The 2015 Situation Report on Counterfeiting in the European Union (“Report”) gives insight into the status and current trends of counterfeit activities in the region, including consideration and analysis of Turkey’s role. The Report is based on surveys of the public as well as private sector. It was jointly prepared by the European Police Office and the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market, with the project conducted through the European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights.
Noteworthy points in the 2015 Report include:
- Counterfeiting causes damage to consumers and enterprises, as well as directly finances organized crime.
- The primary source-countries for counterfeiting are: China, India, Egypt, Ghana, Korea, Morocco, Greece, Malaysia and Turkey.
- China is the primary source of counterfeiting, providing more than two thirds of counterfeit goods.
- Noteworthy countries with respect to particular types of counterfeit goods include:
- India with regard to medicines.
- Egypt with regard to foodstuffs.
- Turkey with regard to perfumes and cosmetics.
- Turkey produces 52% of overall seizures for perfumes and cosmetics.
- The Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union reported that customs authorities seized perfumes and cosmetics originating from Turkey, worth a total of EUR 26.1 million in 2013.
- Turkey is a country with a substantial impact on counterfeit foodstuff distribution within the European Union.
- Organized crime groups in Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany have strong links to Turkey in terms of language and culture.
- Movement of counterfeit goods into the European Union is facilitated by organized crime groups, through ports at Istanbul or Constanta.
- Istanbul is commonly used as an entry point for the overland route to Bulgaria and Romania, which is a preferred route for movement of counterfeit goods.
- Particular areas which should be addressed include:
- Counterfeiters abusing free trade zones for assembling, packaging and labeling counterfeited goods.
- Limited resources of small and medium enterprises.
- Lack of investigation possibilities.
- Weak cooperation with payment processors and advertising companies in the e-commerce sector.
- Low consumer awareness and education.
- Lack of awareness and training for investigators, prosecutors and judges.
Please see this link for full text of Report.