Foreign Company Faces Both Sanctions and Customs Investigation in Turkey: How Should the Defense Be Coordinated? (2026 Updated Guide)

A foreign company faces simultaneous sanctions and customs scrutiny in Turkey. Learn how to coordinate customs, sanctions, banking, ownership, origin, payment and criminal-risk defenses without creating contradictory evidence.

A foreign company facing both sanctions-related scrutiny and a Turkish customs investigation should not treat the two matters as independent files. The same shipment, payment, supplier, vessel, intermediary, country of origin or corporate owner may be examined from several directions at once. Customs authorities may question the declaration and movement of the goods while banks, financial institutions or public authorities examine whether the transaction involves a sanctioned person, restricted entity, prohibited destination, suspicious payment structure or possible circumvention arrangement.

The principal defense risk is inconsistency. An explanation submitted to Customs about the supplier, origin or payment structure can later be compared with bank records, commercial contracts, invoices, transport documents and statements given during a criminal investigation. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office therefore approaches simultaneous sanctions and customs investigations as a coordinated evidence and risk-management problem. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya emphasizes that the company should establish one verified transaction chronology before submitting substantive explanations to different authorities.

Why Can Sanctions and Customs Investigations Overlap?

International trade transactions involve goods, money and multiple commercial actors. A sanctions concern may therefore quickly create customs questions, while a customs irregularity may reveal facts that trigger sanctions screening.

Common triggers include a sanctioned supplier, unusual third-country routing, changes in consignee information, payments through unrelated companies, questionable certificates of origin, discrepancies between invoices and customs declarations, high-risk end users, dual-use characteristics, vessel-related concerns or sudden changes in the supply chain.

First Build a Single Transaction Timeline

The company should reconstruct the transaction from the beginning. Identify when the contract was signed, purchase order issued, goods manufactured, invoice created, payment arranged, shipment loaded, certificates issued, goods transported and customs declaration filed.

Every relevant document should fit this chronology.

Identify Every Party to the Transaction

Do not limit the review to the contractual seller and Turkish importer. Identify the manufacturer, exporter, seller, freight forwarder, carrier, vessel where relevant, consignee, customs broker, payment bank, intermediary bank, agent, distributor, end user and beneficial owners of material counterparties.

Sanctions risk can arise through a party that does not appear prominently on the commercial invoice.

Beneficial Ownership Must Be Examined

A company may not itself appear on a sanctions list while its ownership or control structure raises separate concerns. The foreign company should therefore document shareholders, ultimate beneficial owners and relevant control relationships.

Outdated ownership information can materially weaken the defense.

Preserve the Ownership Evidence

Keep corporate registry extracts, shareholder records, organizational charts and other reliable documents demonstrating the ownership structure as it existed when the transaction occurred.

A current ownership chart may not answer what the ownership position was several months earlier.

Determine Which Sanctions Regime Is Actually Relevant

The word “sanctions” should not be used generically. The company should identify the precise legal or compliance restriction causing the problem.

A Turkish legal prohibition, international restrictive measure, foreign sanctions regime applied by a correspondent bank and a bank’s internal risk policy can create very different legal consequences.

A Bank Compliance Block Is Not Automatically a Customs Violation

A Turkish or international bank may refuse or suspend a transaction because of its internal sanctions-risk policy even where Customs has not established a customs offense.

The company should distinguish commercial banking restrictions from public-law customs liability.

Customs Authorities May Examine the Goods Independently

Even if the payment ultimately clears sanctions screening, Customs may separately investigate classification, origin, customs value, documentation, licensing or other import requirements.

Resolving the banking issue does not automatically resolve the customs investigation.

Review the Customs Declaration Line by Line

Check the importer, exporter, seller, manufacturer, tariff classification, country of origin, country of dispatch, customs value, invoice number, quantity, description and supporting documents.

Small inconsistencies can become significant where authorities already suspect circumvention.

Country of Origin Is Particularly Important

A common sanctions and customs overlap occurs where goods associated with a restricted jurisdiction are routed through another country.

The company should establish where the goods were genuinely manufactured and what processing occurred in each country.

