The legal basis for public procurement in Mexico is Article 134 of the Federal Constitution, which provides the principles pursuant to which public procurement is governed.
Despite the complex public procurement scenario in different sectors, the most common public procurement can be divided according to the type of authority at the federal level and the sub-federal level; there are as many local contracting regimes as there are states in the country.
The federal level is ruled by the Law on Procurement, Leases and Services by the Public Sector (Ley de Adquisiciones, Arrendamientos y Servicios del Sector Público or LAASSP) and the Law on Public Works and Related Services (Ley de Obras Públicas y Servicios Relacionados con las Mismas or LOPSRM), both with respective regulations.
The sub-federal level falls under state government and municipal authorities. It is autonomous under its own constitution and therefore has its own regulation – although in most cases it is like the federal legislation – and must be analysed on a case-by-case basis.
The regulating procurement procedures at local level sometimes reveal important discrepancies in the areas and stages of procurements. However, there are also great similarities, and sometimes even total correlation in the rules that regulate such procedures.
There are also special regimes, such as those applicable to public state enterprises – Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and the Federal Electricity Commission (Comisión Federal de Electricidad or CFE) – and to autonomous constitutional bodies.
Other specific regimes apply to:
According to the public procurement laws, the entities that are subject to these regulations are:
The contracts that are mainly subject to the LAASSP are:
The contracts that are subject to the LOPSRM are mostly those with a main purpose to build, install, extend, remodel, restore, preserve, maintain, modify or demolish immovable goods.
According to the LAASSP and LOPSRM, it is possible for foreign suppliers to take part in Mexican bids under two specific types of procedures: (i) public tenders covered by international treaties that include a specific chapter on public procurement; and (ii) international open tenders that allow any national or foreign supplier to participate in the bids even if they have not signed an international treaty with Mexico. This option is available when a national tender has been declared uncontested or when it is being financed with foreign credit.
The main obligations for contracting authorities include the following:
Under public procurement regulation, the authority has the obligation to disclose and publish the call for public tenders via the electronic platform ComprasMX.
This free-access platform is the electronic system administered by the Anti-Corruption and Governance Ministry where all the information related to the call for competition on public tenders and all the activity related to the process can be found.
Among other things, the call for bids must include:
In general, prior to any contracting procedure, the awarding authority requires a market study to establish the optimum price that will be accepted for a proposal made by the bidders or participants.
According to the applicable regulation, this is defined as: “The process prior to the commencement of procurement procedures, with the exception of competitive dialogue, aimed at obtaining relevant and reliable information to ascertain the commercial conditions of the goods or services to be procured, as well as to estimate their prices and identify potential suppliers, in order to determine the strategy and modalities of the procedure, through which in each case the best conditions for the contracting public entities are obtained.”
The aims of the market study are to provide the pertinent information to carry out the corresponding public procurement process, to ensure the best economic conditions, and to determine the market price of the service or supplies that will be acquired. The results of the market study must include the following:
This investigation seeks to eliminate the possibility that the contract is being granted at a cost in excess of the market price and allows the identification of two different price parameters: (i) the unacceptable price; and (ii) the maximum reference price.
Based on the above, the entity will be able to choose the best cost-benefit option from the proposals that does not exceed the maximum reference price.
The legislation provides the following procurement procedures:
The public tender, as the main procurement procedure, comprises the following stages:
As mentioned in 2.3 Tender Procedure for the Award of a Contract, the general rule in public procurement is to award a contract through an open tender. Similar procedures are followed in cases of competitive dialogue.
However, by exception and under specific circumstances, the awarding authority can choose one of the other types of procedure if certain conditions are met.
For a restricted invitation, at least three suppliers who meet certain prerequisites are preselected, and the contract is awarded to the one that presents the best bid.
For a direct award, a direct award with negotiating strategy, an award of a specific contract resulting from the execution of a framework agreement, and the issuance of supply orders derived from Federal Government Digital Store, the contract is directly awarded to a supplier without any competition. This is usually when the value of the purchase is low, or when public tenders or restricted invitations are unsuccessful.
Specific scenarios where these types of procedures apply are established in law.
As mentioned in 2.3 Tender Procedure for the Award of a Contract and 2.4 Choice/Conditions of a Tender Procedure, public procurement laws usually allow a direct award when the value of the purchase is low. In addition, contracts can be directly awarded when public tender or restricted invitations are unsuccessful.
Moreover, in terms of the legislation, agencies and entities may contract without subjecting themselves to a public bidding procedure, but through direct award, for example when:
Public entities are obliged to make their annual acquisition programme available to the public through the digital system ComprasMX at the beginning of each year, no later than 31 January.
