Fake Invoice Allegation at Turkish Customs: Criminal Liability of Foreign Importers 2026

Foreign importer accused of submitting a fake invoice to Turkish customs? Learn when invoice discrepancies may lead to additional customs duties, administrative penalties, seizure or criminal investigation, and how foreign companies can defend themselves in Turkey in 2026.

A fake invoice allegation at Turkish customs is considerably more serious than an ordinary disagreement over customs value. If customs authorities believe that a commercial invoice was fabricated, altered, deliberately undervalued or created to conceal the true transaction, an ordinary customs inspection can develop into a criminal investigation involving the importing company, its managers, employees, customs broker and foreign supplier.

However, one distinction is critical:

The existence of an incorrect, inconsistent or disputed invoice does not automatically prove that the foreign importer committed a criminal offence.

Turkish customs legislation separately regulates incorrect customs declarations and valuation discrepancies. Current Ministry of Trade guidance states that where declared customs value is lower than the value determined under the Customs Law, additional import duties and an administrative monetary penalty may arise under Article 234. The same official guidance expressly reserves the possible application of Law No. 5607 on Combating Smuggling.

Accordingly, a criminal defense should not begin with the assumption that:

“The invoice was challenged, therefore the importer committed customs fraud.”

The real questions are:

Was the invoice actually false? Who created it? What was the genuine commercial transaction? What was actually paid? Who knew about the discrepancy? Who submitted the invoice to customs? Was there deliberate participation in conduct satisfying a specific criminal offence?

What Can Trigger a Fake Invoice Allegation?

Customs authorities may become suspicious where they discover:

• Two invoices for the same shipment
• An invoice materially below the actual payment
• Different invoices in the supplier’s and importer’s records
• Altered invoice numbers or dates
• Different quantities
• Different product descriptions
• Different unit prices
• Undisclosed side payments
• Payments to another company
• Payments to a shareholder or intermediary
• Credit notes without a clear commercial basis
• Supplier emails referring to a higher price
• A second invoice discovered on an employee’s computer
• Invoice values inconsistent with previous shipments

These circumstances may justify investigation, but they do not all have the same legal meaning.

What Is a Fake Invoice?

The expression “fake invoice” can describe several different factual situations.

An invoice may relate to:

A transaction that never occurred.

Alternatively, a genuine shipment may exist but the invoice may contain:

• False price
• False quantity
• False seller
• False buyer
• False product
• False commercial terms

There may also be a genuine invoice that customs incorrectly believes is false because another commercial document contains different figures.

These situations must be separated.

Two Invoices Do Not Automatically Mean Fraud

International transactions routinely generate multiple documents.

A shipment may have:

• Quotation
• Pro forma invoice
• Preliminary invoice
• Revised invoice
• Final commercial invoice
• Credit note
• Debit note
• Customs invoice

Therefore, finding two documents containing different prices does not automatically establish a double-invoice scheme.

The defense should determine the commercial function of each document.

Example: Customs Finds Two Different Invoices

Suppose customs receives an invoice showing:

Machinery price: €250,000

During a subsequent inspection, authorities find another document in company email showing:

Machinery price: €480,000

The difference is significant.

But before reaching a criminal conclusion, determine:

1. When was each invoice created?
2. Who created it?
3. Which invoice was final?
4. Was one merely a quotation?
5. Was one cancelled?
6. Did one include additional machinery?
7. Which amount was actually paid?
8. Were there subsequent price adjustments?
9. What amount did the supplier record?
10. What did the importer believe was the final transaction price?

The answers may determine whether the case concerns fraud, a valuation dispute or an ordinary commercial-document discrepancy.

Follow the Money

Payment records are often among the most important pieces of evidence.

Compare:

Purchase contract → Purchase order → Invoice → Customs declaration → Bank payment → Supplier account.

If customs receives an invoice for €250,000 but bank records show that €480,000 was paid for the same goods, investigators will likely examine the additional €230,000 closely.

But even that difference requires analysis.

Additional Payment Does Not Automatically Mean Hidden Purchase Price

An additional transfer may relate to:

• Freight
• Insurance
• Installation
• Training
• Maintenance
• Software
• Technical services
• Separate goods
• Previous invoices
• Royalties
• Licence fees

The importer should document the actual commercial purpose.

A vague explanation given years after the transaction will generally be less persuasive than contemporaneous contracts, invoices, banking records and correspondence.