Third-Country Routing Is Not Automatically Illegal

Legitimate international supply chains frequently involve traders, warehouses, logistics hubs and transshipment countries. Routing through a third country does not by itself prove sanctions evasion.

However, the company should be capable of explaining the commercial reason for the route.

Prepare a Manufacturing Flow

Where origin is disputed, identify the factories, raw materials, components and manufacturing stages.

Production records, bills of materials, factory documents and quality-control records can be more persuasive than simply relying on the country stated on an invoice.

Transshipment Should Be Documented

Preserve bills of lading, container information, seals, warehouse records and transport documents showing how the goods moved.

Authorities may examine whether the third country was a genuine manufacturing location or merely an intermediate shipping point.

Review the A.TR, EUR.1 and Origin Documents Separately

Different customs documents serve different legal functions. A circulation document should not automatically be treated as conclusive evidence of non-preferential origin for every sanctions or trade-remedy question.

The legal purpose of each document should be identified before relying on it.

False Documentation Allegations Create Higher Risk

If authorities suspect that an invoice, certificate of origin, circulation document or other customs document is false, the investigation can become considerably more serious.

Preserve the original document, transmission history and information concerning who prepared and supplied it.

Do Not Quietly Replace Questioned Documents

Once an investigation begins, a company should not simply substitute a new invoice or certificate without explaining why the original document was incorrect.

Corrections should be transparent and procedurally defensible.

Review the Payment Chain

Identify the payer, beneficiary, currency, payment bank, correspondent institutions and any intermediary company.

The payment route should correspond with the underlying commercial transaction.

Third-Party Payments Require Explanation

Payment by or to an entity that does not appear in the supply contract can trigger questions. There may be a legitimate commercial explanation, but it should be documented.

Prepare agency agreements, group-company arrangements, assignment documents or other evidence supporting the structure.

Do Not Create a New Payment Route Merely to Bypass Screening

If a bank rejects a transaction for sanctions reasons, immediately sending the same payment through another bank or intermediary without addressing the underlying issue can create additional compliance concerns.

The reason for the first rejection should be understood before restructuring payment.

Review Emails and Internal Messages Early

Commercial correspondence can reveal why the supplier, route, invoice or payment method changed.

The legal team should preserve relevant communications before employees delete messages through ordinary retention practices.

Issue an Internal Document Preservation Notice

Once a serious investigation is anticipated, relevant personnel should preserve emails, contracts, invoices, customs files, shipping documents, messaging records, compliance checks and accounting data.

Selective deletion after an investigation begins can create additional evidentiary problems.

Avoid Uncoordinated Employee Statements

Sales, logistics, accounting and management personnel may each know only one part of the transaction. Uncoordinated explanations can therefore contradict one another even where no misconduct occurred.

The company should establish the facts before substantive interviews or written explanations.

Customs Broker Communications Matter

Obtain the information provided to the customs broker before declaration. Determine whether the broker received accurate product, origin and valuation information.

This can be important both for the company’s defense and for allocating responsibility later.

Review Customs Valuation

Sanctions investigations sometimes expose payment arrangements that were not clearly reflected in the declared customs value.

Review royalties, assists, commissions, related-party payments and other amounts potentially connected with the imported goods.

Undeclared Payments Can Create a Separate Customs Problem

Even if an additional payment is completely lawful from a sanctions perspective, Customs may question whether it should have been included in customs value.

Sanctions compliance and customs valuation should therefore be reviewed separately.

Check Whether the Goods Are Dual-Use or Otherwise Controlled

Some transactions attract heightened scrutiny because of the nature or potential end use of the goods.

Confirm technical specifications, classification, licensing requirements, end user and intended use before making representations to authorities.

End-User Evidence Can Be Critical

For sensitive products, prepare evidence identifying the ultimate customer and actual use of the goods.

An unclear end-user chain can materially increase sanctions and export-control concerns.

Do Not Assume the Contractual Buyer Is the End User

A distributor may resell the goods. If end-use restrictions matter, trace the commercial chain beyond the immediate customer where required.

Separate Administrative, Financial and Criminal Exposure

A simultaneous investigation may create several different categories of risk: customs duties, administrative penalties, detention or seizure of goods, banking restrictions, administrative measures and potentially criminal investigation.

