TR-TR 
EN-US 
Türkiye’s data protection and cybersecurity regimes have evolved rapidly. The Personal Data Protection Law (No. 6698, “KVKK”) – in force since 2016 – is now being amended to align more closely with the EU’s GDPR. As of June 2024, new legal grounds for processing “special categories” of data (including health, race, religion, etc.) have been added, mirroring GDPR provisions. For example, employers can now process employee health data without explicit consent when required by law (such as disabled employment requirements). Overall, the recent KVKK reforms broaden lawful bases for sensitive data and ease restrictions on cross-border transfers, indicating a clear trend toward GDPR-style regulation. In practice, organizations should review and update their data inventories, consents and privacy notices to reflect these changes and ensure that any processing of sensitive personal data is backed by the newly permissible legal bases.
Turkish law explicitly requires data controllers to adopt “all necessary technical and organisational measures” to protect personal data. While no single encryption standard is mandated, guidelines emphasize strong security frameworks. For instance, Turkish regulators have recommended that large-scale data controllers implement advanced measures – including recognised encryption methods for data in transit and at rest – especially when handling sensitive or health-related information. Sectoral rules reinforce this: healthcare providers must use encrypted channels (e.g. the KamuNet network) for medical data, and recent advisories urge encryption and multi-factor controls for cloud storage of personal data. In short, deploying robust encryption and related cyber-hygiene practices is considered best practice under KVKK security obligations, even if not spelled out as a specific “encryption law.”
VERBİS Registry and Enforcement
Under KVKK, certain organizations must register in Türkiye’s Data Controllers’ Registry Information System (VERBİS). Domestic controllers exceeding thresholds (over 50 employees or a TRY 100 million balance sheet) or processing special personal data must register, and all foreign controllers processing Turkish data are likewise required to register. Notably, any company transferring Turkish personal data abroad is deemed a Turkish data controller and must meet VERBİS obligations. The hard deadline for initial registration (31 Dec 2021) has passed, and regulators now rigorously enforce compliance. Companies that register late or fail to register face steep fines for each year of delay. For example, even a foreign firm with a single employee in Türkiye and no direct commercial activity was recently fined for a two-month registration delay.
Enforcement trends underline the need for vigilance: the Turkish DPA has begun publishing breach notices and levying substantial penalties. As of a recent report, the Authority received over 1,300 breach notifications and imposed roughly TRY 463.8 million (about €13.3 million) in administrative fines on violators. The fine schedule has also been updated – in 2025 the maximum penalty for failing security obligations or registration is around TRY 13.6 million (approximately €700,000). Companies operating from the UK or USA with any Turkish data exposure (employees, customers, cloud storage, etc.) should immediately verify VERBİS registration. Given the regulatory focus, failure to comply with VERBİS now brings compounded risks (registration plus data transfer violations).
Cross-Border Data Transfers
Türkiye’s cross-border data transfer rules have historically been strict. Under KVKK Article 9, transfers are allowed only with explicit data subject consent or if one of the KVKK legal grounds applies in a country where an adequacy decision is in place. Since Turkey has not yet declared any country “safe” via adequacy decisions, and historically few undertakings were approved, many companies relied on consent. However, the March 2024 amendments (effective June 2024) significantly liberalized the framework. New provisions allow transfers if based on valid legal grounds and one of several safeguards is met: an adequacy decision (if adopted in future), binding corporate rules (BCRs) approved by the Turkish authority, or a standard data transfer agreement published by the authority. In practice, the “standard agreement” mechanism functions like GDPR’s standard contractual clauses: companies can execute the model contract and simply notify the DPA within five business days (no prior permission needed).
Aside from these structured mechanisms, the law still permits occasional transfers in specific cases (e.g. explicit informed consent, contractual necessity, vital interests). Notably, the legal amendments introduced a short transition: consent-based transfers that were in place before 1 June 2024 remain valid until 1 September 2024. After that date, companies must rely on the new safeguards. Non-compliance has consequences: even routine transfers now require a formal legal basis and in many cases a notification to KVKK. For UK/US firms, this means that simply using “adequate privacy protections” is not enough — one must use an approved transfer tool. In summary, post-2024, cross-border transfers require one of the Article 9 safeguards, and using the standard contracts or BCRs demands notifying the KVKK, while ad hoc transfers can only occur under limited exceptions.
Breach Notification and Incident Response
KVKK imposes strict breach reporting duties. Data controllers must notify the KVKK Authority “within 72 hours of becoming aware” of a personal data breach. In addition, affected individuals should be informed “within a reasonable time”. These requirements are codified in the law and reinforced by a DPA Board decision (2019) mandating that controllers have an incident response plan and clear notification procedures. In practice, companies should prepare a written breach-response protocol, conduct timely impact assessments, and file reports to the Authority promptly.
Failure to comply carries penalties. For example, not notifying the Authority can trigger fines under Article 18 of KVKK: the maximum fine for neglecting security or reporting duties is in the millions of lira. Enforcement data show this is taken seriously: hundreds of breach reports have been made public, and high-profile fines (totalling over TRY 460 million) have been imposed on errant controllers. In one notable case, a large company was penalized for delayed breach notification. By contrast, firms with mature compliance programs have avoided sanction by demonstrating swift notification and mitigation. International businesses should therefore build breach response drills and ensure their Turkish operations include notification checklists, mirroring GDPR-style requirements to reduce liability.
Encryption and Secure Communications
Beyond data protection, Türkiye regulates the use of encryption in communications. Under the Electronic Communications Law (No. 5809) and implementing regulations, entities that produce or provide encrypted communication services (such as secure messaging platforms, encrypted telecom equipment, etc.) must comply with BTK (the communications regulator) rules. A specific regulation (“Principles on Coded or Encrypted Communications”) requires service providers to notify BTK and furnish technical details about their encryption systems. Importantly, distributing encryption without authorization is penalized: violators can face jail terms (roughly 500–1,000 days) and administrative fines up to 3% of annual revenue. (These sanctions derive from Article 10 of the Encryption Regulation and Articles 60–63 of Law 5809.)
For most businesses handling data (outside of telecom operators), the electronic communications rules mean that any product or service offering end-to-end encryption must be carefully vetted. For example, if a U.S. software firm wishes to launch an encrypted messaging app in Türkiye, it must register the app with BTK and provide required keys – otherwise it risks legal exposure. That said, simply using strong encryption for data security is not prohibited; rather, the law seeks to ensure government access capabilities. In fact, Turkish data protection guidance advises companies to use encryption as a core security measure: regulatory recommendations for sensitive data explicitly encourage “internationally recognised encryption programs” and cryptographic protection of cloud-stored data. In practice, this dual regime means: (a) businesses should employ robust encryption to safeguard personal data (as a technical measure under KVKK), and (b) any telecom or cybersecurity products involving encryption must comply with BTK’s licensing or notification rules.
Cybersecurity Act No. 7545 (2025)
On 19 March 2025, Türkiye enacted its first comprehensive Cybersecurity Law (No. 7545). This law establishes a central Cybersecurity Directorate and Council, empowers regular security audits, and imposes mandatory resilience measures for public institutions and critical sectors. Key provisions include: mandatory penetration testing and security audits for entities in designated critical infrastructure sectors, creation of special Cyber Incident Response Teams (SOMEs) at public agencies, and requirement for cyber-vendors to obtain Directorate approval before operating. Service providers must now report vulnerabilities or attacks promptly to the Directorate and submit requested technical information on demand.
The law also introduces severe penalties to enforce compliance. For example, operating without required cybersecurity authorization is punishable by 2–4 years imprisonment or fines of TRY 1–10 million; causing damage to critical infrastructure by cyberattacks carries 8–12 years’ jail. Illegally sharing or selling sensitive data incurs 3–15 years’ imprisonment. Even companies failing to implement mandated cybersecurity measures or failing to report incidents can face administrative fines (from TRY 1–10 million) or penalties up to 5% of annual turnover. Existing rules (e.g. in ICTA regulations) remain in effect until detailed regulations under the new law are issued.
For UK/US companies, the new law means that any Turkish operations or critical services must evaluate applicability. Multinationals in finance, energy, health or tech should audit whether they fall under “critical sector” definitions (for instance, telecom, banking and public utilities are included). If so, they must prepare for mandatory security audits, ensure executive accountability for cybersecurity, and comply with any certification/authorization regimes introduced by the Directorate. Notably, cross-border controllers should note that Turkish cybersecurity law focuses on infrastructure and products – it does not directly override KVKK data rules, but both regimes share the goal of data confidentiality. A proactive compliance approach would integrate the new cybersecurity requirements (penetration testing, incident reporting, secure certification) with existing data protection programs.
Illustrative Compliance Scenarios
- VERBİS Registration: A global retail firm headquartered in the UK transfers Turkish customer data to its central servers. Turkish authorities found that the firm had not registered in VERBİS despite being a data controller for Turkish data. The company promptly filed its VERBİS registration and updated its records; under KVKK this late registration remains subject to fines per year of delay. This case illustrates that even minimal Turkey-related data handling triggers registration obligations (foreign entities must register if they process Turkish data) and that authorities enforce fees for each year of non-compliance.
- Data Transfers and Legal Basis: A US healthcare software provider maintained Turkish patient data in US data centers, relying initially on patient consent. After the 2024 amendments, the consent-alone strategy became inadequate for ongoing operations. The company shifted to a contractual basis and implemented the standard transfer agreement, notifying the KVKK Authority within five days as required. They also developed an internal data subject rights procedure in line with new portability/erasure rules. This highlights the practical effect of KVKK reforms: companies must transition from blanket consent to structured transfer mechanisms and align cross-border procedures with the updated Article 9 framework.
- Breach Response: An Ankara-based subsidiary of a US tech firm suffered a cyber intrusion exposing customer records. Thanks to its compliance program, it had a breach response plan and notified the KVKK within 48 hours. The prompt action – including informing affected individuals – mitigated the impact, and the firm avoided fines. In contrast, another multinational missed the 72‑hour deadline in a similar incident and was fined for delayed notification. This contrast underscores that timely breach management is essential under Turkish law, which explicitly requires notification and permits the Authority to sanction late reporting.
- Encryption Compliance: A startup offering end-to-end encrypted messaging realized that its product fell under the Turkish communications regulations. Before launch, it liaised with the BTK to register its encryption system and provide cryptographic key details. By securing the necessary approvals, the company avoided penalties and built customer trust. This example demonstrates that, while strong encryption is encouraged for data security, providers of encrypted communication services must also navigate Türkiye’s telecom compliance regime.
In each scenario, the pattern is clear: non-compliance triggers regulatory action, whereas proactive alignment (e.g. timely VERBIS filing, using approved transfer contracts, having incident plans, registering encryption services) mitigates risk. International businesses expanding to Türkiye should therefore integrate Turkish-specific requirements into their compliance checklists, combining KVKK obligations (registration, legal bases, breach rules) with new cybersecurity mandates (security audits, incident reporting) and telecom regulations on encryption. By doing so, they can operate in Türkiye’s market while minimizing liability under the evolving legal regime.
