Timor-Leste is a signatory to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Information Technology Agreement (ITA) of 1996 and its 2015 expansion (ITA II). The country joined these Agreements with its accession to WTO membership in August 2024, except for duties on products in ITA tariff lines 378 and 27, which will be eliminated in 2027 and 2030, respectively.

Under Art. 10 of Decree-Law No. 1/2025, procuring entities are required, where expressly permitted by the Code, to support the national economy by giving preference to goods extracted, produced, or grown within the national territory and to goods and services supplied by domestic providers, including by adapting procurement procedures to the country’s socio-economic context.
This preference is operationalised through the Arts. 86–87. Art. 86 requires contracting authorities, in public tender, restricted tender, and request-for-quotation procedures, to apply a preference margin of up to 10% (in score or price) in favour of eligible national suppliers that meet specified local-content conditions. These conditions include, inter alia, domestic production thresholds for goods, minimum shares of local inputs or Timorese workers for works, and at least 60% Timorese staff for services, supported by the submission of a local content plan with the bid. Art. 87 extends a smaller preference margin, up to 5%, to non-national suppliers whose offers nonetheless satisfy one of the relevant local-content conditions.
In addition, Art. 88 authorises contracting authorities, across all procurement procedures under the Code, to include requirements that tenders contribute to economic and social development, national innovation, local employment creation, and the transfer of technology or know-how to national workers and suppliers. It also permits requirements for the procurement of minimum proportions of goods and services at the local or national level, and for the employment of a minimum number of national workers.

According to Code No. 6493 on Payment and Security Settlement Systems, Payment Services and Electronic Money Institutions, e-money and e-payment services providers must be licensed by the Central Bank of Türkiye in order to operate in Türkiye. Furthermore, e-money institutions and payment service providers are required to establish their Turkish entities and localise their Turkish businesses by June 2015. However, the conditions and procedures for foreign payment service providers who wish to provide payment services in Türkiye are currently under review.

Türkiye does not implement any de minimis threshold, which is the minimum value of goods below which customs do not charge duties.

Additional Art. 4.1 of Law No. 5651 stipulates that social media service providers based abroad whose daily access from Türkiye exceeds one million users are required to appoint at least one authorised representative in Türkiye. Where the representative is a natural person, that individual must be both a Turkish citizen and resident in Türkiye. Where the representative is a legal person, it must take the form of a branch established directly by the social media provider as a limited liability company. It is reported that major foreign technology companies, including Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Google (YouTube), and X, readily exceed the stipulated user threshold and consequently incur significant costs in complying with the obligation to establish local representation.

The Law on Consumer Protection provides a comprehensive framework for consumer protection that also applies to online transactions.

Türkiye has not signed the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts.

Türkiye has not adopted national legislation based on or influenced by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Commerce.

Türkiye has not adopted national legislation based on or influenced by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Signatures.

According to the Notification No. 2020/6 on Import Surveillance of May 2020, the Turkish Ministry of Trade issued a licensing requirement on the imports of mobile phones.

According to the Communiqué on Implementation of Tariff Quota in Imports of Printed Circuit Boards with LED Diodes Used in the Production of Backlight Units, in October 2014, the government of Türkiye announced an altered import quota on printed circuit boards with LEDs used in the production of backlight units.

It is reported that Türkiye's documentation requirements for many imports are burdensome, inconsistent, and non-transparent, often causing shipments to be delayed at Turkish ports.

It is reported that Türkiye suspended all exports to Israel with effect from 2 May 2024. It is further reported that, from August 2025, Turkish port authorities began requiring shipping agents to submit an electronic declaration confirming that the vessel’s owner, agent, or operator has no affiliation with Israel and that the vessel is not carrying military or hazardous cargo destined for Israel.

It is reported that Türkiye permits self‑certification for radio transmission, electromagnetic interference (EMI) and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), allowing foreign manufacturers to demonstrate compliance through a Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity (SDoC). Under the conformity assessment procedure applied to EMC/EMI, the supplier or manufacturer declares that the equipment satisfies the relevant technical and administrative requirements; registration with the national regulator is not required, and testing by a recognised testing laboratory is not mandatory. Where testing is undertaken, the selection of the laboratory is at the discretion of the supplier or manufacturer; however, if harmonised standards are not applied or do not exist, an independent third‑party opinion is required.

The Regulation of Publications on the Internet and Suppression of Crimes Committed by means of Such Publications establishes a safe harbour regime for intermediaries beyond copyright infringements. According to Art. 4 of the law, a content provider is not responsible for the link to the content that belongs to someone else. However, if it is clear from the format of the presentation that the content in question it links to is embraced and intended to be reachable, the content provider is responsible according to the general provisions.