions.  
Question (Mexico):  
Paragraph 137 mentions that the Turkish Governme nt grants incentives for tourism investments in 
accordance with the Tourism Encouragement Law.  We would like to know in greater detail what 
these incentives consist of and whether they apply to foreign investors. 
 
Answer: 
The following incentives are grant ed for tourism investments on the basis of the Law for the 
Encouragement of Tourism (No. 2634): 
- Allocation of public lands for tourism investments 
- Facilitated process for the employment  of foreign personnel and artisans 
- Reduction in the rate of utilities such as electricity, gas and water 
- Priority for allotment of telephone and telex facilities 
- Exemption from restrictive regulations on the sale of alcoholic beverages 
- Operation permit during official hol idays, weekends and lunchtimes 
 
All of these incentives regulated by the Law are ap plied to foreign investors as well. There is no 
discrimination between foreign and domestic investo rs in terms of application of the incentives. 
According to the aforementioned Law, foreign invest ors can freely invest in tourism sector without 
any restriction. In addition, foreign investors are subject to the same requirements and conditions 
applied to the domestic investors in lin e with the related regulation.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 92  
 
 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON REPORT BY TURKEY (W/TPR/G/192) 
 I. INTRODUCTION  (1) MACROECONOMIC POLICIES AND DEVELOPMENT 
 
(iii) Enhancement of the private sector’s role in the economy  Question (The Unites States)  
 
 Page 11, paragraph 44:  Please describe the current  ownership structure of Turk Telecom.  What 
percentage (if any) do foreigners hold and what is  the current statutory limit on foreign investment in 
telecommunications licensees?  Please also indicate whether Turk Telecom continues to provide any 
services on a monopoly basis, what such services are, and when said monopoly is scheduled to end.   Answer: 55 % of Turk Telekom shares were transferred to  the consortium composed of OGER TELECOM and 
TELECOM ITALIA when the deal was closed on No vember 14, 2005 with the signing of the Share 
Sale Agreement and Shareholders Agreement (State-h eld shares represent 45 % of the total shares). 
  An investment friendly framework was designed in th e initiation of the privatization of Turk Telekom : 
• No limitation on foreign ownership,  
• Liberalised telecom market as of 01.01.2004,  
• Fully independent regulatory bodies,  
• Government’s commitment to understand investor needs.  
Turk Telekom is not monopoly in  providing any kind of services. 
 
II. TRADE POLICIES 
 (1) IMPLEMENTATION OF WTO AGREEMENTS 
 
(i) Trade in goods /Technical Barriers to Trade 
 
Question (the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan
, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu):  
 (page 16, paragraphs 77-78) 
The report states that "In order to render the distri bution of notifications timely and effective, and 
information about draft regulations easily accessed by all actors of trade, the notifications have been 
exchanged by means of electronic communication sin ce the end of 2002. To complement this process, 
in 2006, a website www.teknikengel.gov.tr has been introduced in order to ensure the efficient 
administration of that notification system."  Howeve r, this website has only one page of information 
in English and our business community has been ha ving some difficulty in accessing the information 
they need.  
Could Turkey please provide details of the system for exchanging notifications electronically.  
How can our business community more easily gain access via the Internet to the latest Turkish 
standards and technical regulations? 
 
Answer: 
The TBT notification mechanism provides an opportun ity to national stakeholders (enterprises, 
institutions etc.) to get acquainted with dynamic c onditions of market access in other countries. It 
particularly aims that domes tic companies can make necessary and timely arrangements to comply  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 93 
 
 
 with changing entry requirements. It also gives opport unity to examine various technical regulations 
before they are adopted, and provide comments in an early stage.  
To better operate this system, timely and effective distribution of those TBT notifications to national 
stakeholders is important. To facilitate this, a website www.teknikengel.gov.tr  has been introduced. 
By signing in to this website, stakeholders specify  their product group and/or country of interest.  
 
Thus, when a notification at the specified group or country received through the WTO, it is 
transferred automatically to the e-mail of the stakeholders. Request for full text and sending 
comments for a specific TBT notification may be done via website. 
 
All Turkish legislation have been published in the official journal and put to website of the relevant 
Ministry. The most convenient way to receive that information is to contact Turkish Enquiry Point via 
your national Enquiry Points or send requests directly through e-mail ( tbt@dtm.gov.tr ).  
 (i) Trade in goods / investment 
 
Question (Chile):
 
 
Paragraph 81: Could the delegation of Turkey pl ease provide more background on the implementation 
of the Investment Encouragement Programme (IEP), and more specifically on the measures aimed at 
encouraging, supporting and orienting investme nts relating to environmental research and 
development and environmental protection b ased on provisions of related legislation? 
Answer: 
Within the objectives and the scope of the progr am, based on the current legislation investment 
activities related to research and development (R&D) and environmental protection can benefit from 
the following encouragement measures:  
(i) Exemption from customs duties  
(ii) VAT exemption for imported and locally purchased machinery and equipment;  
(iii) "interest support", by certain percentage points of the interest rate, on credits obtained on 
commercial terms by investors to finance their investment projects. 
For a detailed description of the IEP (legisla tive basis, scope, purpose, eligibility criteria) and 
encouragement measures (terms and conditions) of fered under the program, please refer in the 
Secretariat Report to section III(2)(iii)( c ) (WT/TPR/S/192, p.33, para.22-23) and section III(4)(i) 
(WT/TPR/S/192, p.62, para.110-111).  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 94  
 
 (iii) Trade-related intellectual property rights 
Question (Canada) 
 
page 19, paragraph 98:According to the Report by Turkey, "[a] Twinning Project "To Support 
Turkey’s Efforts in the Full Alignment and Enforc ement in the Field of Intellectual Property Rights 
with a Focus on Fight Against Piracy"" has been  initiated in May 2006 and scheduled to end by 
November 2007".   
Canada would be grateful for a status report on the Project and, if possible, a summary of its findings 
in relation to the fight against piracy. 
 
