In February 2020, Mexico’s Instituto Federal de Telecomunicaciones (IFT) issued guidelines under Technical Provision IFT-012-2019, which entered into force in February 2021 and has been reported to create a significant barrier to trade for mobile telecommunications products. Reports indicate that the framework may delay time-to-market by requiring in-country testing for Specific Absorption Rate (SAR). It is also reported that the applicable requirements rely on standards considered outdated compared with more recent guidance from the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)/Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), as well as the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). In addition, the rules reportedly entail duplicative testing and may create bottlenecks, as Mexico has only a limited number of accredited facilities capable of performing the required tests.

It is reported that the conformity procedures of the Agreement, under which the Plenary of the Federal Telecommunications Institute issues the Conformity Assessment Procedure for Telecommunications and Broadcasting, contain worrying language requiring the sharing of test reports that may contain in-depth confidential information about ICT products.

Circular 12/2018 imposed quantitative limits on electronic payment fund accounts offered by electronic payment institutions in Mexico. Under Provision 15, individuals holding accounts denominated in foreign currency may withdraw funds and make card payments for a combined maximum of USD 10,000 per calendar month. Card payments from these accounts may be made only to beneficiaries located outside Mexico. The measure, therefore, imposes a direct monthly ceiling relevant to cross-border online payments.
Provision 9 establishes separate limits for accounts denominated in Mexican pesos, depending on the account level. Level 1 accounts may receive up to 750 Investment Units (UDIs, Unidades de Inversión) per month (approx. USD 378) and maintain a maximum balance of 1,000 UDIs (approx. USD 505). Level 2 accounts may receive up to 3,000 UDIs per month (approx. USD 1,514), while Level 3 accounts are not subject to a regulatory funding limit. These ceilings restrict the amount that users may receive or hold in their accounts and may therefore indirectly limit payments made through them.

Mexico does not apply a horizontal de minimis threshold, which is the minimum value of goods below which customs do not charge duties, across all trading partners. Yet, Rule 3.7.35 of the General Foreign Trade Rules for 2025 provides duty relief to specific, origin-based categories. For shipments from the United States and Canada, the de minimis threshold for customs duties is USD 117, while for countries covered by certain trade agreements, including Panama, the Pacific Agreement, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the applicable de minimis threshold is USD 1.

Under Mexico’s Value Added Tax Law (LIVA), non-resident suppliers of digital services without an establishment in Mexico are subject to specific compliance obligations. In particular, Art. 18-D(VI) requires such suppliers to appoint a legal representative and provide an address in Mexican territory for notification and compliance-monitoring purposes. Where a non-resident supplier fails to comply with the relevant obligations, Art. 18-H BIS provides for the temporary blocking of access to the supplier’s digital service through Mexican telecommunications network concessionaires until compliance is achieved.
The applicability of these obligations depends on whether the activity qualifies as a “digital service” under Art. 18-B, which enumerates four categories, including (i) digital content, and (ii) digital intermediation between third-party suppliers and customers. In this regard, the SAT’s Criterion 40/IVA/N, published in the Official Gazette on 11 October 2024, broadens the interpretation of “digital intermediation services” by treating platforms as intermediaries where, for consideration, they enable customers to offer goods or services to third parties and allow suppliers and customers to agree via the platform on the transaction terms and price. The criterion further clarifies that this characterisation may apply even where the platform presents itself as merely an “online store,” if it also connects third-party suppliers with customers.

The "Law on the National System of Research and Intelligence in the Field of Public Security" grants the Secretariat for Security and Citizen Protection (SSPC) broad powers to access personal, fiscal, biometric, and geolocation data from public and private sources without prior judicial authorisation, while also establishing a single, centralised database to which federal, state, and municipal authorities may obtain direct access without a warrant. It further establishes a Central Intelligence Platform to integrate and connect public and private databases under the authority of the Digital Transformation Agency and the National Intelligence Centre in Mexico, permitting the use of such information without judicial oversight. The platform will consolidate an extensive range of data, including vehicle and licence plate records, biometric identifiers, telephone information, property and commercial registries, corporate and land records, fiscal data, firearms registries, information from private security service providers, data on detained and sentenced persons, and records relating to financial and banking services, transport, health, telecommunications, maritime activities, and other sectors.

The Federal Copyright Act provides a safe harbour regime for intermediaries concerning copyright infringements. According to the 2020 amendments to Arts. 114 Septies and 114 Octies of the Mexican Federal Copyright Law, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are not liable for copyright infringements if they:
- 'Promptly and readily' remove any copyrighted works that infringe copyright, regardless of whether they are notified of the infringement or discover it themselves.
- Do not initiate the transmission of the works, performances, or productions, do not select them, and do not receive financial compensation for their transmission, making available, or reproduction.
These safe harbour provisions limit ISP liability, ensuring they are not directly liable for damages when they adhere to appropriate compliance measures. However, it is reported that these provisions lack the detail and clarity found in other similar regulations.

Mexico has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Mexico’s Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property establishes a framework for trade secret protection, including safeguards against unlawful disclosure. The Law provides for both administrative and criminal enforcement mechanisms, including administrative infringements (Art. 386) and criminal offences relating to trade secrets (Art. 402).
However, it is reported that the Conformity Assessment Procedure for Telecommunications and Broadcasting issued by the Plenary of the Federal Institute of Telecommunications (DOF: 25 February 2020) has raised confidentiality concerns, insofar as it contemplates the submission of test reports that may contain detailed confidential information on ICT products. While the amendment to the 2021 Agreement has reportedly addressed earlier concerns about the automatic sharing of such reports, regulators may still request test reports in specific cases, which continues to generate trade secret and confidentiality risks for ICT manufacturers.

Mexico’s Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property establishes a framework for the protection of trade secrets. Title III of the Act defines trade secrets and misappropriation, recognises lawful means of acquisition, and provides administrative enforcement mechanisms to protect trade secrets.

Art. 125 of the Telecommunications and Broadcasting Act establishes a framework for infrastructure sharing. It requires the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission to issue guidelines to promote, in a structured and progressive manner, co-location and the shared use of passive and active infrastructure and other physical resources, prioritising negotiated agreements between concessionaires. Where no agreement is reached, and sharing is necessary, the Commission may set the applicable technical, tariff, and operational conditions, and resolve disputes through the interconnection procedure, subject to a maximum time frame of 30 working days. The Law also requires that sharing agreements be registered in the Public Telecommunications Register.
Art. 123 further provides that operators with significant market power in the telecommunications sector are subject to specific obligations, including the obligation to conclude agreements for the shared use of infrastructure. The Law expressly repeals the previous Federal Telecommunications and Broadcasting Law (LFTR, DOF 14/07/2014), which already contained comparable infrastructure-sharing provisions (Arts. 138 and 139) under which the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission promoted co-location and shared-use arrangements. In addition, the “Agreement issuing the Guidelines for the Deployment, Access and Shared Use of Telecommunications and Broadcasting Infrastructure” (DOF 15/01/2020) sets out operational rules, including procedures, timelines, and registration requirements, for implementing access and shared-use arrangements.

The Mexican State maintains equity participation in parts of the telecommunications sector through the Federal Electricity Commission (Comisión Federal de Electricidad, CFE). Following the publication of the Agreement creating CFE Telecomunicaciones e Internet para Todos in the Official Gazette in August 2019, the CFE created CFE Telecomunicaciones e Internet para Todos (CFE TEIT), a State-owned entity mandated to provide mobile telephony and internet services on a non-profit basis in order to support the right of access to information and communication technologies. In addition, in February 2025, CFE reported that its Board of Directors authorised the acquisition of a 49% stake in Altán Redes, a provider of wholesale mobile telephony and internet services, thereby strengthening the State’s presence in wholesale telecommunications infrastructure and operations.

Pursuant to Art. 17 of the Public Sector Procurement, Leasing and Services Act, agencies and entities involved in open international procurement processes are required to prioritise the use of domestic human resources when conditions are comparable. Furthermore, for the procurement and leasing of goods, the Act establishes a preferential margin of 15% for domestically produced goods that incorporate at least 65% national content.

Pursuant to Art. 123 of the Telecommunications and Broadcasting Act, operators designated as having significant market power (SMP) in the telecommunications sector are subject to specific obligations, including the obligation to submit, at least once per year, separated accounts and cost-accounting information for interconnection services to the Commission and to the authority responsible for competition and market access, in the form and in accordance with the methodologies and criteria determined by the competent authorities. Moreover, operators designated as having SMP are subject to functional separation obligations in the telecommunications market (Art. 256 and 267).

Since December 2018, Mexico has pursued greater centralisation and consolidation of federal procurement under the leadership of the Secretariat of Finance (SHCP/Hacienda), framed primarily as an anti-corruption and efficiency initiative, including through consolidated purchasing. However, it is reported that government procurement in Mexico lacks transparency and remains vulnerable to corruption and favouritism. Businesses have reported losing government contracts or commercial opportunities because competitors resorted to corrupt practices, bribery or personal influence. More recent reports indicate that corruption may influence tender outcomes and that shortened procurement windows, sole-source awards and other exceptions to open tendering may limit fair and effective participation.