Latin America Insights | Legal Updates and Developments in Major Sectors in LATAM Region- Aug 2026

•  Separate calculation for construction steel:⁠For public works involving construction steel, tender documents must specify separate minimum national content requirements for the overall project and for construction steel. Bidders must calculate and demonstrate compliance with each requirement separately.

•  Clearer criteria for determining whether steel is domestically produced:⁠Steel billets, ingots and other raw materials may count towards national content if they undergo substantive processing in Mexico, such as heating and rolling. Simple cutting, packaging, storage or resale will generally not qualify as substantive processing.

•  No uniform percentage requirement:⁠The contracting authority will determine the minimum national content requirement by considering factors such as domestic supply capacity, technical requirements, price, delivery schedules and the project timeline. Companies should therefore refer to the specific tender documents for each project.

•  Stronger supply-chain documentation and contract-performance reviews:⁠Bidders must submit and retain supporting documents such as supplier declarations, electronic invoices, quality certificates and import records. If the actual national content falls below the percentage of national content committed to in the bid, the contractor may face termination of the contract or other liabilities.

•  Companies participating in federal public works projects should calculate the national content of general materials and equipment separately from that of construction steel and verify compliance before submitting a bid.

•  Companies using Chinese steel or equipment should determine whether any processing carried out in Mexico constitutes substantive manufacturing or merely simple processing, to avoid incorrectly counting such products toward national content.

•  Companies should identify Mexican suppliers capable of providing electronic invoices, production-process descriptions, quality certificates and import documents, and should incorporate the relevant documentation obligations into their procurement and subcontracting agreements.

•  A separate procurement regime for CFE:⁠CFE procurement is governed by its specific legislation and procurement rules and, in principle, is not subject to the general federal procurement and public works laws. Available procurement methods include open competition, simplified open competition, restricted invitation and direct award.

•  Advance-payment limits vary by contract type:⁠Advance payments for the procurement of goods, services, construction works and works-related services are generally capped at 50%, 20%, 30% and 10% of the total contract value, respectively. Where justified by the particular nature of a project, these limits may be exceeded with written approval from an authorized senior official.

•  Limits on advance payments and subcontracting:⁠Subcontracting is generally limited to 49% of the contract value.

•  Limited flexibility to modify works contracts:⁠For unit-price and mixed-price works contracts, changes to the contract value or completion period may not generally exceed 30%. The price and completion period of fixed-price and turnkey contracts generally cannot be adjusted. Bidders usually have only five business days to seek review of an award decision or a decision declaring the tender unsuccessful.

•  Companies should first confirm the procurement method and eligibility requirements for the relevant project, including whether a foreign company may bid independently or must form a consortium with a Mexican company.

•  Chinese suppliers whose contracts include installation, commissioning or civil works should arrange local subcontracting at an early stage. They should also note that subcontracting does not relieve the main contractor of its full contractual responsibility to CFE.

•  Companies should promptly record variations, instructions and delays in the electronic works log and closely monitor award decisions and decisions declaring a tender unsuccessful.

•  Relevance added as an admissibility requirement:⁠In addition to showing that the judgment under appeal violates federal law or a treaty, or conflicts with another court’s interpretation of federal law, the appellant must demonstrate that the case raises an economic, political, social or legal issue extending beyond the individual interests of the parties.

•  A separate, reasoned section is required:⁠The special appeal must contain a dedicated, substantiated section addressing the relevance of the federal legal issue. A decision by the STJ to reject an appeal for lack of relevance requires the support of two-thirds of the members of the relevant adjudicatory body and is not subject to further appeal.

•  Certain cases are presumed to be relevant:⁠Relevance is generally presumed in criminal cases, administrative misconduct cases, cases involving an amount in dispute exceeding 500 times the minimum wage, cases that may result in a candidate becoming ineligible for election, and cases in which the lower court’s judgment conflicts with the STJ’s prevailing case law. The appellant must nevertheless explain how the case falls within the relevant presumption.

•  Greater nationwide impact of STJ decisions:⁠Once the STJ recognizes the relevance of a particular legal issue, it may stay individual or collective proceedings involving the same issue throughout Brazil, generally for six months. The stay may be extended for a further six months where a public hearing or third-party participation is required. The resulting judgment will also form part of Brazil’s system of guiding and binding precedents.

•  Companies involved in commercial, tax or other civil proceedings in Brazil should assess at an early stage whether the dispute has broader industry implications, raises an issue of general legal importance or requires the uniform interpretation of federal law.

•  Companies intending to file a special appeal before the STJ must include a separate submission addressing the relevance of the legal issue. This section cannot be omitted even where the case falls within one of the statutory presumptions of relevance.

•  Companies should continue to monitor cases in which the STJ has recognized or rejected relevance, as such decisions may lead to the nationwide suspension of similar proceedings and directly affect ongoing litigation and future dispute-resolution strategies.

•  Food regulatory responsibilities concentrated in SENASA:⁠The Ministry of Health will primarily remain responsible for food safety policy and technical standards, while SENASA will oversee food registration, import authorizations, inspections, enforcement and the day-to-day implementation of the Argentine Food Code. This is intended to reduce overlaps between different regulatory authorities.

•  Broader recognition of foreign certifications:⁠Food, additives, processing aids, ingredients and packaging materials certified by countries listed in Annex III may be deemed compliant with the Argentine Food Code. Certain products not yet covered by the Code may also be exempt from prior approval, although Argentina’s specific prohibitions and maximum permitted limits will continue to prevail.

•  Different import procedures depending on certification status:⁠Products certified by a country listed in Annex III will generally require only an import declaration and a certificate of free sale or equivalent document. Other products must still obtain registration with the National Registry of Food Establishments (RNE) and the National Registry of Food Products (RNPA), submit the required front-of-package nutrition warning requirements and pass SENASA’s sanitary review before they may be marketed and sold.

•  Simplified export requirements and transitional arrangements:⁠Food exported from Argentina will generally only need to comply with the requirements of the destination country. Existing registrations of businesses, products and packaging materials will remain valid where responsibility has been transferred to a different authority and will not need to be renewed solely because of the regulatory restructuring.

•  China is not currently expressly included in the list of countries in Annex III. Chinese food products therefore cannot automatically use the Annex III import declaration procedure solely on the basis of a certificate of free sale issued by a Chinese authority. Importers will need to determine whether the products may instead qualify under Codex Alimentarius standards or another recognized mechanism.

•  Food businesses operating in Argentina should update their regulatory procedures so that SENASA becomes their primary point of contact for food registration, import authorization and regulatory inspections. They should also monitor the filing platforms and implementing rules subsequently issued by SENASA.

•  Importers should carefully verify the origin of the products, the issuing authority for the relevant certification and the applicable import procedure. They should also ensure that the certificate of free sale, product name, manufacturer information, product formulation and Spanish-language label are consistent with one another.

•  Choose Chile Initiative:⁠The Chilean Government is actively promoting the country as a destination for foreign investment and seeking to expand economic cooperation with Chinese companies.

•  Tax Incentives:⁠The new framework reduces the corporate income tax rate from 27% to 23% and introduces long-term tax stability for qualifying investments.

•  Regulatory Certainty:⁠The reduction of the period for invalidating sectoral permits is intended to provide greater predictability for companies developing investment projects in Chile.

•  Strategic Sectors:⁠Chinese companies are being encouraged to explore opportunities in areas including energy, mining, infrastructure, telecommunications, electromobility and technology.

•  Chinese companies considering investments in Chile should assess how the new tax and regulatory framework may affect the structuring, timing and expected returns of their projects.

•  Investors planning projects above the applicable investment thresholds should evaluate whether they may benefit from the new tax stability regime and consider its implications for long-term investment planning.

•  Companies developing projects in regulated sectors should consider the revised rules governing sectoral permits and assess how the shorter invalidation period may affect project execution and regulatory risk.

•  Chinese investors should monitor opportunities in sectors highlighted by the Chilean Government, particularly energy, mining, infrastructure, telecommunications and electromobility.

