Mexico: Trade mark implications of new import requirements

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Mexico: Trade mark implications of new import requirements

Tax avoidance involving the import of undeclared trade marked items has led the Mexican Customs authorities to change the regulations governing the information that must be submitted.

Over the last few years the Mexican Customs authorities have detected an increasing importation problem of sub-valued goods. The problem arises when companies importing goods into the Mexican market do not mark the goods with the brand names they will be sold under.

In this way many companies were able to report a lower value of imported goods. The goods were not bearing any trade mark, and that made it possible for the importers to pay a lower tax rate since the value of goods that are not branded is much lower than that of products supported by a well-known trade mark.

Although this is originally a tax problem, the Mexican government made an attempt to attack it from both tax and IP perspectives.

Accordingly on January 27 2016 the Mexican Customs authorities published a new regulation known as Rule 3.1.17, which included an additional requirement for the importers of several products to provide certain information related to the trade marks that the imported goods will bear.

In addition, it has become a common practice of Mexican Customs brokers assisting the importing companies to request from their clients (the importing company) a letter granted by the trade mark owner (or its local representative) confirming authorisation to import and sell the goods using their trade mark.

This sort of letter is not required by the Mexican regulations nor Customs officers but by private Customs brokers to make sure the importing company is not infringing third parties' rights and that the goods imported are original products and not counterfeit.

ramirez.jpg

Victor Ramirez


OlivaresPedro Luis Ogazón No 17Col San Angel01000 México DFTel: +5255 53 22 30 00Fax: +5255 53 22 30 01olivlaw@olivares.com.mxwww.olivares.com.mx

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
Gift this article