Payment to a Related Company

Suppose the importer pays:

€300,000 to the manufacturer

and

€200,000 to another company in the manufacturer’s corporate group.

Authorities may investigate whether the second payment was actually part of the consideration for the imported goods.

Preserve:

• Agreement with second company
• Invoice
• Description of services
• Deliverables
• Banking records
• Emails
• Accounting treatment

The defense should explain the economic reality of the payment.

Supplier Issues the Fake Invoice Without Importer’s Knowledge

A foreign supplier may deliberately issue an invoice containing an artificially low price.

That does not automatically establish that the Turkish importer knew the invoice was false.

Consider:

Purchase order: €200,000
Supplier invoice: €200,000
Importer payment: €200,000
Customs declaration: €200,000

If the supplier independently manipulated its own records, the importer may have a materially different position from an importer that secretly paid another €300,000 outside the invoice.

Supplier Misconduct Must Be Investigated Separately

Preserve:

• Original purchase order
• Sales contract
• Price negotiations
• Supplier quotation
• Final invoice
• Bank payment
• Supplier emails
• Shipping documents

The evidence should show what the importer actually knew when the customs declaration was made.

Importer Requests a Lower Invoice

The risk profile changes dramatically if communications show:

“The real price is €600,000. Please issue a €300,000 invoice for customs.”

Such evidence may cause authorities to investigate whether there was a deliberate scheme designed to reduce customs liabilities.

The defense must then examine:

• Who sent the instruction
• Whether that person represented the company
• Whether management knew
• Whether the supplier followed the instruction
• What was actually paid
• Whether the practice occurred in other shipments

Employee Acts Without Management Authorization

Suppose an import manager privately asks a supplier to issue lower invoices without informing foreign management.

The company should immediately investigate:

• Employee authority
• Supplier relationship
• Broker communications
• Payment approvals
• Personal benefit
• Historical shipments
• Management knowledge

The existence of employee misconduct does not automatically establish personal criminal responsibility for the foreign CEO or shareholder.

Foreign CEO Is Not Automatically Criminally Liable

A foreign CEO may have overall management responsibility while having no direct involvement in individual customs declarations.

Relevant evidence includes:

• Organization chart
• Job descriptions
• Delegation documents
• Approval matrix
• Customs procedures
• ERP access
• Email communications

The investigation should determine what the executive actually knew and did.

Foreign Shareholder Is Not Automatically Responsible

Ownership of a Turkish importing company does not itself prove participation in a fake invoice arrangement.

A passive foreign investor should distinguish:

Share ownership → Corporate management → Operational customs activity.

If disputed imports predate the investment, the acquisition chronology can become especially important.

Customs Broker Submitted the Invoice

Foreign companies frequently use licensed customs brokers.

If the allegedly false invoice was submitted through the broker, determine:

• Who sent the invoice to the broker
• Whether broker received another invoice
• Whether broker questioned the value
• Whether importer approved the declaration
• Whether broker changed any information
• Whether supplier communicated directly with broker

A customs broker’s involvement neither automatically establishes nor eliminates importer responsibility.

The Broker Received Only One Invoice

Suppose the broker received a single invoice for €250,000 and had no access to any alleged second invoice.

That fact can be relevant when assessing the broker’s role.

Likewise, if the importing company itself received only one invoice, that may be relevant to the knowledge of its personnel.

Fake Invoice Versus Customs Valuation Dispute

These concepts should not be confused.

A perfectly genuine commercial invoice may still produce a customs valuation dispute.

Turkish customs value is determined under the valuation provisions of the Customs Law. Ministry guidance identifies transaction value as the first valuation method, followed where necessary by the prescribed alternative methods. The Ministry also explains that the price actually paid or payable can include direct and indirect payments made to or for the benefit of the seller, subject to the applicable valuation rules.

Therefore:

Customs value higher than invoice price ≠ invoice automatically fake.

Customs Law Article 234

Where customs concludes that the declared value is lower than the value determined under the statutory customs-valuation rules, current Ministry guidance states that Article 234(1)(b) generally provides for collection of the missing import duties plus a monetary penalty equal to three times the tax difference. Certain limited quantity differences and material calculation errors receive different treatment.

This is an administrative customs consequence.

Whether the facts also establish criminal conduct is a separate question.

Law No. 5607 and Criminal Investigation

Where authorities believe the invoice discrepancy forms part of conduct satisfying an offence under Law No. 5607, the matter can move beyond administrative customs enforcement.