In addition, the awarding authority must publish the call with all the necessary requirements, formats and documents that participants must meet or provide in order to participate, and adhere to the terms and conditions therein.
In a public bid, participants must submit their technical and economic proposals on a specific date within 15 to 20 days after publication of the call for competition.
All government procurement regulations prohibit government bodies or agencies from receiving proposals from, or awarding contracts to, participants that:
Certain tenders may be limited to only national participants, such as when the products to be acquired are manufactured in Mexico and have national content of at least 65%.
The awarding authority can, as an exception, opt to award a contract through a restricted invitation process to at least three participants. The selection of this proceeding must be justified according to the specific circumstances allowed by law and must rely on principles such as economy, efficiency, impartiality, transparency and honesty to ensure the best purchase conditions for the government.
In any case, the potential suppliers must have the capacity for an immediate response, as well as sufficient economic and technical capacity and all the necessary resources. In addition, economic or professional activities must be directly related to the main object of the contract.
Proposals are evaluated according to the criteria selected by the awarding authority, which can be:
See 2.8 Eligibility for Participation in a Procurement Process.
The evaluation criteria and the conditions that must be met by the competitors must be published in the call for bids.
The contract must be awarded in a public meeting. The final decision must include:
The provisions of 3.2 Obligation to Notify Interested Parties Who Have Not Been Selected are applicable.
In addition, the act by means of which the contract award is given to the participants must be signed and a copy must be handed to each of them. In addition, the calling entity must make the same information publicly available in its office within no less than five working days.
In addition, the judgment must be uploaded and published on ComprasMX.
Bidders may only be given a prior hearing when the bidder detects a calculation error, so that the bidder can accept or not accept the correction of such error.
It is possible to carry out the so-called “subsequent discount offers”, as an intermediate stage between the submission of bids and the issuance of the award, in order to obtain better economic conditions.
Once the contract has been awarded, the obligations arising from it become enforceable. The contract must be signed on the platform ComprasMX by the date specified in the bidding conditions or within a period of 15 days.
Notwithstanding the above, to date, many contracts continue to be signed physically, with the problems that this entails.
Non-conformity complaints against the tender documents and the contract award decision can be submitted by participants who consider that the judgment is not aligned with the provisions of the law or the terms and conditions of the bidding process.
The Anti-Corruption and Governance Ministry (either directly or through the internal comptroller office in the contracting entity) will be responsible for deciding the legality of the decision. That verdict can be appealed at the Federal Court of Administrative Justice through a nullity claim. Furthermore, the judgment of the federal court can be challenged at the federal collegiate courts, with that decision being final.
In the event of disagreements between the government and a contractor in connection with the performance of a contract, the parties can opt for the following proceedings.
After filing the complaint, the procurement process will be suspended until the proceeding is finished. Regarding the final decision, the complaint does not automatically suspend the execution of the contract but the claimant relying on specific and critical circumstances can request an injunction, which may, or may not, be granted.
Procurement proceedings can be challenged by competitors in the following cases:
As a rule, the competitors have six days after the execution of the challenged act to submit a complaint, and ten days if the bidding is in the framework of an international agreement.
In addition, the time limits are 30 working days for a nullity claim and 15 working days for an extraordinary constitutional claim before the federal court (amparo).
Considering the complex challenge process that exists in Mexico in relation to administrative matters and the existence of optional means of defence, the duration of claims can vary greatly; however, it is common for proceedings to take between three and five months.
It is worth mentioning that the administrative challenge system in Mexico implies the existence of other means of defence, such as the administrative contentious trial and the amparo trial, which can often lead to the challenge process taking up to two years to be definitively resolved.
The review body for tenders is the Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Secretariat – however, each agency and entity of the federal public administration has an internal control body under the said Ministry of Public Administration. These internal control bodies are responsible for receiving, processing, and resolving the disagreements presented by bidders and suppliers on the contracting procedures convened by each entity or agency.
Since most disagreements are resolved by internal control bodies, statistics are not representative of the total number of complaints filed in relation to the number of contracting procedures that are convened throughout the country.
However, it is common for bidders to resort to these means of defence, given the numerous errors and illegal acts committed in the procedures.
The review bodies in Mexico are not authorised to charge any kind of fee in the matter of challenging public procurement decisions.
The awarding authority may agree to increase the contract amount in justified circumstances, provided that the increase does not exceed 20% of the original sum.
In addition, if the supplier is unable to fulfil the entirety of the contract, the authority may cancel part of it, provided that the amount does not exceed 10% of the original total amount of the contract.
Agencies and entities may at any time terminate contracts when the supplier fails to comply with its obligations.
