Published On: Sun, Feb 9th, 2014

The Fideicomiso will continue, amendment to Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution has been Rejected

Share This
In May of 2013, the Mexican Chamber of Deputies (the lower house), approved legislation which would have amended the Mexican Constitution to permit  foreigners to purchase property outright in Mexico’s Restricted Zone which is 100 kilometers (62 miles) from the borders of the United States, Belize and Guatemala, and 50 kilometers (31 miles) from the coastlines of Mexico.
Effectively this would have meant doing away with the Mexican bank trust,  known as the fideicomiso.
This initiative has been rejected, according to a report from the Secretary of Government. (SEGOB)
Rejection of the proposed amendment is the result of not continuing with the amendment procedure within the time frame permitted under Article 89, number 2, Section III of the Rules of the Chamber of Deputies.
Mexico's Chamber of Deputies, similar to the U.S. House of Representatives

Mexico’s Chamber of Deputies  (similar to the U.S. House of Representatives)

The result is that foreigners purchasing property in the Restricted Zone must continue to obtain titles using the bank trust system, the fideicomiso, initiated in 1972.

Restricted Zone

 By John Glaab
john-glaab-cipsAbout the author:
John Glaab is Vice President of International Marketing at Mexico’s The Settlement Company® A Certified International Property Specialist (CIPS) he was named International Member of the year, 2012 by the National Association of Realtors® (NAR)

Mexico Travel Care




Displaying 9 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Your Name... says:

    Good to know!!! Thank you TYT !!!

  2. Alex A says:

    What else is new ???

  3. Stewart Mandy says:

    Could you post a link to the notice from SEGOB? While I am not doubting your story, I have not been able to find anything in the Spanish language press.

    This is indeed very bad news – do we know why the amendment did not proceed within the time frame permitted? Was it obstructed by political forces opposed? Is there any chance it will be re-introduced?

    As far as I know, the abolition of the fideicomisos was only one part of the proposed amendments to the article.

    The law, while well intentioned at the time it was introduced, has failed to achieve what was intended, and does not stop foreigners buying residential property in the restricted zone (which they do via fideicomiso) nor commercial property in the restricted zone (which they do via corporation). Neither the country nor the Mexican people benefit from the law. The only entities which benefit are the banks which manage the fideicomisos, and the associated lawyers and notaries who perform peripheral services related.

  4. tony chapman says:

    when can this be brought to a vote again. is this a violation of NAFTA; also who was the party who brought this to congress this time

  5. Juan Pablo says:

    While I respect any’s country decisions, US should apply the same rules to the foreign nationals who want to make similar real-estate purchases.
    I see these “protective” legislations from India, U.A.E. to Mexico etc. which makes it difficult for US small individual investors.

  6. Kim says:

    Yes, a great deal for the banks. There have to be kick-backs somewhere.

  7. Gringo Todd says:

    It appears to me that the word “REJECTED” was an attempt to sensationalize the story and grab more readers, or perhaps to invigorate real estate buyers who have been waiting.

    The truth is that the proposal EXPIRED, in accordance with the laws of the land (and as mentioned, due to many more pressing matters.) It is HIGHLY likely that the bill will be reintroduced and won’t expire as it easily moves forward through the approval process and the final constitutional amendment. Probably not until after the summer break now.

  8. Rhonda says:

    Keep me posted.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>