•  Preventive Review:⁠The Procuraduría is examining the legal, financial and patrimonial conditions of the transaction.

•  Regulatory Authorization:⁠The authority will assess whether the agreement required prior authorization or approval from Superservicios given the company’s current government intervention.

•  Financial Sustainability:⁠The review will consider the agreement’s potential impact on AIR-E’s indebtedness, cash flow and repayment capacity.

•  Infrastructure and Users:⁠The Procuraduría will examine the projects to be financed and their potential impact on the quality, continuity and reliability of electricity services, including their potential effect on tariffs and the more than 1.3 million users served by AIR-E.

•  Companies financing or investing in regulated Colombian utilities should assess the regulatory requirements applicable to transactions involving entities under government intervention, including any requirements for prior authorization or approval.

•  Investors and lenders should carefully assess the financial condition, indebtedness, cash flow and repayment capacity of companies under government intervention before entering into financing arrangements.

•  Chinese companies involved in financing or developing electricity infrastructure in Colombia should consider how regulatory oversight may affect project implementation, financing structures and operational planning.

•  Infrastructure and utility companies should assess whether financing arrangements could affect service continuity, electricity tariffs or other conditions applicable to users, particularly where the transaction involves a regulated utility.

•  Procuraduría’s preventive monitoring does not, by itself, establish any irregularity or invalidate the financing agreement. The authority has requested information to assess whether the transaction complies with the applicable legal, regulatory and financial requirements.

•  Completion of Domestic Procedures:⁠Peru has completed the legal procedures required for the Protocol’s entry into force following its ratification by Supreme Decree No. 035-2026-RE.

•  Modernized Trade Framework:⁠The Protocol updates existing FTA provisions and introduces new rules addressing trade facilitation, customs cooperation and the digital economy.

•  Investment Promotion:⁠The updated framework is intended to create a more favorable environment for Chinese investment in Peru.

•  Growing Bilateral Trade:⁠China continues to be Peru’s largest trading partner, underscoring the economic significance of the updated agreement.

•  Companies engaged in Peru-China trade should review the updated FTA provisions and assess how the new rules may affect their import, export and customs procedures.

•  Importers and exporters should evaluate the updated customs and trade facilitation provisions to ensure that their internal procedures and documentation remain compliant with applicable requirements.

•  Companies involved in digital services and cross-border digital transactions should monitor the implementation of the new provisions relating to the digital economy and assess potential opportunities arising from the updated framework.

•  Chinese companies considering investments in Peru should take into account the modernized FTA framework when evaluating market-entry strategies, investment structures and long-term operations.

•  The completion of Peru’s internal procedures does not by itself mean that all provisions are already applicable. Companies should monitor the formal entry into force of the Protocol and any implementing measures issued by the Peruvian authorities.

•  Criminal Conviction:⁠Moreno was found guilty of bribery, sentenced to five years in prison and permanently barred from holding public office.

•  Chinese Infrastructure Project:⁠The Coca Codo Sinclair Hydroelectric Plant was constructed by a major Chinese hydropower construction group..

• Alleged Bribery Scheme:⁠Prosecutors alleged that approximately US$76 million in bribes were paid through sham consulting contracts connected to the project.

•  Chinese companies participating in infrastructure projects in Ecuador should maintain robust anti-bribery and compliance procedures, particularly when dealing with public officials, state-owned entities and government-linked projects.

•  Companies should conduct enhanced due diligence on local agents, consultants, intermediaries and business partners involved in public infrastructure transactions to identify potential corruption and reputational risks.

•  Infrastructure investors should ensure that consulting, advisory and intermediary agreements are supported by legitimate services, transparent payment structures and appropriate contractual compliance provisions.

•  Chinese companies operating internationally should consider the interaction between Ecuadorian anti-corruption requirements and applicable Chinese or other foreign compliance obligations when structuring payments and engaging local counterparties.

•  The case demonstrates that corruption allegations arising from major infrastructure projects may result in significant criminal, financial and reputational consequences for individuals and companies involved, even years after the underlying transactions occurred.