Each requires its own legal analysis.

A Customs Error Does Not Automatically Establish Criminal Intent

Incorrect classification, valuation or origin can result from technical disagreement or inaccurate supplier information.

Where criminal allegations arise, the prosecution must be analyzed according to the elements of the alleged offense and the evidence concerning the responsible individuals.

Corporate Investigation and Manager Liability Should Be Separated

A foreign company may be investigated while managers or employees are also asked to give statements.

Individual criminal responsibility should not be assumed merely because someone holds a director or management position.

Identify Who Actually Made Each Decision

Determine who selected the supplier, approved the route, prepared the invoice, determined origin, instructed the customs broker and approved payment.

This decision map can be essential where individual liability is alleged.

Preserve Compliance Checks Conducted Before the Transaction

If the company screened the supplier, ownership structure, vessel, bank or end user before contracting, preserve those records.

Contemporaneous due-diligence evidence can be significantly more persuasive than a screening report created only after authorities intervene.

What If the Supplier Was Listed After the Contract?

Establish the relevant chronology carefully. Determine the supplier’s status when the contract was executed, when payment occurred, when goods were shipped and when the relevant restriction became effective.

Timing can materially change the legal analysis.

What If Ownership Changed After Shipment?

Preserve historical corporate records. Current ownership should not automatically be projected backward onto an earlier transaction without examining the actual timeline.

Goods Detention Requires Immediate Attention

If Customs has detained the shipment, obtain the formal basis for detention and identify whether the issue concerns sanctions, documentation, origin, licensing or another customs matter.

Commercial urgency should not lead the company to accept an incorrect legal characterization.

Can Detained Goods Be Released?

Potentially, depending on the reason for detention and applicable legal framework. The company may need to provide ownership, origin, licensing, end-user or other supporting evidence.

If release is refused, formal administrative or judicial remedies should be evaluated promptly.

Goods Seizure Is More Serious Than an Ordinary Clearance Delay

Determine whether the goods are merely awaiting examination, administratively detained or formally seized in connection with a criminal investigation.

These situations should not be described interchangeably.

Bank Accounts May Also Be Affected

Where authorities suspect proceeds connected with unlawful trade, financial measures may accompany the customs investigation.

If company accounts are frozen, identify the authority, decision, legal basis, amount affected and available objection procedure immediately.

Preserve Evidence of Legitimate Funds

Invoices, contracts, accounting records and payment documentation should demonstrate the commercial source and purpose of the relevant funds.

This is particularly important where multiple group companies participated in the payment chain.

Coordinate Customs and Criminal Defense

A customs submission should not contain factual admissions that unnecessarily prejudice a criminal defense.

Likewise, a criminal statement should not contradict technical customs arguments concerning origin, valuation or documentation.

One Master Fact File Should Control the Defense

Create a central evidence file containing the verified chronology, parties, ownership, goods, origin, classification, valuation, shipping route, payment flow, sanctions checks and responsible personnel.

Different legal submissions can then address different legal issues while relying on the same factual foundation.

Do Not Use Identical Legal Arguments Everywhere

Coordination does not mean copying the same petition to every authority.

A customs objection, sanctions explanation, bank compliance submission and criminal defense have different legal purposes. The underlying facts should be consistent, but the legal analysis should be tailored.

Review Foreign-Law Advice Carefully

A multinational company may receive advice concerning foreign sanctions regimes from counsel abroad. That advice can be important, but the Turkish customs and criminal consequences require separate Turkish-law analysis.

Compliance with one jurisdiction’s rules does not automatically resolve every Turkish issue.

Supplier Representations Should Be Investigated

Review contractual representations concerning sanctions status, beneficial ownership, origin, export controls and regulatory compliance.

If those representations were false, preserve potential claims against the supplier.

Consider Formal Notice to the Supplier

Where the investigation arises from inaccurate information supplied by the foreign counterparty, prompt contractual notice can be important.

Request complete ownership, manufacturing, origin and sanctions documentation.