Moreover, an agency or entity may terminate contracts in advance when there are reasons of general interest; or when, for justified reasons, the need for the goods or services originally contracted is extinguished, and it is demonstrated that continued compliance with the agreed obligations would cause damage or harm to the state; or when the acts that gave rise to the contract are null and void, as a result of the resolution of a competent authority.
In the case of suppliers, to terminate a contract, they must either:
All entities must refrain from executing any modification related to price, advance payments, progress payments, terms and conditions, or any change that implies giving better conditions to a supplier than those originally agreed.
In the past year, no judicial decisions have been issued that imply any change in legislation or that are particularly important.
Currently, because of the new Public Procurement, Leasing and Services Act, the Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Secretariat is awaiting the issuance of policies, rules and guidelines, as well as guidelines for contract planning, that regulate integrity policy, points and percentages, regulation of consolidated procedures, and market studies, among others.
Furthermore, given the trend observed in recent years, especially in the health sector, it is foreseeable that agreements, decrees, guidelines, and other secondary regulations will be issued on a relatively regular basis to establish criteria to be followed in public procurement procedures.
Tenancingo 18
Condesa
Mexico City
Mexico
+52 555 211 8070
+52 555 211 8070
mgk@mgk.mx www.mgk.mx
Focus on Public Procurement in the Mexican Health Sector
In view of the various legal and public policy changes that, in recent years, have led to deficient contractual procedures, there has been a shortage of supplies in the Mexican public sector. This has forced the administrative authorities to take action, often outside the legal framework, as an urgent measure to combat the situation.
As a result, a new Law on Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services has been enacted, introducing various new features that had previously been implemented as public policies even without legal backing.
It appears that the new Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services Act was the result of experience gained from contracting for the procurement of health supplies during the previous six-year term and the first year of the current one. During this time, there have been radical changes in contracting models, from the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público or SHCP), the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) and the Institute of Health for Wellbeing (Instituto de Salud para el Bienestar or INSABI), to Biologicals and Reagents Laboratories of Mexico (BIRMEX).
With this in mind, it is worth taking a moment to look at the main changes introduced by the reform in the area of public procurement.
The governing authority under the new public procurement model
Under the new public procurement model, the Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Secretariat becomes the governing authority.
This authority has considerable power, with the ability to interpret the Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services Act; issue policies, rules and guidelines on contracting in place of those previously issued by each authority; and consolidate tenders. It also determines the formula for calculating the 65% national integration requirement and even has the power, among many others, to issue general rules establishing exceptions to this requirement. It is the governing authority for general public procurement policy, with the power to issue any administrative provisions necessary for the proper enforcement of the Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services Act.
Similarly, the creation of a Strategic Procurement Committee is envisaged, whose main function will be to identify goods and services that are necessary for the State and can therefore be procured through consolidated schemes.
For its part, the SHCP continues to participate in the operation of consolidated procurement processes and has been given new powers, as can be seen below, while the Ministry of Health retains sectoral co-ordination functions related to the planning of the supply of medicines and other medical supplies.
New modalities
While it is true that only three modalities were previously used in the area of public procurement (public tender, invitation to at least three persons, and direct award), the reforms now propose new modalities:
The direct award mechanism is used when:
Although this is a “direct award”, elements such as competition and negotiation are incorporated through a simplified procedure that includes:
In this regard, although the Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services Act regulates a supposed order of priority regarding the origin of the contracting event, the truth is that it does so in a completely flexible manner. This includes new exceptions to the National Public Tender so that an international procedure without treaty coverage can be carried out when “it is convenient in terms of price, derived from the results of market research, the lowest price of foreign goods, leases, or services not covered by treaties is more convenient than the lowest price in the domestic market, and has a margin of preference of up to fifteen percent in its favor, under equal conditions”.
Subsequent discount offers
Similarly, the reform also promotes the use of “subsequent discount offers”, which can be defined as a scheme that allows participants to progressively adjust their price proposals during the course of the procurement procedure.
At this point, it is important to note that the contracting procedure known as “direct award with negotiation strategy” has a peculiarity, as the procedure to be followed is only established when no benefit has been obtained and a subsequent discount offer must be implemented, which results in a considerable contingency, as the Law establishes that in this type of procedure, prior to a subsequent discount offer, the contract must be awarded to the supplier who offered the greatest “benefit” derived from the negotiation.
This case constitutes a considerable legal loophole that could generate legal uncertainty (in addition to a zone of opacity), because there are no parameters regulating the negotiation of economic bids between competitors or the scope of the aforementioned benefit.
The creation of ComprasMX
A new digital public procurement platform (ComprasMX) has been planned to replace the system known as “CompraNet”.
The reform envisages that, with this platform, it will be possible to electronically manage procurement planning, conduct procurement procedures, and monitor the obligations arising from the contracts entered into.