Answer:   
Please see answer to the Question (The United St ates) concerning Page 73: paragraphs 140-146 of 
the Secretariat Report.  
(2) TURKEY’S ACCESSION PROCESS TO THE EU 
 (ii) Turkey’s current status of harmonization with the EC policies 
 
Question (Chile) 
 
 
Paragraph 122: Turkey mentions that it will align itself progressively with the preferential customs 
regime of the Community.  In this connection, could Turkey please tell us:  
Where do the tariffs applied by Turkey to agricu ltural products, processed agricultural products and 
fisheries products (extracted and processed) curren tly coincide with those of the EU, and where do 
they differ? 
Are there products that are exempted from this alignment?  If so, what are they? 
 
Is there an established programme with a specific  time-frame for the comple te alignment of the two 
preferential regimes?  If so, what is it? 
 
Answer: Turkey accepted to harmonize its agricultural polic y with Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of 
European Union (EU) within the context of Ankara Agreement signed on 12 September 1963. 
Moreover, in Article 33 of the Additional Protocol , which is based on the Ankara Agreement entered 
into force on 1 January 1973, it was indicated that over  a period of twenty-two years Turkey shall 
adjust its agricultural policy with a view to adopting,  at the end of that period, those measures of the 
common agricultural policy which must be applie d in Turkey if free movement of agricultural 
products between it and the Community is to be achieved .  In this respect, albeit in a slow pace, the 
process of Turkey’s harmonization to the CAP is s till underway, however, the process is envisaged to 
be completed after the full membership.  As a result, within the context of the Associa tion Council Decision No. 1/95, signed in 1995, 
establishing Customs Union between Turkey and Eur opean Union, Processed Agricultural Products 
(PAP) system is established in Turkey and a preferentia l trade regime is in force since 1996 between 
the parties. In that framework, Turkey aligned its import regime accordingly and abolished its custom 
duties for industrial components of PAPs originati ng in European Union, however, it continues to 
apply its own customs duties for the agricultura l components of PAPs, agricultural products and 
fisheries. Therefore, Common Customs Tariff of the EU is applied for industrial components of PAPs 
vis-à-vis the third countries. Besides, the harmoni zation of agricultural policy in Turkey with CAP is   WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 95 
 
 
 still an on-going process in the context of EU ac cession negotiations and also in the context of 
Agricultural Negotiations in the Doha Round.  On the other hand, according to Article 16 of Association Council Decision No. 1/95, Turkey is 
obliged to sign Free Trade Agreements (FTA) as it aligns itself progressively with the preferential 
customs regime of the Community. However, Turk ey’s preferential regime in basic agricultural 
products, fisheries products and PAPs do not coincide with those of the EU. Generally, in Free Trade 
Agreements for the preferential regime in the aforementioned products, each Party makes 
negotiations with the partner countries in the c ontext of its own interests, priorities, needs and 
positive list approach is used.  
 
Lastly, there is not an established programme with a specific time-frame for the complete alignment 
of the two preferential regimes. Nevertheless, further integration in trade of agricultural products is 
foreseen within the negotiation process with the EU. 
 
Question (Chile):
 
Paragraph 126: Graph 1 lists the countries with wh ich Turkey has concluded free trade agreements.  
Could Turkey provide more background informati on on its experience in the administration and 
implementation of those agreements?  
Answer: 
Turkey has 15 years of experience in free trade agr eements (FTA) and its first FTA was signed with 
the EFTA countries in 1991. Moreover, has conclude d 22 FTAs up until now (10 of these Agreements 
concluded with the Middle and Ea st European countries were abolished in 2004 with their accession 
to the EU). The Joint or Association Committees, which are established by the FTAs, are responsible 
for the administration and implementation of th ese agreements. These committ ees are also working as 
a dispute settlement body.  
 The Agreements also contain provisions with reg ard to specific issues and hence envisage the 
inclusion of other related institutions in the impl ementation of these specific provisions. For example, 
concerning the rules of origin, in Turkey, the Undersecretariat fo r Customs is responsible for the 
issues like origin of goods, movement certificate and cumulation of origin. Besides, regarding the 
tariff rates, the General Directorate of Imports  of the Undersecretariat for Foreign Trade is 
responsible for the proper implementation of the preferential tariffs applied to the FTA countries.  
 
