TCA Reviews Handheld Terminals In FMCG

TURKISH COMPETITION AUTHORITY PUBLISHES SECTOR INQUIRY REPORT ON THE USE OF HANDHELD TERMINALS IN THE FAST-MOVING CONSUMER GOODS SECTOR

The Turkish Competition Authority ("Authority") published, on 12 January 2026, the "Sector Inquiry Report on Practices Regarding Handheld Terminals and Similar Devices" ("Report").

The Report sets out the competition law risks that may arise under Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition ("Law No. 4054") in connection with handheld terminals widely used in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods ("FMCG") sector, in addition to the operational efficiencies provided by such devices. Considering the Authority's increasing sensitivity towards digitalisation and data-driven practices, it is observed that the Report gives rise to significant compliance implications both for undertakings operating in the FMCG sector and for technology companies providing handheld terminal software and hardware.

The Authority initiated the sector inquiry by its decision dated 3 May 2025 and numbered 24-21/473-M. During the inquiry process, the Authority requested extensive information and documents from a large number of undertakings, including handheld terminal suppliers, FMCG manufacturers, and national retail chains. The inquiry was conducted within a broad framework encompassing all layers of the sector.

We have summarised for you the findings set out in the Report, the main risks that the use of handheld terminals may give rise to from a competition law perspective, and the compliance strategies that companies should consider in order to address these risks.

Use and Operational Role of Handheld Terminals in the FMCG Sector

In the Report, handheld terminals are defined as portable electronic devices capable of wireless data transfer, used to monitor, control, and manage processes such as production, warehousing, logistics, and field sales in a digital environment. These devices serve as a bridge between physical operations and digital management systems, enabling real-time data flows across all processes.

According to the Authority's findings, handheld terminals provide, in particular, the following operational benefits:

• Increased operational speed and efficiency: Digitalisation of order taking, shipment, invoicing, and collection processes.
• Reduction of error rates: Minimisation of errors arising from manual data entry through barcode scanning and automatic verification mechanisms.
• Real-time monitoring capability: Enabling real-time monitoring of stock, sales, and field operations.

Handheld terminals are extensively used at various stages of the FMCG supply chain, primarily in warehouse operations and field sales activities. According to the Report, these areas of use are listed as warehouse operations, field sales operations, dealer/distributor operations, merchandising and in-store display operations, return and deposit operations, food safety and regulatory compliance, and the supplier–distributor–retailer dynamic. However, the Authority draws attention to the fact that the control and data collection capacity provided by this technology may create a basis for practices that restrict competition.

Main Competition Law Risks Identified by the Authority

In the Report, the use of handheld terminals is examined under three main headings as potentially giving rise to infringement risks under Law No. 4054 under certain conditions:

1. Resale Price Maintenance

The Authority indicates that suppliers' ability to monitor, on a real-time basis, the sales prices applied by dealers through handheld terminal software may increase the risk of resale price maintenance. Monitoring dealers' compliance with pricing policies through such systems and imposing sanctions in cases of non-compliance may lead to practices that could be considered as serious infringements.

2. Territorial and Customer Restrictions

GPS and route management features available in handheld terminals technically enable dealers to sell only within certain geographical areas or to assigned customer groups. The Authority emphasises that such practices may have a restrictive effect on competition between dealers.

3. Discount Systems

The Authority acknowledges that discount and premium systems are ordinary competitive tools in commercial practice; however, it emphasises that, from a competition law perspective, the principal risk arises where such systems are implemented by undertakings holding a dominant position in a manner that produces loyalty-enhancing and exclusionary effects.

In this context, the collection of detailed dealer-level performance data through handheld terminal systems may enable the establishment of conditional, personalised, or retroactive discount mechanisms. Where applied by a dominant undertaking, such systems may create de facto exclusivity at the dealer level and make it more difficult for competitors to access the market.

Compliance Assessments and Recommendations for Companies

The Report clearly demonstrates that companies should review their handheld terminal usage practices from a competition law perspective. In this context, the main compliance steps that come to the fore are as follows:

• Data Masking and Anonymization: It is stated that transferring data collected through handheld terminals to the centre in an aggregated form, rather than at the level of individual points of sale, to the extent possible, may contribute both to reducing the risk of competition law infringements and to ensuring data security.
• Access Authorisation: It is emphasised that access to competitive parameters such as price, quantity, stock, territory, and customer information should be limited to authorised and a restricted number of personnel, and that user-based role definitions should be implemented.
• Technology and Policy Integration: It is considered that digital systems should be supported by mechanisms for lawful data processing, reporting, and alerts, and that such integration may both mitigate competition law risks and enhance operational efficiency.
• Competition Law Training: It is stated that providing regular competition law training to field sales personnel and managers regarding the use of data collected through handheld terminals, and monitoring whether such training has been effectively internalised, may play an important role in preventing potential competition-related concerns.

In addition, the Report indicates that the Authority may also consider introducing clarifying secondary legislation in order to render the competition law framework governing the use of handheld terminals more transparent and predictable, particularly with respect to practices relating to resale price maintenance and territorial and customer restrictions.

Conclusion

The Authority's Report demonstrates that data-driven control mechanisms in digitalised supply chains are closely monitored from a competition law perspective. While preserving the operational advantages provided by handheld terminals, it is of great importance to establish compliance mechanisms ensuring that such technologies are not used in a manner that restricts competition.

Companies' treatment of competition law compliance programmes as a dynamic process and their regular review of technological practices within this framework will be critical in reducing the risk of potential investigations and administrative monetary fines.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.