Among the planned features are:
National content requirement
Similarly, a national content requirement has been established for certain goods purchased by the public sector.
In effect, it is established that, as a general rule, products of national origin must demonstrate a minimum degree of national integration equivalent to 65%.
Before the reform, suppliers could comply with this obligation by making statements under oath. Now, the new system establishes a stricter verification mechanism that requires the submission of detailed documentation on the cost structure of the goods offered.
In addition, the authorities may carry out subsequent checks to verify that the declared national content has in fact been complied with during the execution of the contract.
Monitoring system
A monitoring system has been established to ensure compliance with the required health supplies. This seeks to record and evaluate the performance of suppliers based on orders issued by public institutions.
The system is intended to concentrate information on various performance indicators (delivery compliance, supply times, and other data relevant to supply management).
Similarly, the system will generate compliance records that contracting authorities can use as a reference when evaluating suppliers’ participation in future procurement procedures.
In addition, for transparency, the information generated by this system will be made public.
Significant changes to company participation
At the same time, there have also been significant changes in the way companies participate in public procurement procedures in the area of economic competition.
In July 2025, reforms to the Federal Economic Competition Law were published, expanding the conduct related to monopolistic practices that is punishable under the law.
Among the most relevant modifications is the inclusion of agreements between potential competitors about absolute monopolistic practices, which expands the type of conduct that can be investigated by the authority.
Similarly, the concept of substantial joint power is introduced to evaluate relative monopolistic practices in markets where the co-ordinated conduct of different economic agents may have a restrictive effect on competition.
However, one of the most significant changes is the possibility of imposing sanctions, including temporary disqualification from government procurement procedures, when bid rigging or improper co-ordination between competitors is proved.
From all of the above, it can be established that the contracting scheme established in the current regulatory framework involves a redistribution of decision-making and execution of actions among the various authorities, so that while the Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Secretariat exercises regulatory control, the SHCP is responsible for the executive function in the most important contracting procedures.
In this sense, it is understandable that there is a desire to reduce the heterogeneity and discretion that previously prevailed in the fragmented scheme of decision-making and execution of contracting procedures. However, the truth is that this new centralised scheme does not solve the problem of discretion; rather, it generalises and homogenises it, even creating bottlenecks that make the system inefficient, at least in some cases.
On the other hand, an important element to consider is the inclusion of additional contracting procedures, which implies the existence – due to the design of these procedures – of more exceptions to public bidding, thereby expanding the space for discretion.
Furthermore, the introduction of the possibility of holding pre-contracting dialogues with interested parties, which involves exchanging information on conditions, prices and specifications, poses significant confidentiality risks and requires the strengthening of rules to mitigate them.
Although it may seem that the aim is to increase flexibility and allow the authorities to gain a deeper understanding of the market, in practice this approach could become a substitute for a formal tendering procedure with rules, in which individuals can exchange information with the authorities (with risks of opacity and to free competition, among others), “negotiate” the conditions (when, for example, the negotiation of terms and conditions is prohibited by law) and, once the conditions have been agreed upon, request quotes via market research that may result in direct awards. In other words, although it was not apparently designed for this purpose, this deviation is a likely consequence.
Furthermore, the confidentiality of the information shared between the authority and the private individual, combined with the possibility of individual dialogues, creates information asymmetries that could constitute undue advantages in terms of economic competition.
Another important element of the new procurement scheme is the recognition and inclusion of compliance issues. This includes the certification of compliance programmes in the area of economic competition, and integrity programmes referred to in the Law on Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services. This represents significant progress, although there are currently no specific parameters to clarify when programmes are “valid” for the purposes of evaluation in procurement procedures.
Special mention should be made of the procurement of health supplies, where there are various scattered regulatory elements (the Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services Act; guidelines from the Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Secretariat; the Import Agreement with foreign health registration; new rules on national content; and the decree to promote pharmaceutical investment). While these scattered regulations imply how complex this sector is, rather than being an adequate systematic response, they appear to be a reaction to various implementation problems that have arisen, especially in recent years.
It is expected that this systematisation will take some time to achieve, so in the short term, the complexity of the regulatory system, at least in the health sector, will entail significant risks of non-compliance by individuals, and require great discretion on the part of the authority in determining not only the suppliers, but also the procurement procedures themselves. The consequent uncertainty this will generate will unfortunately lead to high supply costs and additional supply problems in the public health market.
Conclusion
Taking all of the above into account, the main factors of the current public procurement system in Mexico, specifically in the health sector, are:
Tenancingo 18
Condesa
Mexico City
Mexico
+52 555 211 8070
+52 555 211 8070
mgk@mgk.mx www.mgk.mx