Question (Chile):
 
 
Paragraph 126: Graph 1 names the countries with which Turkey is currently negotiating free trade 
agreements.  Could Turkey bring us up to date on the status of those negotiations? 
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 96  
 
 Answer: 
Turkey's free trade agreements  
No. Country Date of Signatory Entry into Force The gradual abolition of 
customs duties on 
industrial products 
 EU 
- Customs Union  - ECSC 
- Agriculture: JCD 1/98  
06.03.1995 25.07.1996 
25.02.1998  
31.12.1995 01.08.1996 
01.01.1998  
- 31.12.1995 
- 01.08.1999 
 -  (Agricultural 
Product)  
1 EFTA 10.12.1991 01.04.1992 01.01.1999 
2 Israel 14.03.1996 01.05.1997 01.01.2000 
3 Macedonia 07.09.1999 01.09.2000 01.01.2008 
4 Croatia 13.03.2002 01.07.2003 01.01.2007 
5 Bosnia and Herzegovina 03.07.2002 01.07.2003 01.01.2007 
6 Palestine 20.07.2004 01.06.2005 01.06.2005 
7 Tunisia 25.11.2004 01.07.2005 01.07.2014 
8 Morocco 07.04.2004 01.01.2006 01.01.2015 
9 Syria 22.12.2004 01.01.2007 01.01.2019 
10 Egypt 27.12.2005 01.03.2007 01.01.2020 
11 Albania 22.12.2006    - On the 5th year after the 
entry into force.  
12 Georgia 21.11.2007    - Upon the entry into force 
Turkey’s ongoing free trade agreement negotiations 
 Country First Round of Negotiations Last Round of negotiations 
1 Faeroe Islands 6-7 March 2000, Ankara - 
2 
Lebanon 14-15 July 2003, Beirut IV. round of negotiations held in Ankara, 3-4 June 
2006 
3 
Jordan 28-29 June 2005, Ankara V. round of negotiations held in Ankara, 5-6 November 
2007 
4 
Gulf Cooperation Council 15 November 2005, Riyadh II. round of negotiations held in Ankara, 13-14 April 
2006 
5 Montenegro 24-25 May 2007, Kolasin II. round of negotiations held in Ankara, 8-9 October 
2007 
6 Serbia 5-6 December 2007, Ankara - 
 
Question (Brazil):  
According to the Government Report (WT/TPR/G /192), in paragraph 124, under Turkey's GSP 
regime, "preferences are granted to industrial goods and some agricultural goods (...) classified 
according to their 'sensitivity'".  How is this "s ensitivity" determined?  How does the methodology 
differ from the EC GSP, with which Turkey aims to  align itself?  In Turkey's GSP, is there any 
provision for "graduation" of count ry or products?  If positive, how is this provision implemented?  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 97 
 
 
 Answer: 
As part of the Customs Union Decision (CUD) , Turkey initiated it’s Generalized System of 
Preferences (GSP) by adopting EC’s GSP regime on  1 January 2002 and extended the system with 
the view of aiming to align itself fully with EC ’s GSP scheme in the con secutive years. Under this 
system, preferences are granted to  the industrial products and cert ain agricultural products covered 
by the CUD. In 2006, Turkey has fully adopted the EC's GSP regime in terms of its results. Regarding 
the "graduation" and "sensitivity" mechanisms, Tu rkey’s application is based on the EC’s system.  
III. DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKISH FOREIGN TRADE  
(2)  TRADE DEVELOPMENTS BY REGIONS, COUNTRIES, REGIONAL 
 ORGANIZATIONS 
(iii) By sectors 
Question (The European Communities)  
Turkey's report, page 31, para. 185 
Turkey indicates that the share of medium and high tech products in Turkish exports moved up from 
26% to 35%.  
 
Could Turkey define the sc ope of high tech products? 
Answer: 
The scope of medium and high tech products a re determined according to the "classification on 
manufacturing industries based on technology" en visaged by the OECD in its report on Science, 
Technology and Industry Scoreboard, 2007. In this context, especially, the product groups listed 
under "the high-technology industries" and "medium- high-technology industries" classifications are 
taken into account. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 98  
 
 ANNEX 1 
 
I. REAL ESTATE ACQUISITION OF FOREIGN REAL PERSONS IN TURKEY 
Real estate acquisition of foreign real and legal pe rsons has been regulated in the article 35 of the 
Land Registry Law numbered 2644 and with the amending law numbered 5444.  New fundamental 
principles was regulated with this amending law as regards the acquisition of real estate by foreign 
real persons and trade companies having legal personality and established in foreign countries 
according to the laws of these countries.  
New form of the article 35 of the Land registry Law is as follows: "With the reservation of reciprocity and complian ce with legal restrictions, foreign real person can 
acquire real estates for the purposes of using as residence or business aims in Turkey that are 
separated and registered for these purposes in th e implemented development plans or localized 
development plans. The same conditions shall be sti pulated in the establishment of limited real rights 
on real estates. The total area of the real estates and limited real rights on real estates that a real 
person of foreign nationality can acquire all over the country can not exceed 25.000 m2. Within the 
same conditions set out in this paragraph Council of Ministers is authorized to increase the area up to 
30 hectares.        
Companies having legal personality established in fo reign countries according to the laws of these 
countries can acquire real estates and limited real rights on real estates in Turkey according to the 
provisions of special laws.     
In case of establishing mortgage in Turkey in favor of foreign real persons and trading companies 
having legal personality established in foreign countri es according to the laws of these countries the 
conditions and restrictions set out in first  and second paragraphs shall not be applied. 
With the exception of foreign real persons and trad ing companies having legal personality established 
in foreign countries according to the laws of these countries, no one can acquire real estates and 
limited real rights on real estates in Turkey.  
 For the real estates acquired through legal inheritan ce by citizens of a country that have reciprocity 
with Republic of Turkey, the conditions and restricti ons set out in the first paragraph shall not be 
applied. For the real estates acquisition by means of transactions depending on death apart from 
legal inheritance, the conditions and restrictions set out in the above paragraphs shall be applied. 
Real estates and limited real rights on real estates acquired through legal inheritance by citizens of 
countries that do not have reciprocity with Republic of Turkey shall be liquidated after their transfer 
transactions are performed.     
De jure and de facto circumstances shall be taken as basis in determination of reciprocity. In 
implementation of this principle for the citizens of countries that have not granted land ownership 
rights, it's stipulated that the rights granted by a foreign country for real estate acquisition to its own 
citizens should also be granted to citizens of the Republic of Turkey. 
  
