English translation of a column by Prof. Dr. Mehmet Karaçuka, originally published in Seferihisar Yeni Haber on 14 June 2026 as “Beyaz et sektöründe rekabet ihlalleri ve tüketici hakları.”
Turkey awoke yesterday to news of a major operation in the poultry industry. Reports described dawn raids involving executives of major white-meat producers and the detention of some of those executives. The matter quickly moved beyond business news to become a subject of public debate. Price increases were now being addressed through a criminal investigation and police action.
The central allegation is that, instead of competing with one another, companies coordinated prices and production quantities, weakening market competition and causing chicken prices to rise in ways that could not be explained by ordinary economic conditions. In other words, the high prices consumers encounter in supermarkets, butcher shops and markets may have reflected not only costs and demand but also coordination among producers.
As part of an investigation conducted by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, supervisory trustees were appointed to 13 companies. The firms named included AS Ofis Damızlık Yumurta and Bakpiliç Entegre Tavukçuluk in Ankara; Şenpiliç and Orvital Organik Gıda in Istanbul; Hastavuk Gıda and Keskinoğlu Tavukçuluk in Bursa; Banvit and Bupiliç in Balıkesir; Akpiliç and Erpiliç in Bolu; Gedik Tavukçuluk in Uşak; Ay-Pi Tavukçuluk in Samsun; and Lezita Gıda in İzmir.
The investigation also reportedly involved allegations of establishing a criminal organization, influencing prices and refusing to sell goods. These accusations mean that the case is no longer confined to administrative fines; it may carry serious criminal-law consequences.
This is the crucial distinction. Competition infringements in Turkey have traditionally been dealt with mainly through investigations by the Turkish Competition Authority, administrative fines and financial sanctions on businesses. Here, however, the prosecutor’s inquiry is being pursued under the Turkish Penal Code. The prosecutor’s office referred to Article 220, concerning the establishment and operation of a criminal organization or membership in one; Article 237, concerning the manipulation of prices; and Article 240, concerning refusal to sell goods or services.
This development takes the matter beyond an ordinary administrative competition-law case into the realm of potential criminal responsibility, an unusual development not only in Turkey but internationally.
But what actually happened? Did the companies breach competition rules and harm consumers, or might this case become another contested issue within Turkey’s legal system? To answer responsibly, it is necessary to look beyond the immediate controversy and examine the background. The present inquiry did not arise in a vacuum; it was preceded by a substantial Competition Authority investigation concluded in 2025.
In that earlier case, the Competition Authority examined domestic broiler-chicken sales by nine undertakings between January 2019 and July 2024. It applied statistical analysis to monthly sales volumes, revenues, costs of goods sold and operating expenses. The resulting data provided important evidence concerning the industry’s pricing behavior.
One striking observation was that the firms’ weighted-average prices for different product groups moved closely together and followed broadly parallel paths. Similar prices alone, of course, are not proof of a competition infringement. But together with other evidence, the pattern became relevant to the investigation. Of particular concern was evidence that firms had advance knowledge of one another’s stock levels, prices and promotional campaigns.
An even more notable finding concerned the gap between selling prices and costs. In competition economics this gap is often described in terms of a mark-up: the amount by which a firm can price its products above cost. Between 2019 and 2022, average total costs sometimes exceeded weighted-average prices, suggesting periods of significant cost pressure. After 2022, however, the gap widened markedly and mark-ups rose.
Put simply, producers’ profit margins appear to have increased substantially after 2022. The trend is particularly noteworthy because real costs remained relatively stable while prices rose strongly. As a result, it became increasingly difficult to explain chicken-price increases solely by rising production costs. Consumers appear to have experienced price growth faster than the underlying cost growth faced by producers.
In its decision, the Competition Board unanimously found that the undertakings had infringed Article 4 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition by exchanging competitively sensitive information. Administrative fines were accordingly imposed under Article 16(3) of the same law. Nevertheless, the companies’ defenses also deserve careful consideration; that question warrants separate analysis.
Another important distinction is that the Competition Authority’s earlier inquiry concerned nine firms, whereas the new criminal investigation involved trustees appointed to 13 companies. A substantial portion of the poultry industry has therefore become subject to supervisory management.
The Competition Board proceedings resulted in administrative sanctions, while the prosecutor’s investigation concerns potential criminal offenses. Thus the relevant questions are no longer limited to whether the firms broke competition rules; they now include whether the alleged conduct could amount to organized crime under criminal law. If proven, the case may have implications beyond poultry production for other essential markets.
The competition-law decision merits much closer economic and legal analysis, which is best reserved for another article. It is nevertheless clear that several companies named in the criminal investigation were also involved in the earlier competition proceedings, and the earlier case appears to form an important part of the evidential background.
Ultimately, this is not merely a question about the price of chicken. It is a question about whether markets operate competitively, whether consumers are protected and which instruments the state should use in response to anticompetitive conduct. The outcome of the poultry investigation may influence how competition violations and consumer rights are addressed in Turkey in the years ahead.
Original Turkish article: Seferihisar Yeni Haber — Beyaz et sektöründe rekabet ihlalleri ve tüketici hakları (14 June 2026).