The criminal defense should identify:

• Exact alleged offence
• Exact shipment
• Exact disputed invoice
• Alleged false information
• Person who created the document
• Person who used it
• Alleged customs advantage
• Evidence of individual participation

Do not defend against the vague label “customs fraud.”

Defend against the specific alleged conduct.

False Export Invoices Are a Separate High-Risk Area

The Ministry of Trade’s official guidance expressly identifies false declarations concerning the type, quantity, characteristics or value of exported goods, as well as fictitious exports undertaken to obtain incentives, subsidies or tax refunds, among conduct potentially falling within Law No. 5607.

Foreign companies involved in both Turkish imports and exports should therefore avoid assuming that invoice-related criminal exposure is limited to imports.

2026 Enforcement Shows Fake-Invoice Investigations Can Become Broad Criminal Cases

In June 2026, the Ministry of Justice publicly reported an investigation involving allegations of fake invoices and fictitious exports in the fuel sector. According to the Ministry’s announcement, criminal proceedings were initiated against 27 suspects, six companies were seized and trustees were appointed to ten companies. These were allegations in an ongoing enforcement action, not a statement that every invoice discrepancy leads to such measures.

The example nevertheless demonstrates why a serious fake-invoice allegation should not be handled as a routine accounting correction.

Fake Invoice and Incorrect Quantity

An invoice may state:

1,000 units

while customs finds:

1,500 units.

Investigators should determine whether:

• Supplier accidentally loaded extra goods
• Invoice was prepared before final loading
• Packing list was incorrect
• Additional goods were free samples
• Parties deliberately concealed 500 units

Physical discrepancy is important evidence, but the reason remains critical.

Fake Invoice and Product Description

An invoice may describe imported goods as inexpensive components when customs believes they are higher-value finished products.

The company should preserve:

• Product specifications
• Catalogues
• Photographs
• Technical manuals
• Purchase agreement
• Supplier description
• Classification analysis

A technical classification disagreement should not automatically be treated as invoice fabrication.

Fake Invoice and Country of Origin

An invoice can also become part of an origin investigation.

Authorities may suspect that goods manufactured in one country were invoiced through another company to conceal their actual origin and avoid:

• Anti-dumping duties
• Additional customs duties
• Safeguards
• Import restrictions

The defense should reconstruct the physical supply chain rather than looking only at the invoice.

Trading Company Versus Manufacturer

It is not unusual for goods to be manufactured by Company A and sold to the Turkish importer by Company B.

That structure is not automatically fraudulent.

Preserve:

Manufacturer → Trading company → Turkish importer

and establish:

• Contractual relationships
• Invoice chain
• Payment chain
• Shipping route
• Actual origin

Related-Party Transactions

Invoices between group companies often receive additional scrutiny.

A foreign parent may sell goods to its Turkish subsidiary at an intercompany price.

That does not make the invoice fake.

However, customs may examine:

• Relationship between buyer and seller
• Pricing method
• Side agreements
• Year-end adjustments
• Royalties
• Management fees
• Additional payments

Current Ministry guidance separately notes that failure to disclose a qualifying related-party relationship may itself trigger an irregularity penalty even where no tax loss arises.

Pro Forma Invoice Mistaken for Fake Invoice

A pro forma invoice can contain a different price from the final commercial invoice.

This can occur because of:

• Negotiation
• Quantity change
• Discount
• Currency movement
• Product change
• Shipping change

Preserve the chronology.

A timeline showing how the transaction developed can explain why multiple legitimate prices appear in the records.

Credit Notes

A credit note reducing the price after importation may also attract scrutiny.

Determine:

• Why it was issued
• When it was issued
• Whether it relates to the imported goods
• Whether the reduction was foreseeable
• Whether customs consequences arise

A credit note should never be created retrospectively simply to explain an investigation.

Do Not Backdate Documents

Once authorities challenge an invoice, never attempt to “repair” the file by:

• Backdating agreements
• Altering invoices
• Deleting emails
• Replacing packing lists
• Creating fictitious credit notes
• Modifying ERP data
• Manufacturing supplier correspondence

Preserve the original record.

Preserve Electronic Evidence

A fake-invoice investigation may depend heavily on digital communications.

Preserve:

• Emails
• Business messaging
• ERP records
• Accounting data
• Shared-drive documents
• Approval logs
• Supplier portals

Do not rely only on screenshots where original electronic records remain available.

