World Trade Organization

Mexico is a founding member of the WTO and has adhered to all other plurilateral rules and agreements, such as:

• the Trade Facilitation Agreement;
• the Anti-Dumping Agreement, or Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994;
• the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Agreement;
• the Safeguards Agreement;
• the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement;
• the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS); and
• the Agreement on Agriculture.

Mexico also actively participates in the regular activities of the WTO, negotiations and discussions in new trade-related matters, and has complied with all resolutions, recommendations and comments of the WTO’s Appellate Body and the Trade Policy Review Body.

Mexico is a key participant in several free trade agreements, including more than 13 valid and effective free trade agreements that cover 50 countries, providing access to global trade and supply chains across North America, Latin America, Asia and Europe. Among other agreements, the following are the most representative:

United States–Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA);

• Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP);
• Mexico–Costa Rica Free Trade Agreement;
• Pacific Alliance with Chile, Colombia and Peru;
• Economic Partnership, Political Coordination, and Cooperation Agreement between Mexico and the European Union (pending final signature);
• Mexico–Colombia Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–Chile Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–European Union Free Trade Agreement (TLCUEM);
• Mexico–Israel Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–Northern Triangle Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–European Free Trade Association (AELC);
• Mexico–Uruguay Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–Japan Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–Peru Free Trade Agreement;
• Mexico–Central America Free Trade Agreement; and
• Mexico–Panama Free Trade Agreement.

Additionally, in June 2021, the United Kingdom and Mexico signed the UK–Mexico Trade Continuity Agreement (TCA), which was designed as an interim agreement following Brexit. Formal negotiations for a new and comprehensive free trade agreement between the United Kingdom and Mexico began in May 2022 and are still ongoing.

There is no applicable information in this jurisdiction.

United Kingdom–Mexico

The United Kingdom and Mexico signed the UK–Mexico Trade Continuity Agreement (TCA) in 2021 following the UK’s exit from the EU.

In 2022, both countries signed the Agreement on the Mutual Recognition and Protection of Designations for Spirit Drinks concerning geographical indications between both countries to protect spirits from both countries, such as tequila, Irish and Scotch whisky, and mezcal, among others. The two countries are currently negotiating a new and comprehensive free trade agreement.

European Union–Mexico

Mexico and the EU entered into the Economic Partnership, Political Coordination, and Cooperation Agreement. In 2016, both countries decided to initiate negotiations to update its provisions, reaching a preliminary agreement in 2018, which is pending signature and ratification by the parliaments of all EU member states.

USA–CANADA–MEXICO

While the USMCA review in July 2026 should not qualify as a “new” agreement, it is expected to be a comprehensive review of the obligations and commitments of the treaty. This review will provide the opportunity to extend the treaty’s validity for six years (it is currently set to expire in 2036, with the possibility of extending it until 2042).

The review is expected to focus on key areas of friction, including:

• automotive rules of origin and labour value content;
• energy and state-owned enterprises, particularly Mexico’s energy policy;
• labour and environmental enforcement mechanisms;
• agricultural market access (corn, dairy, SPS measures);
• digital trade and data governance; and
• dispute settlement procedures.

Beyond specific issues, the 2026 review will act as a strategic checkpoint to evaluate North America’s competitiveness, supply chain integration, and the political will to sustain long-term co-operation under the USMCA.

• In 2021, Mexico and Canada challenged the USA over its stricter interpretation of automotive rules of origin under the USMCA. In 2023, a panel ruled in favour of Mexico and Canada, allowing a more flexible interpretation, which benefits the Mexican automotive industry.
• The USA initiated consultations in 2023 over Mexico’s ban on GM corn for human consumption, citing health concerns. The USA argues this may violate USMCA commitments, and the dispute remains in the consultation phase.
• The USA and Canada requested consultations in 2022 over Mexico’s energy policies favouring state-owned firms (CFE and Pemex), arguing these policies discriminate against foreign companies and may breach the USMCA. The dispute remains in the consultation phase.
• The USA has raised concerns over Mexico’s labelling requirements for imported dairy products. Although this has not yet escalated to formal dispute resolution, consultations are ongoing.
• Discussions between the USA and Mexico involve quotas on agricultural imports, like potatoes and blueberries, aiming to prevent trade barriers under USMCA guidelines.
• Similar to a prior US request, in 2024 Canada initiated a consultation regarding Mexico’s energy sector policies.

The most prominent and widely discussed development is the first review of the USMCA, scheduled for July 2026. This review will determine whether the treaty’s validity is extended for an additional six years or if any party decides to withdraw from the agreement, though the latter is highly unlikely. The USMCA encompasses approximately USD1.8 trillion in global trade, making it the most significant and influential trade agreement.

The USMCA strengthens the two most significant trade relationships of the USA, as Canada and Mexico together constitute its largest export market. In 2023, Mexico and Canada surpassed China as the United States’ main import partners, a development that, in the context of the escalating trade tensions between the USA and China, grants the USMCA joint review scheduled for 2026 a strategic and decisive relevance for international trade.

