New obligations will be added for companies that sell products and provide services electronically in Mexico in 2026.
These new obligations became mandatory on December 13 of last year, following the addition of a couple of sections to Article 76 bis of the Federal Consumer Protection Law (LFPC).
As of the date mentioned, any supplier conducting electronic transactions must clearly inform the consumer whether the contracted service involves automatic, recurring charges and their frequency, amount, and billing date.
Such charges must be agreed to by the consumer. The law now also stipulates that consent must be informed, which strengthens the provider’s duty to inform.
When, in accordance with the contract or the terms and conditions posted on the company’s website, automatic service renewal applies, the law now requires the provider to notify the consumer at least five days in advance of such automatic renewal, allowing the consumer to cancel without penalty.
Another obligation that came into effect is to implement mechanisms that allow consumers to cancel a service, subscription, or membership immediately, without breaching contractual provisions or applicable terms and conditions. [1]
What are the implications of this reform for online suppliers?
This reform is mandatory for any type of company that sells goods or provides services by electronic or optical means, both in Mexico and abroad, although the wording of the new legal text is particularly aimed at streaming platforms, software providers, and mobile phone companies.
With this reform, lawmakers sought to align the Mexican legal framework with certain consumer-protection practices in both the United States and the European Union, according to a statement from the Mexican Senate. [2]
Upon its entry into force, whether through individual consumer complaints or through the exercise of the oversight and verification powers granted by the LFPC, the Consumer Protection Agency (Profeco) may investigate whether suppliers are complying with their new obligations. Otherwise, it may initiate a sanctioning procedure that concludes with the imposition of a fine.
It wouldn’t be surprising if Profeco now pays attention to certain companies, such as software providers that sell subscriptions in Mexico with monthly charges, if their website doesn’t allow users to cancel the service immediately or establishes an unnecessarily complex procedure that makes cancelation difficult, regardless of whether their terms and conditions formally provide for it.
In that case, Profeco could conclude that the supplier is in breach of the new obligations arising from the reform and be sanctioned in accordance with the law.
What are the penalties for failing to comply with the new obligations resulting from the reform?
The law itself stipulates that failure to comply with these obligations will result in a fine ranging from $1,053.01 mexican pesos to $4´118,491.38 mexican pesos (approximately $58.56 USD to $228,754.50 USD).
Will foreign suppliers abroad be able to avoid these new obligations?
Currently, the LFPC, NMX-COE-001-SCFI-2018, and the Code of Ethics for Electronic Commerce regulate electronic transactions aimed at consumers in Mexico, although they do not, on their own, guarantee that providers located abroad fully comply with the Mexican regulatory framework.
The regulatory framework prohibits suppliers from including clauses in their contracts that require consumers to waive the protection of Mexican law or submit to foreign courts. However, this prohibition is fully enforceable in practice with respect to adhesion contracts that must be registered with Profeco.
While not all adhesion contracts are subject to registration, through this mechanism Profeco maintains direct oversight of those suppliers that are formally established in Mexico or registered with the Federal Taxpayers Registry.
In contrast, suppliers operating from abroad who are neither incorporated under Mexican law nor registered with the RFC would appear, in many cases, to remain outside the authorities’ immediate radar, even when they market goods or services aimed at the Mexican market.
However, the Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico recently settled this debate by issuing a binding ruling that clauses included in adhesion contracts of companies providing services in Mexico through websites that designate foreign courts as competent are unconstitutional.
This is because such clauses violate consumers’ right of access to justice by requiring them to resort to authorities and laws other than those of their domicile to seek redress for a breach of contract. [3]
For this reason, the new obligations apply both to Mexican suppliers and to foreign companies that market goods or services in Mexico through electronic platforms, regardless of their place of establishment.
Final comments
The reform not only requires companies to adapt the terms and conditions of sale or service provision posted on their websites but also expands the circumstances under which the authorities may impose fines.
It also requires suppliers to review their debt collection and subscription/membership cancelation protocols.
In practice, some suppliers will formally comply with these obligations, but few will thoroughly review their contracting, billing, and cancelation processes from a comprehensive regulatory perspective. That difference often determines whether non-compliance results in a one-off fine or a recurring problem with Profeco.
__________________________________________________
[1] https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7405372539838816256
[3] Jurisprudence with Digital Record: 2030477.