Preserve Foreign-Language Originals

Foreign suppliers may communicate in Chinese, German, Arabic, Russian, French or another language.

Keep the original communication together with any translation.

Small wording differences may become important when authorities assess whether an employee requested a lower invoice or merely negotiated a lower commercial price.

Search and Seizure Risks

A serious investigation may lead authorities to examine or seize company records and electronic material under applicable criminal-procedure rules.

The company should record:

• Investigation number
• Authority conducting the measure
• Items taken
• Devices taken
• Documents copied
• Inventory provided

Do not physically obstruct lawful investigative measures.

Goods May Also Be Seized

If customs authorities believe the goods are connected with alleged smuggling, the goods themselves may become subject to seizure or other statutory procedures.

Seizure does not equal final confiscation and does not itself prove that the importer committed the alleged offence.

The company should immediately obtain the seizure and inventory records.

Company Versus Manager Defense

A foreign-owned company and an individual manager may not always have identical interests.

For example:

Company position: employee secretly manipulated invoices.

Employee position: senior management ordered the practice.

This potential conflict should be identified early.

Supplier Versus Importer Defense

The supplier may claim:

“The Turkish importer asked us to issue the lower invoice.”

The importer may claim:

“The supplier issued the document without our knowledge.”

Do not choose between these competing accounts without examining objective evidence.

Review:

• Emails
• Messages
• Price negotiations
• Bank payments
• Draft invoices
• Shipping records
• ERP history

Bank Transfer Is Important but Not Conclusive

A payment matching the invoice can support the importer.

But investigators may search for additional payments through:

• Other group companies
• Intermediaries
• Directors
• Shareholders
• Agents

Conversely, an additional payment does not automatically prove hidden purchase consideration. Its actual commercial purpose must be established.

Internal Investigation

When a foreign parent discovers a possible fake invoice in its Turkish operations, the investigation should answer:

1. Was there a real shipment?
2. What was actually ordered?
3. What was the agreed price?
4. How many invoices exist?
5. Who created each invoice?
6. Which invoice was submitted to customs?
7. What was actually paid?
8. Were additional payments made?
9. Who communicated with the supplier?
10. Who instructed the customs broker?
11. Was management aware?
12. Did anyone personally benefit?

Build an Invoice Comparison Matrix

Document	Value	Purpose	Key Question
Quotation	€600,000	Initial offer	Was it accepted?
Pro forma	€550,000	Preliminary	Was it replaced?
Commercial invoice	€400,000	Customs document	Was this final price?
Bank payment	€400,000	Supplier payment	Any additional payment?
Credit note	€50,000	Adjustment	Genuine commercial basis?

This structure can quickly expose whether the allegation is based on a misunderstanding or a genuine discrepancy.

Review Historical Shipments

One disputed invoice can lead to review of previous imports involving:

• Same supplier
• Same product
• Same employee
• Same customs broker
• Same valuation method

In July 2026, the Ministry of Trade reported TRY 8.3 billion in additional assessments and penalties from secondary declaration controls and post-clearance company audits during the first six months of the year. It also stated that risk systems including the Customs Value Alarm System are used to identify risky declarations and companies.

By August 2026, the Ministry reported TRY 8.9 billion in additional assessments and penalties for the first seven months of 2026.

2026 Customs Enforcement Is Data-Driven

Historical declarations can be compared through risk-analysis systems.

Authorities may identify patterns such as:

Same supplier + same product + unusually low value

or

Repeated value differences across shipments.

Therefore, companies should review historical transactions before assuming the investigation will remain limited to one invoice.

One Fake Invoice Allegation Can Expand Beyond Customs

Depending on the evidence, an investigation may potentially raise issues involving:

• Smuggling
• Tax offences
• Document-related offences
• Fraud
• Money laundering allegations

These are separate legal concepts.

The existence of a fake-invoice allegation should not be used as a shortcut to conclude that every possible offence has occurred.

Administrative and Criminal Files Must Be Coordinated

A company may simultaneously face:

Customs reassessment

Administrative penalty

Criminal investigation

Seizure

Post-clearance audit.

Arguments submitted in one proceeding may affect another.

The legal strategy should therefore be coordinated.

Paying Additional Duties Does Not Automatically End Criminal Exposure

Payment of additional customs duties may resolve or affect certain customs liabilities.