All three member countries launched domestic public consultations in late 2025 to gather feedback from key industry stakeholders ahead of the mandatory 2026 joint review of the USMCA.

Mexico initiated its consultation process in September 2025 through a formal government notice inviting comments and recommendations from stakeholders and interested parties. The notice set 16 November 2025 as the deadline for submitting observations and proposals.

• The House of Representatives is responsible for drafting and issuing laws that impact customs and foreign trade matters.
• The executive branch has the regulatory authority to develop the provisions established by the legislation enacted by Congress. This must respect the limits established in the legislation, and therefore it cannot impose greater burdens or obligations on the governed.
• The Mexican National Customs Agency (ANAM) is a decentralised agency of the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit responsible for the direction, organisation, and operation of customs services. Its primary function is to implement and ensure compliance with the regulations governing the import and export of goods from national territory, as well as the collection of federal customs revenues.
• The Tax Administration Service (SAT) has certain faculties in customs matters and is responsible for ensuring compliance with tax obligations, including those of major taxpayers and foreigners engaging in economic activities and foreign trade in the country.
• The Ministry of Economy is the authority responsible for the investigation, regulation, determination, and enforcement of payment regarding countervailing duties and investigations into unfair trade practices. Although these do not fall strictly within the realm of customs law, they do have a direct impact on tariffs.

The relevant government agencies that administer or enforce customs laws and regulations are:

• ANAM;
• SAT – through the General Administration of Foreign Trade Audit (referred to by its Spanish acronym AGACE); and
• the Ministry of Economy.

In Mexico, trade practices that negatively impact domestic industries are addressed through the application of the Foreign Trade Law (Ley de Comercio Exterior). This law provides the legal framework for investigating and imposing trade remedies, including anti-dumping duties, countervailing measures, and safeguards, which serve as mechanisms similar to the EU’s Trade Barriers Regulation and the US Section 301. The law is implemented through the Ministry of Economy and allows for protective measures when unfair practices in other jurisdictions threaten Mexican industries.

Additionally, the government may initiate an investigation procedure either ex officio or upon request from an interested party to ascertain the existence of any unfair trade practices, which may result in the imposition of anti-dumping or countervailing duties.

In connection with the aforementioned proceedings, when the competent authority decides to initiate an anti-dumping or countervailing investigation, non-domestic companies shall have the opportunity to participate in the review process. The findings of the investigation will be published in the Official Gazette and communicated to the national producers known to the competent authority.

In order to determine the measures currently in effect, a case-by-case analysis is necessary, based on the specific type of product and its origin; however, in general the vast majority of the anti-dumping duties are imposed on products originating from China, from the steel, textile, footwear, ceramic and plastic sectors.

Recently, there has been a substantial increase in audits conducted by the tax authority to verify that companies engaged in foreign trade operations are complying with their obligations. At the same time, customs authorities have become much stricter regarding the importation of goods in order to determine their originating status.

In line with this shift, the SAT has published a series of amendments to the General Rules on Foreign Trade, placing particular emphasis on companies’ internal control systems and the operations conducted under their registered importer and exporter registries, including those applicable to specific industries. These amendments aim to strengthen the government’s revenue collection and compliance control policies for certain strategic sectors.

Likewise, considering Mexico’s current context, temporary imports of goods intended for the 2026 FIFA World Cup have been included, as well as amendments to the ATA Convention and Carnets, which relate to the temporary importation of such goods intended for exhibitions, trade fairs, commercial samples, advertising materials, among others.

On October 2025, the Customs Law reform package was approved by Congress and submitted to the President for its approval. The Customs Law is the primary legal instrument governing the different aspects related to the importation and exportation of goods into and from Mexico.

The main amendments introduce stricter penalties, increased fines for non-compliance with customs and tax obligations, and grant broader powers to the customs authorities (specifically to the ANAM) in matters related to the inspection, auditing, tax collection, and oversight of foreign trade operations.

They also contemplate an expansion of the liability framework applicable to customs brokers, the imposition of additional obligations on importers, and the introduction of further measures aimed at preventing and combating tax evasion and avoidance.

There are different types of sanctions and mechanisms used within Mexican jurisdiction concerning foreign trade operations, including:

• Tariff barriers: These represent elevated foreign trade duties designed to control or reduce the volume of goods entering or exiting the country.
• Non-tariff measures: Mexico may impose non-tariff measures that restrict imports or exports of products through quantitative or qualitative restrictions, such as labelling requirements, import or export permits, authorisations, or certificates.
• Technical barriers to trade: Mexico can also implement non-tariff measures or barriers that limit imports or exports of products, including quotas and other requirements.
• General prohibitions: A further sanction may involve a complete ban on imports or exports of specific products within the country. Such prohibitions are typically justified on the basis of public health, environmental protection, or national security considerations.
• Restrictions on services: Certain services are reserved for the state; accordingly, Mexico may grant specific concessions and authorisations for the exploitation and provision of such services.
• Anti-dumping and countervailing duties: In cases where, as a result of an investigation conducted by the competent authority, it is determined that imports have been made under conditions of price discrimination that cause harm to the domestic industry, certain measures may be imposed, such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties.

