On July 30, 2026, the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC)—an organization representing nearly 300 U.S. multinational companies, including FedEx, Walmart, and Visa—sent a letter to U.S. senators denouncing an “unprecedented” audit by Mexico’s Tax Administration Service (SAT), which, in their view, fails to provide legal certainty for investments. On August 15, 2026, the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP) responded publicly, and within that response there is a specific point regarding Transfer Pricing that deserves special attention: the status of Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs) between Mexico and the United States.
General Allegations
The NFTC accused the SAT of retroactively denying legitimate deductions, conducting harsh audits, and pressuring companies, in addition to questioning an alleged “pay-to-challenge” scheme linked to Article 141 of the Federal Tax Code. The SHCP responded by rejecting any retroactive change in criteria and detailed reforms implemented since October 2025: the amendment to Article 141 (April 9, 2026), which eliminated the requirement to secure tax credits through a deposit certificate as the primary option; a single audit per taxpayer, with a sample review instead of a 100% review of the information; and shorter turnaround times for refund decisions.
The Specific Point on Transfer Pricing
The SHCP highlighted the role of APAs as a central mechanism for providing certainty in Transfer Pricing, noting that the SAT strengthened the procedure for issuing rulings through direct contact with companies, and that it worked alongside the competent U.S. authority—the IRS—to significantly reduce the backlog of pending cases. This is a point worth reading carefully: while public criticism focuses on general tax enforcement, the Mexican authority itself chose to cite progress in bilateral APAs as concrete evidence of improvement—a mechanism that, by its very nature, requires active cooperation between both tax administrations.
Why it matters beyond this specific dispute
A bilateral APA depends on both tax administrations negotiating and agreeing on the methodology applicable to a future transaction between related parties. A steadily declining backlog suggests that the channel for bilateral cooperation is functioning more smoothly, regardless of how the SAT’s general domestic tax enforcement is perceived. For a group with a parent company in the United States and operations in Mexico that has an APA in process—or is considering initiating one—this signal is relevant for gauging timeline expectations, although the SHCP did not provide specific figures.
Sources: