Digital Neutrality in 2025: Mexico’s Tax Reforms

The recent amendments made to the Mexican Federal Tax Code to include Articles 30-B and 113-Bis is a key part of Mexico's 2026 Economic Package. This represents more than just a legislative update, it indicates a significant — and potentially complex — shift in how the state plans to regulate and tax the digital economy. While the objective of improving tax transparency and increasing government revenue is fundamentally valid, a careful technical analysis of the proposed legislation reveals deep structural, constitutional, and international conflicts that require attention.

This reform package positions Mexico at a crucial point between strengthening fiscal capabilities and maintaining the fundamental principles of privacy, and digital neutrality contained in the Mexican Federal Constitution as well as in International Agreements and Human Rights Conventions. For specialized legal practitioners in Mexico City, who are experienced in navigating corporate law, data protection, and cross-border commerce, the proposed language is introducing a certain level of legal ambiguity that has the potential to impact stability.

Article 30-B

Article 30-B is the most controversial aspect of the reform. It mandates that digital service platforms provide tax authorities with permanent, online, and real-time access to their records and databases for verification purposes. From a technical legal standpoint, this measure is fundamentally problematic as it blurs the line between routine audits and comprehensive, ongoing digital surveillance.

Firstly, this article directly conflicts with Article 16 of the Mexican Constitution, which protects citizens' privacy and personal documents from arbitrary intrusion. It demands that any inspection be supported by a valid judicial order. As emphasized by the digital industry, including the Mexican Internet Association, along with established jurisprudence from the Mexican Supreme Court of Justice (SCJN), a permanent and unrestricted electronic gateway into private business records bypasses constitutional requirements for judicial control and the principle of proportionality. Tax authorities already have effective mechanisms, like electronic reviews and requests for financial information (CFDIs), to trace transactions. Real-time access adds no operational value that cannot be achieved through existing, legally compliant methods.

Secondly, the amendment reinterprets the legal nature of digital intermediaries. International legal standards define platforms as technical facilitators, not as content publishers or extensions of law enforcement. Article 30-B effectively redefines these intermediaries as mandatory tax collectors and continuous data custodians. Moreover, by imposing full joint liability on these platforms for potential non-compliance, the article attempts to apply a liability standard typically reserved for direct providers, which contradicts the global trend towards limited intermediary responsibility.

International Treaties

Beyond constitutional issues, the implementation of Article 30-B poses a real threat to corporate assets protected under the Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property (LFPI). Real-time access to databases inevitably exposes confidential information, including:

• Industrial Secrets: Business models, pricing strategies, proprietary algorithms, and internal procedures.
• Personal Data: Extensive and indiscriminate collection of user data, including sensitive consumption habits, without the explicit consent required by the Federal Law on Protection of Personal Data Held by Private Parties (LFPDPPP).

This forced data access and data transfer directly undermines a platform's ability to maintain the confidentiality necessary to classify information as a trade secret, potentially diminishing these assets' economic value.

Critically, this conflict extends to Mexico's international trade commitments. The measure puts the country in a complicated position regarding the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Specifically, it risks violating Article 19.17, which advocates for limited intermediary liability, and Article 19.11, which protects the free cross-border flow of information. The requirement for indiscriminate disclosure is seen as an undue restriction on these flows and undermines the effective protection of confidential corporate information mandated by both the USMCA and the modernized EU-Mexico Global Agreement.

In addition, Article 30-B directly violates International Human Rights treaties, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the American Convention of Human Rights, which protect individuals against arbitrary intrusions into their privacy, such as the intrusion mandated by Article 30-B.

Article 113-Bis

The proposed Article 113-Bis adds another disruptive element by suggesting criminal sanctions for platforms that "knowingly" allow advertisements related to false tax receipts.

The legal challenge here lies in defining "knowingly." Establishing intent in high-volume, automated, self-managed content models, such as social media, search engines, and classified platforms, presents operational and legal challenges.

Next Steps

Articles 30-B and 113-Bis implementation must be thoroughly revised. The industry has expressed its full commitment to efficient and proportional fiscalization. This presents an opportunity for the Mexican government to lead a modernization of digital tax law based on best global practices.

A collaborative working group, involving authorities, Congress, academia, and industry, should focus on the following alternatives suggested by the digital associations in the implementation of the Tax reforms when creating the rules applicable for that implementation:

No Real-Time Access: Narrow the scope of permanent access mandate with targeted selective audits, strictly adhering to constitutional requirements.

Digital Neutrality: Maintain the principle of limited intermediary liability, consistent with international trade agreements.

Equivalence: Ensure that the mechanisms of fiscalization do not impose regulatory burdens on digital commerce compared to traditional commerce, promoting innovation and digital inclusion.

The integrity of Mexico’s legal framework, its standing in international commerce, and the future competitiveness of its digital ecosystem depend on achieving a fiscal solution that is both effective, and legally strong, while carefully crafted.