Review Indemnification Clauses

The supply agreement may allocate responsibility for customs duties, penalties, seizure losses, sanctions breaches, storage costs and legal expenses.

These contractual rights should be preserved while the public-law investigation continues.

Storage and Demurrage Must Be Managed

A legally strong defense can still become commercially unsuccessful if containers accumulate substantial daily charges.

Track storage, demurrage, detention and warehouse expenses and pursue available mitigation measures.

Review Other Shipments Immediately

Identify identical goods already in transit or awaiting shipment.

Do not continue the same transaction structure blindly while authorities are questioning it.

Historical Transactions Should Be Assessed

Authorities may expand scrutiny to earlier declarations involving the same supplier, route or origin.

Create a transaction matrix showing declaration dates, products, suppliers, manufacturers, origin, routes, payments and customs treatment.

Do Not Assume One Problem Contaminates Every Historical Import

Different production periods, suppliers or transaction structures may produce different legal outcomes.

Historical exposure should be analyzed declaration by declaration.

Consider an Internal Investigation

For serious cases, an internal investigation can determine whether the issue arose from a documentation error, inadequate due diligence, supplier misconduct, employee conduct or deliberate circumvention.

The investigation should be structured carefully so that factual findings remain reliable.

Correct Future Compliance Weaknesses Immediately

Regardless of the outcome of the disputed transaction, strengthen sanctions screening, beneficial-ownership review, customs classification, origin verification, valuation controls, payment approval and end-user checks.

Future transactions should not reproduce the same uncertainty.

Immediate Defense Strategy

A foreign company facing simultaneous sanctions and customs investigations in Turkey should immediately preserve documents, obtain the formal customs and financial decisions, establish a single transaction chronology, identify all counterparties and beneficial owners, reconstruct the manufacturing and shipping chain, verify origin and classification, map every payment, review sanctions screening and end-user evidence, distinguish administrative from criminal exposure, coordinate employee statements, protect customs objection and judicial deadlines, review other shipments and preserve contractual claims against suppliers and logistics providers.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a foreign company face customs and sanctions scrutiny at the same time?

Yes. The same transaction may raise questions concerning the goods, their origin, payment structure, counterparties and end users.

Does a bank sanctions block prove that the import is illegal?

No. A bank’s compliance decision and a Turkish customs-law determination are separate issues and should be analyzed independently.

Does third-country routing prove sanctions evasion?

No. Legitimate transshipment and multi-country supply chains exist. However, the company should be able to explain and document the route.

Can Customs investigate beneficial ownership?

Ownership and control information may become relevant where the identity or sanctions status of parties to the transaction is questioned.

Should the company change invoices or origin documents after an investigation begins?

Documents should not be quietly altered or replaced. Any legitimate correction should be transparent and properly documented.

Can a customs mistake become a criminal case?

Potentially, depending on the facts and alleged conduct. An administrative customs irregularity should not automatically be equated with criminal intent.

Can company directors be personally investigated?

Potentially. Individual responsibility depends on each person’s acts, authority, knowledge and the elements of the alleged offense rather than title alone.

What should happen if goods are detained?

The company should obtain the formal basis for detention, identify the precise issue and evaluate the appropriate administrative, customs or judicial remedy without delay.

Should historical shipments be reviewed?

Yes. If the investigation concerns a recurring supplier, route or origin structure, earlier declarations should be reviewed proactively.

What is the most important defense principle?

Use one verified factual record across the entire case. Customs, sanctions, banking and criminal defenses may require different legal arguments, but they should never be built on contradictory descriptions of the same supplier, shipment, origin, ownership structure or payment.

Client-Focused Legal Support for Coordinated Sanctions and Customs Investigations

Simultaneous sanctions and customs investigations can expose foreign companies to detained or seized goods, customs duties, administrative penalties, blocked payments, frozen funds, origin disputes, export-control questions and criminal investigations involving company managers. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign manufacturers, exporters, investors and Turkish importers in coordinating these overlapping proceedings. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in reconstructing transactions, reviewing sanctions and beneficial-ownership risks, challenging customs measures, coordinating customs and criminal defenses, protecting company managers and pursuing urgent remedies involving goods or company assets.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey