In the meeting dated January 16, 2025 (Decision No. 353), the Advertising Board (“Board”) conducted a comprehensive review concerning the use of environmental claims in financial markets and identified significant issues regarding environmentally themed loan advertisements within the banking sector.
Accordingly, the Board imposed administrative sanctions for the identified violations and issued notifications to the relevant financial institutions. Below are some of the key decisions rendered:
- Decision No. 2025/7943 – Türkiye İş Bankası
Following the Board’s review, it was determined that the promotional materials featuring “Eco-Friendly Vehicle Loan” and “Eco-Friendly Housing Loan” created the misleading impression that these credit products had a greater positive environmental impact than they actually did. While these loans were restricted to vehicles and residences labeled as eco-friendly, no actual environmental impact improvements were made in the provision of the loans themselves.
Additionally, in the description of the “Eco-Friendly Vehicle Loan,” the statement “We offer privileges in financing brand-new electric and hybrid vehicles. Click here for detailed information about the loan” was included, with a hyperlink directing consumers to further details. However, upon clicking the link, no specific promotional campaign was found, thereby misleading consumers into believing that a special campaign existed. Furthermore, the advertisement failed to disclose the fundamental elements of the loan, such as interest rates and preferential conditions.
Similarly, in the case of the “Eco-Friendly Housing Loan,” the promotional text stated that the allocation fee was reduced from 0.5% to 0.25%. However, this claim was found to be unsubstantiated. As a result, the Board imposed a cease-and-desist order on the advertisements in question.
- Decision No. 2025/7947 – Türkiye Garanti Bankası
The Board’s review of promotional content on the bank’s website (www.garantibbva.com.tr) revealed that advertisements targeting environmentally conscious consumers included the phrase “Eco-Friendly Vehicle Loan,” implying that the loan had a more significant environmental impact than it actually did. While these loans were restricted to vehicles labeled as eco-friendly, the advertisements failed to disclose essential elements such as interest rates and preferential conditions.
Additionally, a commercial published on YouTube included the statement: "Türkiye’s most widely used banking application, Garanti BBVA Mobile,"
which was deemed a comparative claim that could not be substantiated with evidence.
Furthermore, the advertisement featured phrases such as:
"Garanti BBVA Mobile offers Ecological Steps. Download the app now and take ecological steps to care for nature! Some choose public transportation for a more sustainable future. Others opt for digital receipts to reduce paper waste. Some wonder, 'What can I do?' and take small but impactful steps to protect nature. Others walk more to consume less fuel."
These statements were classified as environmental claims, yet they lacked sufficient explanation and did not provide any measurement or assessment methods regarding their environmental impact. Since the advertising medium itself did not allow for detailed disclosures, consumers should have been directed to sources where they could obtain comprehensive information. The failure to do so resulted in a misleading perception that the bank's mobile application had a more substantial positive impact on the environment than it actually did. Consequently, the Board imposed a cease-and-desist order on the advertisements.
- Decision No. 2025/7940 – Türkiye Vakıflar Bankası
The bank’s promotional materials referred to a loan product as a "Nature-Friendly Vehicle Loan," which created the misleading impression that it had a more substantial environmental benefit than was actually the case. While these loans were restricted to vehicles labeled as environmentally friendly, no actual environmental impact improvements were made in their provision.
Furthermore, the “Sustainable Banking” logo used in the advertisement constituted a general environmental claim, which could create uncertainty among consumers. Additionally, while the advertisement referred to the loan as offering "special advantageous interest rates," it failed to disclose the fundamental elements of the loan, such as specific interest rates and terms. As a result, the Board imposed a cease-and-desist order on the advertisements.
As evidenced by the above decisions, the Board’s investigation aimed to prevent misleading environmental claims that could exploit consumers' environmental sensitivities. The findings revealed that several banks failed to adequately and transparently disclose the essential elements of their advertised financial products, creating a false impression of greater environmental benefits than actually existed.