In Türkiye, since 15 January 2026, general-purpose AI assistants that used to answer users inside WhatsApp have been shut out under a change to Meta’s terms, while Meta’s own assistant, Meta AI, stayed in the app. On 14 May 2026 the Turkish Competition Board (Rekabet Kurulu) opened a full abuse of dominance investigation into Meta. At the same meeting it adopted an interim measure: Meta must let third-party AI chatbots offer their services on WhatsApp without making that practically or economically harder. This article covers what the Board decided and why, how the case fits with parallel proceedings in the EU, Italy and Brazil, and what startups and WhatsApp Business API users should document and watch.
What the Board decided and when
The case started on the Board’s own initiative, with a preliminary inquiry under Article 40 of Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition into the Meta economic entity (Meta Platforms, Inc., Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, WhatsApp LLC and Meta Platforms İstanbul Bilişim Hizmetleri Ltd. Şti.). Case handlers inspected Meta’s Turkish subsidiary on 31 March 2026 and sent information requests to Meta and to many AI providers, messaging services and app store operators.
| Date | Step | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| 15 October 2025 | Meta adds an “AI Providers” section to the WhatsApp Business Solution Terms (immediate effect for providers not yet on WhatsApp) | Board decision |
| 15 January 2026 | Restriction applies to providers already on WhatsApp | Board decision |
| 12 February 2026 | Preliminary inquiry opened | Decision 26-05/154-M |
| 14 May 2026 | Full investigation opened; interim measure adopted unanimously | Decisions 26-18/536-M and 26-18/536-193 |
| 5 June 2026 | The Authority announces the decisions | Authority announcement |
| One month after notification of the reasoned decision | Deadline for Meta to comply | Operative part of decision 26-18/536-193 |
The operative part of decision 26-18/536-193, adopted under Article 9(4) of Law No. 4054, orders Meta to put in place the conditions that allow third-party general-purpose generative AI chatbots and assistants to offer AI as their primary service through WhatsApp, in a way that does not make offering those services practically or economically more difficult. If the obligations are not met within one month of notification of the reasoned decision, an administrative fine under Article 17 will follow. The decision states that it can be challenged before the Ankara administrative courts within 60 days of notification of the reasoned decision.
As of November 2026, we have found no public Authority statement on whether Meta has complied, whether an Article 17 fine has been imposed or whether Meta has gone to court in Türkiye. The investigation continues.
The conduct: a “primary functionality” ban in the WhatsApp terms
The Board’s decision quotes the clause at the centre of the case. “AI Providers” are defined broadly, covering developers of large language models, generative AI platforms, general-purpose assistants and similar technologies “as determined by Meta in its sole discretion”. They are prohibited from using the WhatsApp Business Solution to offer those technologies where AI is the “primary (rather than incidental or ancillary) functionality”.
The clause itself, and the Board’s reading of it, leave several uses untouched:
- a business that uses an AI assistant built on a third-party model to handle its own customer support is not caught (the decision’s example is a travel company);
- AI providers can still send marketing, utility and authentication template messages, such as promotional messages or one-time passwords;
- a business may use an AI provider as its service provider, but may not let WhatsApp Business Solution data be used to train or improve AI models, except to fine-tune a model for its own exclusive use.
The Board’s preliminary view is that Meta, through WhatsApp, is dominant in consumer communication services, and that WhatsApp is a critical distribution channel for AI assistants, almost indispensable for providers built on third-party platform integration. With rivals excluded, Meta AI would be the only general-purpose assistant inside WhatsApp, and the data and personalisation it accumulates could lock users in before a final decision. Some providers told the Board they had abandoned launch plans.
The legal frame: Articles 6, 9, 16 and 17 of Law No. 4054
- Article 6 prohibits the abuse of a dominant position. Its examples include conduct that directly or indirectly prevents others from entering a market or makes competitors’ activities harder (Article 6(2)(a)), and using the advantages of dominance in one market to distort competition in another (Article 6(2)(d)).
- Article 9(4) allows the Board to take interim measures until the final decision where serious and irreparable harm is likely, provided the measure preserves the pre-infringement situation and does not go beyond the scope of the final decision. The Board requires a strong suspicion of infringement, not proof.
- Article 17(1)(a) provides for a daily administrative fine of five in ten thousand of the undertaking’s annual gross revenue where obligations imposed by an interim measure are not complied with. Under Article 17(2), this fine can run from the end of the compliance period.
- Article 16(3) allows a fine of up to 10% of annual gross revenue if the final decision establishes an infringement of Article 6.
If an infringement is finally established, Articles 57 and 58 allow those harmed, including competitors, to claim damages. The Board applies these general rules to digital conduct too, as our note on algorithmic pricing and competition law in Türkiye shows. A draft amendment to Law No. 4054 introducing DMA-style rules for large digital platforms has been discussed for several years, and in April 2026 the Authority announced a new study on competition rules and tools for digital markets in Türkiye. As of November 2026 we have not been able to confirm that any such amendment has been enacted, and the Meta case is proceeding under the general abuse of dominance rules. For the EU comparison, see our article on game store distribution agreements and the DMA.
The parallel cases in the EU, Italy and Brazil
The foreign cases explain why the Turkish order refers to practical and economic difficulty: after authorities intervened, Meta restored access in some markets but introduced per-message charges for AI providers.
| Authority | Key steps | Outcome so far |
|---|---|---|
| European Commission (case AT.41034) | Investigation opened 4 December 2025; Statement of Objections on interim measures 9 February 2026; supplementary objections on the paid access model 15 April 2026, extending the case to Italy | Interim measures of 9 June 2026: free access on the terms that applied before 15 October 2025, within five working days, until the final decision. Meta said it would appeal; an appeal to the EU General Court was reported in August 2026 |
| Italy (AGCM) | Investigation opened 22 July 2025 and extended 25 November 2025; interim measures 22 December 2025 | Meta restored access for Italian numbers from 30 December 2025, then charged per message from 16 March 2026. AGCM closed its national case once the Commission’s case covered Italy (Article 11(6), Regulation 1/2003; decision of 19 May 2026, published 8 June 2026) |
| Brazil (CADE) | Interim measure of 12 January 2026 suspending the new terms | Per-message fees from 11 March 2026; according to the Board’s decision, CADE found non-compliance on 18 March 2026 and imposed a daily fine. According to Brazilian press reports, a federal court in São Paulo suspended the daily fine on 29 April 2026 |
The Turkish wording appears designed to prevent that outcome: lifting the ban while charging a price with the same exclusionary effect would not satisfy it. Whether a particular fee or technical condition in Türkiye crosses that line is for the Board to decide; it has not published a view.
What it means for startups and WhatsApp Business API users
If you build a general-purpose assistant. The interim measure protects providers whose product is the AI assistant itself. It is an order addressed to Meta, not a licence for any provider; the details of restored access (onboarding, pricing, rate limits) are set by Meta under the Board’s supervision. Consumer law obligations still apply on WhatsApp: see our note on AI chatbots and consumer law. If your assistant books or pays for users, the issues in our agentic commerce article apply too.
If you use the WhatsApp Business API for your own customers. On the Board’s reading of the terms, a customer-service bot that supports your own business is incidental AI and was not the target of the ban. The clause that matters more for you is the data restriction. Check that your AI vendor contract does not allow conversation data to be used to train the vendor’s general models: that could breach WhatsApp’s terms and would raise KVKK questions as well.
For investors and acquirers. On 7 April 2026 the Authority announced a sector inquiry into the AI ecosystem (including access to critical inputs and the integration of AI into large platforms), and on 2 November 2026 an investigation and interim measure concerning Google’s AI Overviews and AI Mode. Deals involving AI startups should be screened against the Turkish merger control thresholds, and due diligence should ask how far the target depends on a single platform’s terms.
Where to start
- Map every feature that depends on WhatsApp: AI as the primary service, or AI supporting your own business?
- Keep a dated record of Meta’s terms, policy notices, onboarding refusals, fee quotes and technical restrictions, with screenshots and correspondence.
- Measure your dependence (users acquired through WhatsApp, launch plans changed, revenue at risk): the Board used such evidence to assess irreparable harm.
- If you are an affected provider, consider submitting information to the Authority; anyone with a legitimate interest may complain under Article 9(2).
- Review AI vendor and WhatsApp partner contracts for data use, training and termination clauses.
- Follow case milestones and appeal windows on our upcoming legal deadlines page.
Frequently asked questions
Does the interim measure mean ChatGPT and other assistants are automatically back on WhatsApp in Türkiye?
No. The measure obliges Meta to create the conditions for third-party general-purpose AI assistants to offer their services on WhatsApp without practical or economic obstacles, within one month of notification of the reasoned decision. Whether a given assistant returns depends on Meta’s implementation and on each provider’s choice. As of November 2026, we have found no public statement from the Authority on compliance.
Is my customer-service chatbot on WhatsApp affected?
On the Board’s reading of the WhatsApp terms, a business that uses AI to support its own customer interactions, such as answering booking questions, falls outside the ban on AI providers. What does apply is the restriction on using WhatsApp Business Solution data to train AI models, other than fine-tuning a model for your exclusive use. Check vendor contracts and data flows against that clause and KVKK.
What happens if Meta does not comply?
Article 17(1)(a) of Law No. 4054 allows the Board to impose a daily administrative fine of five in ten thousand of annual gross revenue for failure to comply with an interim measure, running from the end of the compliance period. Separately, a final finding of abuse under Article 6 can lead to a fine of up to 10% of annual gross revenue (Article 16(3)).
Can Meta challenge the decision, and does a challenge suspend it?
Yes. The decision states that it may be challenged before the Ankara administrative courts within 60 days of notification of the reasoned decision. Under Article 55 of Law No. 4054, filing a case does not stop the decision from being applied; only a stay of execution granted by the court would.
Sources. Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (Official Gazette 13 December 1994, No. 22140), Articles 6, 9, 16, 17, 40, 55, 57 and 58; Competition Board decision 26-18/536-193 of 14 May 2026 (interim measure, Meta/WhatsApp); Competition Authority announcement (5 June 2026); Anadolu Agency (5 June 2026); European Commission press release IP/26/1276 (9 June 2026), case AT.41034; AGCM provision No. 31971 (A576), Bulletin No. 23 of 8 June 2026; Competition Authority announcement on Google’s AI Overviews (2 November 2026).
This article is general information and not legal advice; a specific situation should be assessed with counsel.
