The Machine Manufacturers Association Türkiye (MİB) submitted its sectoral views on the European Union’s Industrial Accelerator Act (IAA) to the European Commission through the “Have Your Say” platform on 18 June 2026.
The IAA, which aims to accelerate the decarbonisation of European industry, strengthen industrial resilience, reduce strategic dependencies and support manufacturing capacity, has the potential to create direct implications for production partners integrated into European value chains.
Strategic Position of the Turkish Machinery Industry Highlighted
In its submission to the European Commission, MİB drew attention to the strategic position of the Turkish machinery industry within the European industrial ecosystem.
The submission underlined that Türkiye is an integral part of Europe’s extended industrial base, due to its structural integration stemming from the Customs Union, common technical standards, regulatory alignment, EU companies’ investments in Türkiye and long-established supply relations. In this context, it was clearly stated that the Turkish machinery industry should not be treated as an ordinary third-country supplier.
MİB’s Key Points
MİB stated that it supports, in principle, the IAA’s objectives of industrial resilience, decarbonisation and reducing strategic dependencies.
At the same time, it was underlined that the way to achieve these objectives is not to narrow existing value chains, but to address Europe’s industrial structure in a realistic manner.
The main points highlighted in the submission are as follows:
– The Turkish machinery industry is an established partner providing machinery, equipment, components, engineering capacity, maintenance services and production capabilities to European value chains.
– The practice of treating content originating from Customs Union partners as equivalent to EU origin within the scope of public procurement and support programmes should be maintained.
– The machinery industry should be recognised as a strategic enabler in terms of scaling clean technologies, modernising existing facilities, energy efficiency, automation and advanced manufacturing capacity.
– Sustainability and low-carbon criteria should not be determined solely on the basis of geographical origin; they should be based on measurable indicators such as technical compliance, energy efficiency, durability, repairability, life-cycle performance and contribution to low-carbon production.
– The production, supply and service operations of EU-headquartered industrial groups operating in Türkiye should be taken into account. It should not be overlooked that regulations which may negatively affect Türkiye’s position would impact not only Turkish manufacturers, but also European companies sourcing from or producing in Türkiye.
– Measures against supply-chain circumvention, unfair practices and excessive strategic dependencies are supported; however, it is emphasised that Turkish machinery production, which is based on genuine added value, engineering capability and long-standing integration with European markets, should not be assessed within this scope.
– The “Made in Europe” approach should not be defined as a narrow geographical label, but on the basis of quality, reliability, technical compliance, sustainability and contribution to Europe’s industrial strength.
Europe’s Resilience Cannot Be Strengthened Through a Narrow Industrial Perimeter
In its submission, MİB acknowledged that the IAA represents an important opportunity to strengthen Europe’s manufacturing base and accelerate the clean industrial transition. However, it argued that Europe’s industrial resilience can only be genuinely strengthened by preserving existing and reliable value chains.
It was assessed that recognising Türkiye’s role within the scope of the IAA would support European manufacturers, reinforce supply-chain stability, strengthen the industrial integration logic of the Customs Union and make the European machinery industry ecosystem more resilient.
It was emphasised that this approach would not weaken Europe’s industrial sovereignty; on the contrary, it would create a more realistic, applicable and robust basis for industrial policy.
The full text of the submission conveyed by MİB to the European Commission is provided below.
Position of MİB on the EU Industrial Accelerator Act
The Machine Manufacturers Association of Türkiye (MİB), representing more than 200 machinery manufacturers, supports the European Union’s objective to strengthen industrial resilience, accelerate decarbonization, reduce dependencies and reinforce manufacturing capacity through the Industrial Accelerator Act.
For the Turkish machinery sector, the Act is a strategic industrial policy initiative that will shape European manufacturing value chains. Its success will depend on whether Europe’s industrial base is defined in a realistic and sound manner.
Türkiye should not be viewed as an ordinary third-country supplier. Through the Customs Union, regulatory convergence and deep supply-chain integration, Turkish machinery manufacturers have become part of Europe’s wider industrial ecosystem. In practice, the EU and Türkiye already operate as a shared industrial space in machinery, with common standards, common customers, common value chains and connected production networks.
The scale of the sector confirms this role. Türkiye’s machinery exports reached US$28.7 billion in 2025. Machinery accounts for more than 10% of Türkiye’s total exports and reaches more than 200 markets worldwide. Around 60% of Turkish machinery exports are directed to the EU and the United States, and Türkiye is the sixth-largest machinery manufacturer in Europe. The industry includes more than 22,000 enterprises and employs over 317,000 people.
This integration is not limited to Turkish-owned companies. Many EU-headquartered industrial groups have production, engineering, sourcing, distribution and after-sales operations in Türkiye. These operations are embedded in regional and global supply chains and contribute to the competitiveness of European manufacturers. A restrictive interpretation of the Act would affect not only Turkish exporters, but also EU companies already invested in Türkiye.
Machinery is not merely an upstream input for strategic sectors. It is the productive capacity that makes industrial expansion possible. Europe’s ability to scale up clean technologies, modernize existing facilities, improve productivity, strengthen supply-chain resilience and expand advanced manufacturing depends on access to competitive, reliable, nearby and standards-oriented machinery.
For this reason, the treatment of Customs Union partners under the Act is central. MİB welcomes the recognition of content originating in Customs Union partners as equivalent to Union origin in relevant public procurement and public support contexts. This approach reflects the economic and legal reality of the EU-Türkiye industrial relationship and should remain a core principle.
Uncertainty over the continuity of this equivalence would create risks for long-term investment planning, supply-chain stability and industrial cooperation. If technically aligned Customs Union partners are treated like unrelated third-country suppliers, European manufacturers may face higher input costs, longer delivery times, reduced supplier flexibility, distorted market dynamics and weaker competitiveness.
MİB supports an approach based on technical performance, sustainability, resilience, regulatory alignment and value-chain integration, rather than a narrow geographic reading of industrial policy. “Made in Europe” should stand for quality, reliability, low-carbon transition capability and contribution to Europe’s industrial strength.
Turkish machinery manufacturers are not a dependency risk. They are nearby, reliable and established partners of European industry.
Excluding Türkiye from the wider European industrial perimeter would not make Europe more resilient. It would reduce the pool of trusted and technically aligned manufacturing capacity available to European producers, including EU companies operating in or sourcing from Türkiye.
Preserving Türkiye’s role should be viewed not as a concession, but as a sound industrial policy choice.