The Council of Ministers is authorized to determin e the places where foreign real persons and trading 
companies having legal personality established in fo reign countries according to the laws of these 
countries can not acquire real estates and limited real ri ghts on real estates within the areas in terms 
of  irrigation, energy, agriculture, mine, and protect ed areas,  and belief an d cultural featured areas 
and special protection areas and touchy areas due to flora and fauna features, strategic areas due to 
public interests and country security by means of the proposals of relevant public institutions and 
organizations with registry based coordinated m aps and plans, and the rate of the areas where  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 99 
 
 
 foreign real persons can acquire real estates not more  than 5 per thousand according to the provinces 
and provinces’ areas. Proposals of the public ins titutions and organizations within these scope shall 
be examined, appreciated and submitted to the Council of Ministers by means of a commission that 
carries out studies within the authority set out in this paragraph and constitutes of relevant 
representatives of administration in the structure of the ministry t hat General Directorate of Land 
Registry and Cadastre is related to. 
Map and coordinate values concerning the military forbidden zones, military and private security 
zones and strategic zones that are determined aft er the enforcement of this law and their alterations 
shall be given without any delay by the Ministry of National Defense to the ministry that General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre is related to. 
The parcels needed to be expropriated or to be an notated on land register due to be in the areas 
determined in the above paragraphs shall be no tified by relevant institutions to relevant Land 
Registry Offices.  
  The real estates and limited real rights on real estates acquired contrary to the provisions of this 
article or determination of misuse according to  the purpose of acquisition without legal necessity 
shall be converted to value and paid to owner of unless the real estates liquidated by the owner within 
the period given by Ministry of Finance."        
I.1. RECIPROCITY PRINCIPLE   
In the new regulation, instead of exact equivalent implementation of reciprocity principle, it's 
stipulated that the rights given by a foreign country  to its own citizens or trade companies having legal 
personality and established according to its own laws , should also be given to citizens and trade 
companies of the Republic of Turkey. 
The Council of Ministers expressed what should be understood from the reciprocity principle in its 
decision dated May 29, 1940 and num bered 2/13394. According to th is decision, in addition to 
legislative regulation of reciprocity principle, pr actical applicability of it is also required for its 
existence. By this decision, in which it's taken in to consideration that reciprocity in law will not 
indicate actual situation, restrictions encountered in  a foreign country by the citizens of the Republic 
of Turkey, in case of their application, are want ed to be taken as a basis in implementation of 
reciprocity. Therefore, for the existence of reciprocity between our country and a foreign country 
about real estate acquisition, reciprocity must be both in law and in practice. According to this principle, for real estate acquisition of a foreign count ry's citizen or trade company in our country, the 
citizens and trade companies of the Republic of Turk ey should also have the right to acquire real 
estate in this foreign country and this right mu st be accepted by laws and must be practically 
applicable. 
I.2. EXCEPTIONS OF RECIPROCITY PRINCIPLE 
Although the first condition is reciprocity for real estate acquisition of foreign real persons in our 
country, reciprocity principle has some exceptions in terms of real persons. These exceptions are as 
follows:  
a. Since haymatlos persons have no state citizenship , there isn't any state to decide about reciprocity. 
For this reason, haymatlos persons are exempted from reciprocity principle. 
b. According to the article 7/2 of "Convention on Legal Situation of Ref ugees" dated July 28, 1951 
and ratified by Turkey with the law dated A ugust 26, 1961 and numbered 359, the refugees are 
exempted from reciprocity principle in a country after three years of residence. The refugees in WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 100  
 