The legal or administrative authorities for imposing sanctions are the Federal Executive Branch, the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit and the Ministry of Economy.

The government agencies responsible for enforcing the sanctions regime are SAT, through its different administrative units (such as the General Administration in Foreign Trade Audit), and the National Customs Agency of Mexico.

The Ministry of Economy, Ministry of Energy, Ministry of Health, and the Environmental Office are responsible for the application of and compliance with trade sanctions.

Any individual or legal entity involved in importing or exporting goods that engage in conduct targeted by sanctions is subject to sanctions laws and regulations in Mexico.

Mexico does not maintain a domestic list of sanctioned persons. The only general restrictions enforced are those derived from United Nations Security Council resolutions. These primarily focus on restricting the import and export of certain military and dual-use technological goods to and from certain countries, such as Iran, North Korea, and Afghanistan.

At the local level, SAT regularly publishes lists of taxpayers suspended for failing to comply with obligations related to trade incentive programmes, including the Manufacturing, Maquiladora and Export Services Industry (IMMEX) Programme, VAT certification, and others. SAT also maintains and frequently updates a general list of suspended importers.

Mexico only enforces those sanctions established by the UN Security Council related to restrictions on the export and import of certain military and dual-use technological goods to and from nations such as Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Lebanon, and Yemen, among others.

Mexico only enforces those sanctions established by the UN Security Council.

Mexico only applies direct sanctions related to imports and exports in Mexico.

Penalties for violations of sanctions laws and regulations include the following:

• tax assessments;
• fines, which may vary depending on the nature of the violation but can exceed 100% of the value of the goods;
• suspension or cancellation of trade programmes and/or registries;
• confiscation of the imported or exported goods that fail to comply with all customs regulations; and
• criminal sanctions in case of importing or exporting prohibited goods, which could be classified as smuggling.

Determining whether a licence is required for specific goods necessitates a case-by-case analysis.

Mexico has a consistent track record of adhering to international laws, regulations, and rulings, including compliance with decisions issued against the country.  However, the current administration has placed strong emphasis on increasing tax collection through enhanced enforcement measures, particularly in foreign trade and customs operations.

The government’s strategy includes closer scrutiny of import and export activities, tighter controls on preferential programmes such as IMMEX and VAT Certification, and more frequent audits aimed at identifying irregularities or non-compliance with customs and fiscal obligations. While these measures are intended to strengthen public revenue and ensure regulatory compliance, they also reflect a more assertive enforcement approach that could increase the operational burden for foreign trade companies.

Mexico currently does not have sanctions-related blocking or reporting requirements.

It is worth mentioning that under Mexican law, entities involved in foreign trade or financial transactions must comply with certain reporting obligations, particularly if the transactions involve sanctioned entities or high-risk jurisdictions under anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing regulations.

Mexico does not currently have any blocking statutes, anti-boycott regulations, or other restrictions that prohibit adherence to other jurisdictions’ sanctions.

As part of the key developments related to the imposition of sanctions by the authorities on taxpayers, there has been a clear trend towards a stricter enforcement policy aimed at preventing and discouraging tax evasion and exceptions.

In this regard, the authorities have strengthened and tightened their oversight of matters related to companies’ inventory control systems, particularly those that operate under trade promotion programmes/authorisations or tariff deferral mechanisms. Likewise, there has been an increased focus on verifying the origin status of goods imported into the country under preferential tariff treatment.

With respect to specific sectors, the authorities have implemented enhanced control measures to reinforce supervision of industries considered strategic for the national economy. Accordingly, in 2025, Mexico’s hydrocarbons and energy sectors have faced a series of significant regulatory changes, including the enactment of the new Internal Regulations of the Ministry of Energy, which establish the obligation to obtain import permits for certain goods.

As part of the Customs Law reform package, approved by Congress and submitted to the President for promulgation in October 2025, the amendments introduce stricter penalties and increased fines for non-compliance with customs and tax obligations.

Once enacted, the reform will grant authorities broader powers to impose sanctions on taxpayers, including significantly higher monetary penalties for inaccuracies in customs declarations, failures to comply with inventory control requirements, and violations related to the origin of goods under preferential tariff programmes.

The reform also reflects a wider enforcement trend under the current administration, aimed at strengthening fiscal oversight and increasing revenue collection through tighter control of foreign trade operations.

The legal framework governing export operations and controls includes the Customs Law, the Foreign Trade Law, their regulations and certain general administrative provisions, such as the General Rules in Foreign Trade, which provide for operational obligations and guidance in customs matters.

The legal and administrative authorities for export controls are the same as those for general customs and trade matters.

In certain cases, other authorities, such as the Ministry of Energy, the Ministry of Health, the Environmental Office, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources, the Ministry of National Defense, among others, participate in the establishment and application of, and compliance with, particular export controls.

The government agencies that administer and enforce export controls are the same as those for general customs and trade matters.

In certain cases, other authorities, such as the Ministry of Energy, the Ministry of Health, the Environmental Office, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources, the Ministry of National Defense, among others, participate in the establishment and application of, and compliance with, particular export controls.

Any individual or legal entity involved in importing or exporting goods that engages in conduct targeted by sanctions is subject to export controls in Mexico.

Mexico does not maintain a list of restricted persons.

The only general restrictions enforced are those derived from United Nations Security Council resolutions. These primarily focus on restricting the import and export of certain military and dual-use technological goods to and from certain countries, such as Iran, North Korea, and Afghanistan.

Exports in certain sectors, such as alcohol, beer, cigars, processed tobacco, gold, silver, and copper, are required to register in specific export registries. This means that, to export items in these sectors, exporters must secure prior registration in the appropriate registry before proceeding with the export transaction.

Depending on the specific case and the tariff classification applicable to the goods being exported, compliance with additional measures may be required, such as obtaining a prior export permit, registration in the sectoral exporter registry, and demonstrating compliance with applicable Mexican Official Standards, among others.

Penalties for violations of export controls include the following:

• tax assessments;
• fines, which may vary depending on the nature of the violation but can exceed 100% of the value of the goods;
• suspension or cancellation of trade programmes and/or registries;
• confiscation of the imported or exported goods that fail to comply with all customs regulations; and
• criminal sanctions in case of importing or exporting prohibited goods, which could be classified as smuggling.

Mexico regulates the export of software, technologies or dual-use goods, including transmissions containing data processing programs, data transmission or telecommunications by electronic media or any other means of communication, susceptible of being diverted for the proliferation and manufacture of conventional weapons and WMVs.

To export these goods, the exporter must secure a prior export permit from the Ministry of Economy, notwithstanding any other provision or control by other regulators.

Furthermore, the Ministry of National Defense is empowered to control and monitor industrial and commercial activities and operations carried out with weapons, ammunition, explosives, artifices and chemical substances, and is responsible for granting the necessary permits for importing or exporting such goods (according to Resolution No 1540 of the UN Security Council).

Mexico has extensive legislation regarding foreign trade operations, which not only grants broad powers to the authorities but also establishes a wide array of penalties for non-compliance. This robust legal framework ensures that compliance is regularly reviewed, fostering accountability and adherence to regulations within the trade sector.

A case-by-case analysis is necessary regarding export controls-related requirements.

On 21 January 2025, the Mexican government issued a “Decree granting tax incentives to support the national strategy called ‘Plan México’, to encourage new investments, incentivise dual training programmes, and promote innovation” (the “Nearshoring Decree”).

Under the Nearshoring Decree, individuals and legal entities that meet the established requirements will be allowed to apply an immediate deduction on new fixed asset investments acquired from 22 January 2025 to 30 September 2030. Such deduction can be taken in the same tax year in which the investment is made, and it will be calculated by applying percentages ranging from 35% to 91%, depending on the type of asset acquired or activity carried out.

The 2025 Decree introduces important innovations, including the creation of an Evaluation Committee tasked with authorising tax incentives and ensuring transparency and accountability in their allocation, a measure which was not included in the previous regulation. It also establishes a total cap of MXN30 billion for the incentives, divided mainly between accelerated depreciation and expenses related to training and innovation.

The nearshoring trend continues to position Mexico as an attractive destination for foreign investment, supported by its strategic geographic location, competitive labour costs, strong logistics infrastructure, and a wide network of free trade agreements. These advantages have consolidated Mexico’s role as a key manufacturing hub within North America, offering an appealing alternative to Asia. However, as global trade conditions shift, particularly under the renewed protectionist stance of the Trump administration, Mexico is expected to strengthen its export and foreign trade regulations to safeguard national interests, ensure fiscal oversight, and maintain alignment with evolving international standards.

Upcoming regulatory changes may involve stricter export verification procedures, enhanced traceability requirements for sensitive goods, and closer co-ordination with US export control frameworks, especially in strategic sectors such as semiconductors, defence, and dual-use technologies. While these measures could increase compliance requirements for exporters, they also aim to provide a more transparent and predictable regulatory environment, reinforcing investor confidence and consolidating Mexico’s reputation as a stable and trusted nearshoring platform within the North American supply chain.

The International Trade Practice Unit of the Ministry of Economy is the administrative authority in charge of governing the imposition, modification, or revocation of anti-dumping duties, countervailing duties and safeguards investigations.

The Ministry of Economy, through its International Trade Practice Unit, is the authority that imposes measures against unfair trade practices, while the National Customs Agency of Mexico and SAT are responsible for ensuring the effective application and collection of anti-dumping duties, countervailing duties and safeguard measures.

According to the Foreign Trade Law, an anti-dumping and countervailing investigation may be initiated both ex officio, when sufficient evidence of price discrimination exists, or upon a request from an interested party.

Requests for investigation by interested parties may be submitted by legally constituted organisations, individuals, or legal entities that produce the same or like products as those imported under price discrimination. Interested parties must represent at least 25% of the total domestic market for the same or like products, or 50% when such producers are also importers of the goods under analysis or are associated with the exporters or importers of the goods under investigation.

Domestic companies are entitled to formally request that the International Trade Practice Unit initiate an investigation when they collectively account for at least 25% of the total domestic market for the same or like products, or 50% when such producers are also importers of the goods under analysis or are associated with the exporters or the importers of the goods.

This threshold is crucial as it helps to ensure that significant market participants can effectively address potential unfair practices. Furthermore, it is important to note that the UPCI actively engages in regular monitoring and investigative procedures to identify and prevent such activities, recognising that they can significantly undermine the integrity of the domestic market and harm fair competition.

Once the investigation procedure has been initiated, non-domestic companies, national producers, importers, exporters, foreign legal entities, or individuals who were not initially summoned but can demonstrate a legal interest in the outcome of the procedure, have an opportunity to participate in it. A specific period is granted for these parties to submit all relevant documentation and evidence to support their claims.

Anti-Dumping Investigation

Prior to meeting the requirements for the initiation of an anti-dumping investigation, or in the case of an ex officio investigation, the UPCI will publish in the Official Gazette the resolution declaring the initiation of the investigation. This resolution must specify the tariff classification of the merchandise, the parties interested in the procedure, the investigated period, and the damage analysis period it will encompass, as well as the arguments and evidence presented for the initiation. Additionally, other parties with a legitimate interest in the outcome of the investigation, who can demonstrate their legal interest, will be granted a period of 23 business days to appear and submit any arguments and evidence they deem relevant.

The UPCI has 90 business days following the initiation resolution to issue a preliminary resolution, in which they can establish a preliminary anti-dumping duty and proceed with the investigation, or terminate the investigation if there is not enough evidence of price discrimination or injury, or there is no causal relation between them.

After the publication of the preliminary resolution, but before issuing the final resolution, the UPCI must notify the parties of the date on which the public hearing will take place for the presentation of the oral arguments.

Under Article 39 of the Foreign Trade Law, to determine an anti-dumping duty, the UPCI must verify if the imports under conditions of price discrimination are the cause of injury to the domestic market or like products. In that sense, injury is understood as:

• material injury caused to the domestic market;
• a threat of injury to the domestic market; or
• a delay in the development of the domestic market.

Once the investigation is completed, the Ministry of Economy must issue a final resolution within 210 business days from the initiation of the investigation and publish it in the Official Gazette.  The final resolution may:

• impose definitive anti-dumping duties;
• revoke or adjust the provisional anti-dumping duties; or
• conclude the investigation without imposing anti-dumping duties.

The UPCI must calculate individual dumping margins for those exporters who provided sufficient information and evidence to do so. These individual margins will also serve as the basis for determining individual anti-dumping duties. Finally, anti-dumping duties will be valid for five years from the date they come into effect.

Anti-Subsidy Investigation Procedure

An anti-subsidy investigation by the UPCI can also be initiated ex officio when sufficient proof of the existence of subsidies is found, or by an interested party that complies with all applicable requirements provided by law.

The investigation can be requested by legally constituted organisations, individuals or legal entity producers of the same or like products as those under analysis. Interested parties must represent at least 25% of the total domestic market of the same or like products, or 50% when such producers are also importers of the goods under analysis or are associated with the exporters or importers of the goods under investigation.

The timeline for anti-subsidy investigations mirrors that of anti-dumping cases, including as regards the acceptance of the request, the request for additional information, and publication in the Federal Official Gazette.

The UPCI has 90 business days following the initiation resolution to issue a preliminary resolution in which they can establish a preliminary countervailing duty and proceed with the investigation, or terminate the investigation if there is not enough evidence of price discrimination or injury, or there is no causal relation between them.

Once the investigation is completed, the UPCI must forward to the Foreign Trade Commission the final draft resolution related to the anti-subsidy investigation. Within 210 business days from the initiation of the investigation, the Ministry of Economy will issue a final resolution where it may:

• impose final and definitive CVDs;
• revoke or adjust the provisional CVDs imposed in the preliminary resolution; or
• declare the investigation as concluded without imposing CVDs.

The UPCI must calculate individual dumping margins for those exporters who provided sufficient information and evidence to do so. These individual margins will also serve as the basis for determining individual anti-dumping duties. Finally, countervailing duties will be valid for five years from the date they come into effect.

Safeguard Investigation Procedure

While not considered an unfair trade practice, safeguard measures regulate or temporarily restrict imports of goods identical, similar, or directly competitive with national production as necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury to the domestic market in question and to facilitate the adjustment of national producers.

This type of investigation may be initiated ex officio by the Ministry of Economy or upon a request from an interested party (interested parties may include legally constituted organisations, individuals, or legal entities that produce identical, similar, or directly competitive goods). Safeguard measures may consist of, among other things, specific or ad valorem tariffs, prior permits, or quotas, or any combination of the above.

The determination of safeguard measures must be completed within 210 days following the publication of the resolution that initiates the investigation, and such measures will be subject to the provisions of the international treaties to which Mexico is a party. Additionally, the validity of safeguard measures may be up to four years. 

The Federal Executive may also establish provisional safeguard measures if critical circumstances arise, where any delay could cause injury that would be difficult to repair. Such measures require evidence that increased imports have caused or threaten to cause serious injury to the domestic industry.

The validity of provisional safeguard measures shall not exceed six months, during which time compliance with the provisions established in the international treaties to which Mexico is a party must be ensured.

The preliminary and final rulings must be published in the Official Gazette of the Federation, so that the parties involved in the procedure and the general public are made aware of the determinations and consequences. The information, documents and specifics of each investigation are only accessible to the parties involved unless deemed confidential.

Mexico is not restricted by any jurisdiction when it comes to imposing anti-dumping duties, countervailing duties, or safeguard measures.

Mexico follows the general rules imposed by the AD/CVD WTO Agreements. Both measures must be eliminated within a period of five years from the date of their entry into force, unless reviewed (sunset review) and extended for an additional five-year period.

Both measures can also be reviewed annually: (i) through an ex officio review by the authority at any point or (ii) by express petition of a party to the investigations during a specified calendar month each year.

Regarding safeguard measures, they can be in place for up to four years, unless extended after a new investigation. The initial application period and any extension thereof may not, in general, exceed eight years.

A review procedure may be initiated on the following basis:

• annual review; or
• sunset review within a period of five years through a validity examination upon receiving a written request from one or more producers.

For the Ministry of Economy to initiate a validity examination, one or more producers must express in writing their interest in such an examination and present a proposal for an examination period of six months to one year within the validity period of the duty, at least 25 days prior to its expiration.

In this proceeding, interested parties will have the opportunity to provide evidence and make arguments, which the International Trade Practice Unit must consider; after analysing such evidence, it must decide whether to maintain, eliminate, or reduce the anti-dumping or countervailing duty.

In any case, the resolution declaring the initiation or conclusion of the review must be notified to the interested parties known to the Ministry of Economy and published in the Official Gazette. Likewise, the review procedure must be completed within a period of 12 months following the resolution that declares their initiation.

It is important to mention that the resolution confirming, modifying or revoking the definitive anti-dumping or countervailing duties will have the character of a “final resolution”.

Administrative Appeal

The initial means of challenging a resolution that imposes definitive anti-dumping or countervailing duties, or the resolutions that apply them, is an administrative appeal. The purpose of this appeal is to revoke the measures imposed. This process is conducted in accordance with the provisions set out in the Federal Tax Code and must be filed within 30 business days of the notification of the resolution. The appeal will be resolved by the same authority that imposed the contested trade remedies.

Nullity Trial

If the administrative appeal results in an unfavourable outcome, the interested parties may proceed to a contentious administrative trial, also referred to as a nullity trial, before the Federal Court of Administrative Justice. This trial must be initiated within 30 business days following the notification of the resolution, in accordance with the Federal Law of Contentious Administrative Procedure. Through this process, the court may declare the nullity of the resolution issued by the Ministry of Economy that imposed a definitive anti-dumping or countervailing duty.

It is worth noting that resolutions subject to an administrative appeal can also be challenged. If a favourable ruling is obtained, it would result in the nullity of the anti-dumping or countervailing duty, rendering them void for all parties involved in the investigation process.

Amparo Lawsuit

If the resolution obtained in the contentious administrative trial does not favour the plaintiff’s claims, there remains the option of filing an amparo lawsuit. This must be submitted within 15 business days following the notification of the resolution issued by the Federal Court of Administrative Justice, and the circuit courts of the judiciary will be in charge of hearing and resolving the matter.

If the plaintiff receives a favourable judgment, their rights will be fully reinstated, and the situation will be restored to the state it was in prior to the violation. However, if the judgment is unfavourable, the plaintiff may still pursue an amparo in review, provided that constitutional arguments regarding the application of the law are raised.

Mexico is adopting a more assertive position to protect its domestic industries from potential market disruptions caused by the import and commercialisation of low-priced goods, particularly from China. This shift reflects the government’s broader strategy to safeguard key manufacturing sectors that are central to its nearshoring and industrial development agenda, such as steel, aluminium, textiles, and chemicals. The UPCI emphasised the importance of enforcing trade defence instruments not only to ensure fair competition but also to prevent market distortions that could undermine employment, investment, and fiscal revenue. In parallel, this more proactive stance aligns with Mexico’s goal of maintaining a balanced trade relationship with China while responding to growing political and commercial pressure from the United States to limit the influx of underpriced Asian goods into North America.