It does not automatically establish that:

No criminal investigation can continue.

Nor does payment itself necessarily establish criminal guilt.

If Law No. 5607 is invoked, any payment or effective-remorse strategy should be assessed under the specific statutory framework and procedural stage.

25 Immediate Steps After a Fake Invoice Allegation

1. Obtain the disputed customs declaration.
2. Obtain the invoice submitted to customs.
3. Identify every other invoice concerning the shipment.
4. Preserve the original purchase agreement.
5. Preserve the purchase order.
6. Preserve price negotiations.
7. Preserve supplier emails.
8. Preserve customs-broker communications.
9. Preserve bank statements.
10. Obtain SWIFT/payment records.
11. Identify all payments to the supplier.
12. Identify payments to related companies.
13. Determine which invoice was actually paid.
14. Determine who created each invoice.
15. Determine who received each invoice.
16. Determine who sent the invoice to the broker.
17. Identify who approved the declaration.
18. Preserve ERP and accounting records.
19. Preserve foreign-language originals.
20. Do not alter historical documents.
21. Review related-party transactions.
22. Determine whether goods were seized.
23. Identify the exact criminal allegation.
24. Review similar historical shipments.
25. Coordinate customs, criminal, tax and commercial strategy.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Does a fake invoice allegation automatically mean the importer committed a crime?

No. Authorities must examine the actual transaction, the authenticity and purpose of the disputed document, what was paid, who used the document and the conduct of the individuals concerned. Customs valuation penalties and criminal liability are separate questions.

2. Can an incorrect invoice lead to additional customs duties without a criminal case?

Yes. Current Ministry guidance provides administrative consequences for certain undervaluations under Customs Law Article 234 while separately reserving Law No. 5607.

3. Are two different invoices proof of customs fraud?

No. One may be a quotation, pro forma invoice, revised invoice, cancelled document or final commercial invoice. The chronology and payment evidence must be examined.

4. What if the foreign supplier issued a false invoice without telling the importer?

Preserve the contract, purchase order, payment records and communications. Supplier misconduct does not automatically establish that importer personnel knowingly participated.

5. What if an importer employee asked the supplier for a lower invoice?

That can create serious exposure for the employee and potentially others depending on the evidence. The company should determine whether management knew, whether hidden payments existed and whether similar conduct occurred in other shipments.

6. Is a foreign CEO automatically liable for fake invoices used by the Turkish subsidiary?

No. Corporate title alone does not prove participation. The investigation should determine what the executive actually knew, authorized or did.

7. Can customs investigate earlier invoices?

Yes. Turkey actively uses post-clearance audits, secondary declaration examinations and risk-analysis systems to review historical transactions.

8. Can the imported goods be seized?

Potentially, where statutory requirements for seizure are satisfied in connection with a criminal investigation. Seizure does not itself constitute a final finding of guilt or confiscation.

9. Does paying the additional customs duty close the criminal investigation?

Not automatically. Customs liabilities and criminal responsibility must be assessed separately. Any payment strategy connected with Law No. 5607 should be reviewed under the precise statutory conditions before admissions are made.

10. What is the most important evidence in a fake invoice investigation?

Usually the complete transaction chain:

Contract → Purchase order → Price negotiations → Invoice → Customs declaration → Bank payment → Supplier records → Shipping documents.

The objective is to establish the commercial reality rather than examining one disputed document in isolation.

Legal Assistance for Foreign Importers Facing Fake Invoice Allegations in Turkey

A fake invoice allegation can rapidly transform an ordinary customs dispute into a complex investigation involving customs duties, administrative penalties, seized goods, company records, foreign suppliers, customs brokers and individual managers.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign importers, multinational groups, foreign-owned companies, shareholders and executives facing customs and criminal investigations in Turkey.

Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya assists foreign clients with fake invoice allegations, double-invoice investigations, customs undervaluation, false customs declarations, supplier misconduct, related-party transactions, hidden-payment allegations, customs seizures, post-clearance audits and criminal proceedings connected with Law No. 5607.

Early legal intervention can be particularly important where authorities have discovered a second invoice, identified payments exceeding the declared invoice, seized imported goods, summoned company managers or expanded one disputed shipment into a multi-year review of the company’s customs transactions.

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

This publication is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Fake-invoice and customs-smuggling allegations depend on the precise transaction, documents, customs procedure, payment structure, conduct of the individuals involved and applicable statutory provisions.