 Turkey are also subjected to the same provision. It  is enough for refugees to prove this situation with 
an official document for exemption. 
c. According to the article 8/E of the Law for En couragement of Tourism numbered 2634, foreign real 
and legal persons who want to ma ke investment for tourism objective in Turkey, can acquire real 
estate by the decision of the Council of Ministers in  tourism areas and centers being exempted from 
reciprocity principle and restrictions formulated for foreigners. 
I.3. LEGAL RESTRICTIVE PROVISIONS 
The second condition for real estate acquisition of fore ign real persons in our country is to comply 
with restrictive provisions involved in law. Some r estrictions are involved in our laws concerning real 
estate acquisition of foreigners. These restrictive provisions are as follows: 
a. According to regulations involved in the Military Forbidden Zones and Security Zones Law 
numbered 2565 which restricts geographically real estate acquisition of foreigners in our country, it is 
not possible to sell, transfer and rent real estate lo cated within military forbidden zones and security 
zones, to foreign real and legal persons. 
b. According to the article 35 of the Land Regist ry Law numbered 2644, foreign real persons can not 
acquire real estate more than 2,5  hectares in  our country, however for acquisition up to thirty 
hectares, decision of the Council of Ministers is requi red. Legal inheritance is exception of this rule.  
I.B. REAL ESTATE ACQUISITION OF FOREIGN TRADE COMPANIES HAVING 
 LEGAL PERSONALITY IN TURKEY 
Companies having legal personality established in fo reign countries according to the laws of these 
countries can acquire real estates and limited real rights on real estates in Turkey according to the provisions of special laws. 
Relevant special laws: 
- Law for Encouragement of Tourism numbered 2634 
-  Petroleum Law numbered 6326 
- Industry Regions Law numbered 4737 
In case of establishing mortgage in Turkey in favor  of foreign real persons and trading companies 
having legal personality established in foreign countries according to the laws of these countries the 
conditions and restrictions set out in first and second paragraphs shall not be applied. 
With the exception of foreign real persons and tr ading companies having lega l personality established 
in foreign countries according to the laws of these countries, no one can acquire real estates and 
limited real rights on real estates in Turkey.  
I.C. REAL ESTATE ACQUISITION OF FOREIGN CAPITAL COMPANIES   
The expression of "foreign capital companies" is usually confused with the expression of "foreign 
company".  
First of all, it should be stated that "foreign capital companies" are established according to the 
provisions of the Turkish Trade Law in Turkey and enrolled in Turkish Trade Register. In other 
words, these countries are subjected to the legal provisions of the Republic of Turkey. Only, the 
whole or part of their capital belongs to forei gn real and legal persons. Availability of foreign 
shareholders within the company will not include it within the status of foreign legal personality; 
because nationality of the company and nationality of its shareholders are different matters.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 101 
 
 
 The Law for Encouragement of Foreign Capita l numbered 6224 and dated January 18, 1954 was 
repealed by Foreign Direct Investment Law number ed 4875 and dated June 5, 2003 that entered into 
effect being published in the Official Gazette  numbered 25141 and dated June 17, 2003, new 
provisions were adopted to encourage and increase foreign direct investments, to protect rights of 
foreign investors, and to transform permission and ratification system to informative systems in realization of foreign investments. 
With regard to the subject, a circular num bered 1363-100/841 and dated August 7, 2003 was 
announced to all our units through our regional di rectorates and it was stated that implementation 
would be carried out within the framework of the following statements. By the Foreign Direct Investment Law numbered 4875, foreign investors are subjected to equal 
treatment with domestic investors; permissions and ratifications like investment permissions, 
company establishment permissions, were removed.  Moreover, companies having legal personality 
that foreign investors participate in or establish, in  our country, are allowed to acquire real estate or 
limited real rights in areas where acquisition of these rights is allowed for Turkish Citizens. 
Companies established according to the repealed Law numbered 6224 or that will act according to the 
Law numbered 4875 which is about the activities of foreign capital companies in our country, are considered as companies of the Republic of Turk ey, according to criteria of establishment place or 
administration center. For this reason, real est ate acquisition and other demands concerning land 
register of foreign capital companies that either obt ained activity permission according to the repealed 
Law for Encouragement of Foreign Capital or will act according to the Foreign Direct Investment 
Law numbered 4875, are concluded by releva nt Land Registry Offices implementing the same 
methods and rules as for companies established accord ing to the Turkish Trade Law, after examining 
authorization documents given by the Trade Register Authorities that indicate the competent person and competence for real estate acquisition of the company. 
II. TRANSFER 
It is free to transfer through banks and private fi nancial institutions, revenue  and value of sale earned 
from real estate and real rights acquired by foreigne rs with or without exchange of foreign currency. 
III. AUTHORITY OF APPLICATIONS 
By the article 26 of the Land Registry Law numbered 2644, the duty and authorization to regulate 
contracts concerning property and real rights excluding property were given to Land Registry Offices. 
Foreigners who want to acquire real estate or benefit from real rights apart from property will make 
their applications to the Land Registry Office where the real estate is located.  
Detailed information about the subject can be provi ded from the General Directorate of Land Registry 
and Cadastre. 
IV. REQUIRED DOCUMENTS FOR APPLICATION  
There is no difference between Turkish citizens and foreigners in terms of required documents for 
application.  
IV.A. In terms of Real Persons,  
a. Title deed of the real estate if available, othe rwise a document indicating the city block and parcel 
of the real estate or verbal statement of the owner.  
b. Identity card or passport of foreigner given by  his/her own country and two small photographs.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 102  
 
 c. If the person applying for demand is representative,  a power of attorney of the representative, and 
identity card with photograph, two small photographs  of the representative, and if some of the 
purchasers are not present during the transacti on, identity card with photograph, two small 
photographs and power of attorney of the representati ves that represent the purchasers, are required.  
IV.B. In terms of Legal Persons  
a. Companies established according to the Forei gn Direct Investment La w numbered 4875 will show 
competence document given by Turkish Trade Re gistry, a document given to the person assigned 
basing on this, and signatures certificate.  
b. Foreign trading companies estab lished in foreign countries according to their laws are required, in 
compliance with the legislation of their country, to  show a document having the effect of competence 
document given by relevant authorities.  
With regard to charges and taxes required to be  paid in the course of transactions, there is no 
difference between persons of foreign nationality an d citizens of the Republic of Turkey. However, 
when asking the competent military post to determin e whether the real estate demanded by real or 
legal person of foreign nationality is located out of  Military Forbidden Zones and Security Zones or 
not, if any control in the field is needed to mark  on map of 1/25000 scale where the real estate is, a 
kind of service value will be paid according to transaction named "showing the parcel in its place. 
Source: General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre.  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 103 
 
 
 ANNEX 2 
 
FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ANKARA   CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
(01.01.2006-31.12.2006) 8
48
0
241
51415
61
0
265
6170
1
0
16
474
21
0
144
3581
23
0
27
653
9
0
41
797
7
0
37
68
0100200300400500600700
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Number of decision Imprisonment Acquittal
Number of accused Judicial fine DismissalOthers
Source: Turk authorities. 
 
FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ANKARA   CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
(01.01.2007-26.11.2007) 3
20
0
137
3356
25
0
185
4250
0
0
18
470
6
0
92
2104
13
0
13
381
5
0
35
471
1
0
27
83
050100150200250300350400450
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Number of decision Imprisonment Acquittal
Number of accused Judicial fine DismissalOthers
Source: Turk authorities. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 104  
 
 Figures on the Decision of Ankara – Criminal Court of Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights 
 Decree-Law 
N° 551 on 
patent/utility 
model Decree-Law 
N° 554 on 
industrial 
designs Decree-Law 
N° 555 on 
geographical 
indications Decree-Law 
N° 556 on 
trademarks Law on 
intellectual and 
artistic works 
N° 5846 
 2006 
Number of decision 8 48 0 241 514 
Number of accused 15 61 0 265 617 
Imprisonment 0 1 0 16 47 
Judicial fine 4 21 0 144 358 
Acquittal 1 23 0 27 65 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 3 9 0 41 79 
Others 7 7 0 37 68 
 2007 
Number of decision 3 20 0 137 335 
Number of accused 6 25 0 185 425 
Imprisonment 0 0 0 18 47 
Judicial fine 0 6 0 92 210 
Acquittal 4 13 0 13 38 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 1 5 0 35 47 
Others 1 1 0 27 83 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 105 
 
 
 FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ISTANBUL 1st  CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
(01.01.2006-31.12.2006)  2
37
0
827
5282
41
0
843
6120
3
0
235
1800
3
0
384
2452
15
0
98
760
17
0
93
760
3
0
33
35
0100200300400500600700800900
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Number of decision Imprisonment Acquittal
Number of accused Judicial fine DismissalOthers
Source: Turk authorities. 
 
FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ISTANBUL 1st  CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
(01.01.2007-26.11.2007)  6
40
0
884
7987
49
0
974
9350
0
0
269
2620
7
0
463
3833
20
0
114
1434
20
0
85
1030
2
0
43
44
020040060080010001200
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Number of decision Imprisonment Acquittal
Number of accused Judicial fine DismissalOthers
Source: Turk authorities. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 106  
 
 Figures on the Decision of Istanbul – First Criminal Court of Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights 
 Decree-Law 
N° 551 on 
patent/utility 
model Decree-Law 
N° 554 on 
industrial 
designs Decree-Law 
N° 555 on 
geographical 
indications Decree-Law 
N° 556 on 
trademarks Law on 
intellectual and 
artistic works 
N° 5846 
 2006 
Number of decision 2 37 0 827 528 
Number of accused 2 41 0 843 612 
Imprisonment 0 3 0 235 180 
Judicial fine 0 3 0 384 245 
Acquittal 2 15 0 98 76 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 0 17 0 93 76 
Others 0 3 0 33 35 
 2007 
Number of decision 6 40 0 884 798 
Number of accused 7 49 0 974 935 
Imprisonment 0 0 0 269 262 
Judicial fine 0 7 0 463 383 
Acquittal 3 20 0 114 143 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 4 20 0 85 103 
Others 0 2 0 43 44 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 107 
 
 
 FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ISTANBUL 2nd  CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
(01.01.2006-31.12.2006)   1
7
0
433
4401
7
0
436
4451
0
0
117
2300
7
0
319
215
050100150200250300350400450500
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Source: Turk authorities.Number of decision Imprisonment Number of accused Judicial fine
 
 
FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ISTANBUL 2nd  CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
(01.01.2007-26.11.2007)   1
0
0
248
7191
0
0
252
7220
0
0
129
3951
0
0
123
327
0100200300400500600700800
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Source: Turk authorities.Number of decision Imprisonment Number of accused Judicial fine
 WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 108  
 
 Figures on the Decision of Istanbul – Second Criminal Court of Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights 
 Decree-Law 
N° 551 on 
patent/utility 
model Decree-Law 
N° 554 on 
industrial 
designs Decree-Law 
N° 555 on 
geographical 
indications Decree-Law 
N° 556 on 
trademarks Law on 
intellectual and 
artistic works 
N° 5846 
 2006 
Number of decision 1 7 0 433 440 
Number of accused 1 7 0 436 445 
Imprisonment 1 0 0 117 230 
Judicial fine 0 7 0 319 215 
 2007 
Number of decision 1 0 0 248 719 
Number of accused 1 0 0 252 722 
Imprisonment 0 0 0 129 395 
Judicial fine 1 0 0 123 327 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 109 
 
 
 FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ISTANBUL 3rd  CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
(01.01.2006-31.12.2006) 1
31
0
501
7250
0
0
89
850
0
0
281
4981
19
0
50
400
12
0
47
420
0
0
34
60
0100200300400500600700800
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Imprisonment AcquittalNumber of accused Judicial fine Dismissal
Others
Source: Turk authorities. 
 
FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF ISTANBUL 3rd  CRIMINAL COURT OF 
INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
(01.01.2007-26.11.2007) 5
31
0
354
7240
0
0
107
2421
1
0
130
3283
21
0
57
751
7
0
37
220
2
0
23
57
0100200300400500600700800
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Imprisonment AcquittalNumber of accused Judicial fine Dismissal
Others
Source: Turk authorities. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 110  
 
 Figures on the Decision of Istanbul – Third Criminal Court of Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights 
 Decree-Law 
N° 551 on 
patent/utility 
model Decree-Law 
N° 554 on 
industrial 
designs Decree-Law 
N° 555 on 
geographical 
indications Decree-Law 
N° 556 on 
trademarks Law on 
intellectual and 
artistic works 
N° 5846 
 2006 
Number of accused 1 31 0 501 725 
Imprisonment 0 0 0 89 85 
Judicial fine 0 0 0 281 498 
Acquittal 1 19 0 50 40 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 0 12 0 47 42 
Others 0 0 0 34 60 
 2007 
Number of accused 5 31 0 354 724 
Imprisonment 0 0 0 107 242 
Judicial fine 1 1 0 130 328 
Acquittal 3 21 0 57 75 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 1 7 0 37 22 
Others 0 2 0 23 57 
 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 111 
 
 
 FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF IZMIR 1st  CRIMINAL COURT OF
 INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
 (01.01.2006-31.12.2006)12
10
0
191
43713
15
0
232
4890
0
0
104
1920
0
0
82
18213
13
0
33
490
2
0
0
400
0
0
13
26
0100200300400500600
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Number of decision Imprisonment Acquittal
Number of accused Judicial fine DismissalOthers
Source: Turk authorities. 
 
FIGURES ON THE DECISION OF IZMIR 1st  CRIMINAL COURT OF
 INTELLECTUAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
 (01.01.2007-26.11.2007)1
2
0
134
8081
3
0
170
9070
3
0
103
5060
00
11
450
00
14
991
0
0
21
270
0
0
21
230
01002003004005006007008009001000
Decree-Law No:551 on 
Patent / Utility Model Decree-Law No:554 on
Industrial DesignsDecree-Law No:555 on
Geographical Indications Decree-Law No:556 on
Trademarks Law on Intellectual and
Artistic Works No:5846
Number of decision Imprisonment Acquittal
Number of accused Judicial fine DismissalOthers
Source: Turk authorities. WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 112  
 
 Figures on the Decision of Izmir – First Criminal Court of Intellectual and Industrial Property Rights 
 Decree-Law 
N° 551 on 
patent/utility 
model Decree-Law 
N° 554 on 
industrial 
designs Decree-Law 
N° 555 on 
geographical 
indications Decree-Law 
N° 556 on 
trademarks Law on 
intellectual and 
artistic works 
N° 5846 
 2006 
Number of decision 12 10 0 191 437 
Number of accused 13 15 0 232 489 
Imprisonment 0 0 0 104 192 
Judicial fine 0 0 0 82 182 
Acquittal 13 13 0 33 49 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 0 2 0 0 40 
Others 0 0 0 13 26 
 2007 
Number of decision 1 2 0 134 808 
Number of accused 1 3 0 170 907 
Imprisonment 0 3 0 103 506 
Judicial fine 0 0 0 11 45 
Acquittal 0 0 0 14 99 
Dismissal (because of death of accused) 1 0 0 21 27 
Others 0 0 0 21 230 
  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 113 
 
 
 ANNEX 3 
 
"Article 2 of Decree Law on the Protection of Patent Rights: 
The Protection conferred by this law is available to natural and legal pers ons who are domiciled or 
who have industrial or commercial establishments with in the territory of the Republic of Turkey, or to 
the persons entitled to file applications u nder the provisions of the Paris Convention. 
Natural or legal persons other than those referred to in the first paragraph of this present Article, who 
are nationals of the States which accord legal or de f acto protection to the nationals of the Republic of 
Turkey shall enjoy, according to the reciprocity pr inciple, patent and/or utility model protection in 
Turkey."  "Article 3 of Decree Law on the Protection of Trademarks : 
The protection conferred by this law is available to natural and legal pers ons who are domiciled or 
who have industrial or commercial establishments with in the territory of the Turkish Republic, or to 
the persons who have application ri ghts resulting from the terms of th e Paris or Bern Conventions or 
the Agreement Establishing World Trade Organisation. 
Natural or legal persons other th an those referred in the first pa ragraph of this Article, who are 
nationals of states which accord legal and de facto protection to the nationals of the Turkish Republic 
shall enjoy according to the reciprocity pr inciple trademark protection in Turkey." 
 "Article 2 of Decree Law on the Protection of Industrial Designs: 
The protection conferred by this Decree-Law is available to natural a nd legal persons who are 
domiciled or who have industrial or  commercial establishments within  the territory of the Turkish 
Republic, or to the persons who have  application rights resulting from the terms of the Paris or Bern 
Conventions or the Agreement Establishing World Trade Organization. 
Natural or legal persons other th an those referred in the first pa ragraph of this Article, who are 
nationals of states which accord legal and de facto protection to the nationals of the Turkish Republic 
shall enjoy according to the reciprocity principle design protection in Turkey." 
 
"Article 2 of Decree Law on the Protection of Geographical Indications:  
The protection conferred by this law is available to natural and legal pers ons who are domiciled or 
who have industrial or commercial establishments with in the territory of the Turkish Republic, or to 
the persons who have application ri ghts resulting from the terms of th e Paris or Bern Conventions or 
the Agreement Establishing World Trade Organization. 
(c) Natural or legal persons other than those refe rred in the first paragraph of this Article, 
who are nationals of states which accord le gal and de facto protection to the nationals 
of the Turkish Republic shall enjoy accordi ng to the reciprocity rules protection in 
Turkey." 
"Article 88 of the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works: 
 The provisions of this Law shall apply: 
1. irrespective of the nationality of the author, to all works first divulged to the public in Turkey and 
to all works in Turkey which have not been divulged to the public, as also to letters and pictures in 
Turkey;  
2. to all works of Turkish nationals which have not yet been divulged to the public or which have 
been first divulged  to the public outside Turkey;  
3. to all works of foreigners which have not yet been divulged to the public or which have been 
divulged to the public outside Turkey, provided th at an international treaty, to which Turkey is a 
party, has suitable provisions. 
Where the state of which the author is a national, grants adequate protection to the rights of Turkish 
authors or an international treaty allows exceptions and limitations with respect to the matters 
concerning foreign authors, the Council of Minist ers may agree certain excep tions to the provisions 
of subparagraphs (1) and (3) of this Article." WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
Page 114  
 
 ANNEX 4 
 
Plant production 
(Tonnes) 
  2003 2004 2005 2006 (*) 
Fruits  14,010,370 14,070,450 15,907,479 16,186,193 
Vegetables  24,018,697 23,215,577 24,320,229 25,851,612 
Field Crops  55,688,932 59,795,656 62,894,926 58,975,246 
 Cereals 30,658,000 33,957,910 36,231,600 34,642,986 
 Pulses 1,558,050 1,583,800 1,565,360 1,430,578 
 Industrial Crops 13,776,957 14,668,527 16,269,628 15,556,216 
 Oil Seeds 2,387,925 2,501,419 2,421,338 2,789,149 
 Tuber Crops 7,308,000 7,084,000 6,407,000 4,397,546 
Fodder Crops      
 Grain 5,200 NA NA NA 
 Silage maize 650,000 6,200,000 7,600,000 10,069,968 
 Green maize NA 600,000 460,000 432,868 
 Green 2,776,400 3,113,601 3,103,016 2,972,772 
 Hay 2,531,000 2,751,550 3,386,800 4,546,305 
 Seed NA 5,500 3,885 178,817 
(*) Estimated figures. 
 
Fisheries production (including aquaculture 
(Tonnes) 
  2003 2004 2005 2006 
Capture      
 Marine 463,074 504,897 380,381 488,966 
 (%) 78.8 78.3 69.8 73.9 
 Fresh Water 44,698 45,585 46,115 44,082 
 (%) 7.6 7.1 8.5 6.7 
 Total 507,772 550,482 426,496 533,048 
Aquaculture      
 Quantity 79,943 94,010 118,277 128,943 
 (%) 13.6 14.6 21.7 19.5 
Total Sum  587,715 644,492 544,773 661,997 
      
 
Forestry products 
  2003 2004 2005 2006 
Principal Products (m3)     
 Logs 2,827,007 3,065,439 2,936,168 3,479,647 
 Mine props 421,686 447,155 404,513 490,619 
 Poles 38,920 44,178 77,034 73,273 
 Industrial wood 778,103 741,393 725,911 749,951 
 Wood for paper 1,169,428 1,610,003 1,528,216 1,514,472 
 Fiber chips 2,073,150 2,329,897 2,409,446 2,964,647 
 
Livestock population and meat production 
 2003 2004 2005 2006 
 Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) 
Sheep (Domestic)   24,689,169 63,006 24,438,459 69,715 24,551,972 73,743 24,801,481 81,899 
Goat      6,516,088 11,285 6,379,900 10,182 6,284,498 12,006 6,433,744 14,077 
Goat (Mohair)   255,587 202 230,037 118 232,966 384 209,550 56 
Cow (Culture)  1,940,506 53,900 2,109,393 67,881 2,354,957 86,070 2,771,818 98,917 
Buffalo           113,356 1,709 103,900 1,950 104,965 1,577 100,516 1,774 
Horse              227,399  212,414  207,808  204,352  
Mule 92,012  83,867  81,678  75,018  
Donkey 397,540  367,739  341,377  329,475  
Camel 808 24 865 16 811 18 1,004 19 
Pig 7,090 280 4,399 174 1,934 14 1,362  
Sheep 
(Merino)   742,370  762,696  752,353  815,431  
Cow (Hybrid)   4,284,890 124,615 4,395,090 165,879 4,537,998 151,432 4,694,197 150,908 
Cow 
(Domestic)   3,562,706 111,939 3,564,863 131,240 3,633,485 84,179 3,405,349 90,881  WT/TPR/M/192/Add.1 
 Page 115 
 
 
 Poultry population and meat production 
 2003 2004 2005 2006 
 Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) Population Meat 
Production 
(Tonnes) 
Chicken (Meat) 217,133,076 862,956 238,101,895 866,862 257,221,440 925,900 286,121,360 910,226 
Chicken 
(Egg)      60,399,520 9,463 58,774,172 9,912 60,275,674 10,797 58,698,485 7,432 
Turkey 3,994,093 32,801 3,902,346 37,623 3,697,103 42,709 3,226,941 17,062 
Goose 1,336,775 21 1,250,634 51 1,066,581 5 830,081 9 
Duck        810,910 10 770,436 10 656,409 2 525,250 3 
 
Source: TURKSTAT and MARA. 
 
__________