Mexico has also intensified its use of anti-dumping and safeguard measures as a key policy tool. By October 2025, the country had opened at least 11 new anti-dumping investigations against Chinese-origin goods, nearly doubling the number from the previous year. These cases cover a wide range of products, from steel and metal components to ceramic tiles, plastics, aluminium foil, and certain electrical and mechanical parts, all of which are considered sensitive sectors under Mexico’s industrial policy.

There is no applicable information in this jurisdiction.

In Mexico, investment security mechanisms are primarily governed by the Foreign Investment Law and regulated by the Ministry of Economy. This framework allows the Mexican government to review certain investments, especially those in sectors considered sensitive or of national interest, such as energy, telecommunications, transportation, and defence. The National Foreign Investment Commission is responsible for overseeing the investment review process.

The investment security review process generally begins with a submission by the foreign investor to the Ministry of Economy, detailing the proposed investment. The timeline for the review can vary but typically takes up to 45 business days, depending on the complexity of the investment and the sector involved. The authorities evaluate whether the investment could pose a risk to national security, economic stability, or other critical areas.

Overall, the Foreign Investment Law and related regulations allow Mexico to protect its strategic industries while promoting an open and secure investment environment for foreign capital.

The relevant authorities in charge of the administration and enforcement of investment security measures in Mexico are the Ministry of Economy and the National Foreign Investment Commission, which is composed of the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit.

The Foreign Investment Law establishes the regulations that govern the entry of foreign direct investment into Mexico and promote its contribution to national development, expressly stating that, in general terms, foreigners have the freedom to participate in or conduct any lawful economic activity, provided that no specific restrictions are explicitly stated.

In Mexico, a transaction is subject to investment security measures or reviews primarily when it involves sectors deemed strategic or sensitive to national interests. According to the Foreign Investment Law, foreign investments in areas like energy, telecommunications, transportation, and defence may require review to assess potential risks to national security, economic stability, or critical infrastructure.

Regarding the activities that allow for foreign participation and investment, the control mechanisms are varied and may include a maximum limit on shareholding participation depending on the specific activity; for certain activities where foreign shareholding is limited to 49%, authorisation may be requested from the National Foreign Investment Commission for a higher percentage.

Additionally, certain individuals are required to register with the National Registry of Foreign Investments.

In cases where the operation or transaction falls within any of the expressly limited scenarios outlined in the Foreign Investment Law, notification must be provided, and authorisation must be requested from the National Foreign Investment Commission, which will consider, among other factors, public interest in granting these authorisations.

It is important to note that these authorisation are distinct from, and independent of, the merger control review process conducted by the Mexican competition authorities.

In relation to the sectors that are expressly limited under the Foreign Investment Law, there are no exceptions. Beyond this, the policy pursued by the Mexican state generally promotes foreign investment, granting foreigners the freedom to engage and participate in various sectors, provided that they do not fall within the limited scenarios.

In accordance with the provisions of the Foreign Investment Law, any person who acts in contravention of the provisions of this regulation may be subject to the revocation of the authorisations granted to them.

Furthermore, depending on the type of conduct engaged in, fines may be imposed. Prior to such determination, the interested party must be heard, and in the case of monetary sanctions, consideration shall be given to the nature and severity of the violation, the economic capacity of the offender, the time elapsed between the date the obligation should have been fulfilled and its fulfilment or regularisation, as well as the total value of the transaction.

It is important to mention that the authority responsible for enforcing the corresponding sanctions will be the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the imposition of sanctions provided for in the Foreign Investment Law shall be without prejudice to any civil or criminal liability that may apply.

A fee must be paid for the receipt and review of applications and the issuance of specific resolutions by the National Foreign Investment Commission and authorisations issued by the Ministry of Economy, with the specific amounts outlined in the Federal Law of Rights.

Over the past year, Mexico has experienced a shift toward tighter oversight of foreign investments in sectors critical to national security, including energy, telecommunications, and infrastructure. These changes align with the government’s objective to strengthen control over industries deemed essential to national interests. This trend reflects a growing emphasis on safeguarding strategic sectors, with Mexican authorities prioritising the alignment of foreign investments with national objectives and security considerations.

A key example of this shift is found in the recent amendments to the internal regulations of the Ministry of Energy. One of the most significant changes is the elimination of permit renewals; once a permit expires, holders are required to apply for a new authorisation, which entails a comprehensive review to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements established by the authorities.

Over the next year, Mexico is expected to see various developments concerning investment security, particularly as the government prioritises control over strategic sectors:

• Energy Sector: Foreign involvement in oil, gas, and renewable energy may face stricter regulations as authorities continue to promote energy independence. Anticipated changes could impact foreign investors seeking to operate in this sector.
• Judicial and Legislative Amendments: According to recent judicial reforms, potential legislative updates or court decisions could expand the framework for foreign investment oversight. This could introduce broader criteria for security reviews, especially in industries where foreign control could affect economic stability.

These projected changes reflect a trend toward greater regulatory control over strategic sectors, which could mean new compliance requirements for foreign investors operating in Mexico.

• In Mexico’s northern border region, there is a special VAT regime to promote economic development and competitiveness. Unlike the standard VAT rate of 16% applied throughout the rest of Mexico, the border region benefits from a reduced VAT rate of 8%. This reduced rate applies to the sale of goods and services within approximately 20 kilometres of the USA–Mexico border, aiming to make Mexican businesses more competitive with USA prices and to stimulate local commerce and investment.
• There are specific geographic areas located in the northern and southern borders, named border or development zones, which grant tax, customs, real estate and financial benefits or preferential treatments for the entities that chose to establish their manufacturing or commercial presence there in order to promote economic development.
• The Sectorial Promotion Programme (PROSEC) allows importers to apply preferential import rates (in some cases even exempted from payment) to imports of raw materials, component parts, machinery and equipment that are intended for the manufacturing of certain goods to be commercialised in Mexico. This authorisation is aimed at promoting manufacturing and developing certain sectors in Mexico.
• The extensive free trade and double taxation treaty network gives producers access to multiple markets.

In Mexico, standards and other technical requirements are not openly applied to reduce imports and/or encourage domestic production, since this could violate several trade agreements, namely GATT, the USMCA, and the CPTPP, among others.

However, it is well known that Mexico is a protectionist country regarding sensitive sectors; therefore, it normally applies additional regulations to these types of products, such as the automatic notice for steel products, and reference prices for footwear and textiles, among others.

Depending on the goods involved in foreign trade operations, these may be subject to various health requirements regulated by the Ministry of Health through the Federal Commission for the Protection against Sanitary Risks (COFEPRIS) or the National Service of Health, Food Safety, and Quality (SENASICA), which is a unit of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries, and Food.

These requirements may include prior import or export permits, certificates of good practices and certificates proving compliance with Mexican official standards, among others.

The Mexican government has periodically adjusted tariffs and quotas on specific imports to protect local industries; by imposing higher tariffs on certain imported goods, the government encourages domestic production to meet local demand.

Furthermore, in order to control the entry of certain goods, the Mexican state has the authority to establish quotas for imports or exports, as well as to set estimated prices aimed at levelling market competition when goods enter national territory. This is intended to counteract unfair competition both internally and externally within the country.

In addition, for the textile and footwear sectors, Mexico has implemented a reference pricing mechanism: where imports are priced below the reference price, the importer must guarantee the difference between those prices to prevent potential undervaluation practices.

In Mexico, state trading, state-owned enterprises, and selective privatisation measures are employed to support domestic production and decrease import dependency, especially in strategic sectors:

• State-Owned Enterprises: The energy sector, including oil, gas, and electricity, is dominated by state-owned enterprises such as Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE). PEMEX focuses on increasing domestic oil refining capacity to limit fuel imports, while CFE concentrates on expanding national electricity generation to ensure energy security. Both entities prioritise domestic suppliers and infrastructure projects to support local economic development and reduce reliance on imported resources.
• Agricultural Support Programmes: Through Segalmex (Food Security of Mexico), the government supports local farmers by purchasing and distributing staple foods like corn and beans. This initiative encourages domestic agricultural production, reduces food imports, and bolsters national food security.

These measures collectively enhance self-sufficiency and strengthen key sectors, particularly in energy and agriculture, while fostering a favourable environment for investment that aligns with Mexico’s national interests.

On 23 June 2023, a presidential decree in Mexico introduced changes to tariffs on white corn. This followed an earlier decree on 6 January 2023 that had removed import tariffs on essential goods, including white corn, in an effort to reduce domestic prices. However, as this exemption did not achieve the expected price reductions, the government decided to reimpose a 50% tariff on both imports and exports of white corn.

This measure aims to decrease reliance on US GMO corn imports, support Mexican agricultural productivity, and increase food availability by promoting domestic production.

There are no geographical protections in Mexico regarding international trade.

Below is a list of significant issues we consider relevant.

• Increased Audits and Reviews: Mexican tax and customs authorities have intensified audits and reviews of import and export operations, focusing especially on origin verification procedures. Adverse findings can lead to tax liabilities for importers, along with penalties and corrective measures.
• Stricter Import Valuation Oversight: Customs authorities are closely scrutinising import valuations, especially where goods are suspected of undervaluation to lower customs duties. Reference prices are now being monitored more rigorously in sectors like textiles, footwear, and steel, where anti-dumping measures are prevalent.
• Rise in AD and CVD Investigations: There has been an increase in AD and CVD investigations to protect domestic producers.
• Customs Duties as a Revenue Source: Customs duties are increasingly being viewed as an important source of tax and income for the Mexican government.