Mexico | The decree that modifies the Securities Market Law and Investment Funds Law is published in the Official Gazette

Mexico | The decree that modifies the Securities Market Law and Investment Funds Law is published in the Official Gazette

Around the end of 2023, the decree that reforms, repeals and adds various provisions of the Securities Market Law and the Investment Funds Law was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation, which came into force on the 29th. December 2023.

To read more about these modifications, please consult the following links:



In summary, these modifications will benefit the Mexican economy by facilitating the active participation of individuals and small and medium-sized companies (SMEs) in the stock market and various investment funds in a safe manner. The introduction of new forms of investment, such as hedge funds, is expected to contribute positively to the Mexican Stock Market.

It is important to highlight that the CNBV must issue the general provisions mentioned in the decree, placing special emphasis on the changes made to both laws. We will be attentive to these publications to delve deeper into this topic.

The lawyers in the Banking and Finance area are at your service to resolve any questions regarding the above.

For more information contact:

Juan José López de Silanes | Partner Basham, Ringe and Correa |

Uruguay | The modifications to the Law on Defense of Competition come into force

Uruguay | The modifications to the Law on Defense of Competition come into force

The year 2024 began with important legislative developments in Uruguay regarding the defense of competition, referring in particular to the regulations for the control of economic concentrations.

On January 1, 2024, the modifications to Law No. 18,159 on the Defense of Competition (hereinafter the “LDC”) included in the Accountability Law No. 20,212 came into force. We comment below on the main developments.

I. Modifies the billing threshold applicable to economic concentrations. It goes from a joint billing of the parties, in any of the last 3 fiscal years, from 600 million indexed units (tax included), approximately 90 million dollars, to 500 million indexed units (tax-free), currently close to 75 million dollars.

II. It incorporates an exception to the prior authorization regime for low-impact operations (“de minimis” rule). It establishes that, in addition to meeting the billing threshold indicated in the previous point, the minimum individual billing (tax-free) of two or more participants in the operation must be, in any of the last 3 fiscal years, equal to or greater than 30 million indexed units, approximately 4.5 million dollars. If this condition is not met, the transaction does not require authorization. Those who take advantage of the exception must also notify the Commission about the operation. Once notified, the Commission may determine by reasoned decision, within a period of 15 business days from notification, whether the operation requires authorization. In this way, the legislator tried to prevent what some local politicians and economists called “pac-man” acquisitions (repeated acquisitions of low-billing companies) from being left out of the prior control system.

III. Incorporation of “joint ventures” to the list of economic concentration operations and definition of “control”. The new wording of article 7 of the LDC expressly includes the creation of joint ventures in the list of economic concentration operations subject to authorization (if the indicated billing thresholds are met). Likewise, a definition of the term “control” is incorporated, which is understood “as the possibility of continuously and decisively influencing, directly or indirectly, the strategy and competitive behavior of one or several entities.”

IV. Referral to the general rules of the common administrative procedure. The new wording of article 29 of the LDC establishes that in everything not provided for in said law or in its regulatory decree, the provisions of Decree No. 500/991 will apply, that is, the general rules of the common administrative procedure. Previously, the LDC only referred to these rules for the investigation of anti-competitive practices and not for the prior control regime.

The Accountability Law also establishes that the Executive Branch will approve specific regulations related to the criteria to quantify notification thresholds, as well as the requirements and conditions that notifications and requests for authorization of economic concentration must meet.

For more information contact:

Carla Arellano | Counselor Ferrere |

Uruguay | The modifications to the Law on Defense of Competition come into force

Uruguay | Penalties increase for failing to comply with commercial promotion regulations

All commercial promotions that promote the consumption of products or services and that designate winners by any random mechanism require prior authorization from the Consumer Defense Unit.

To date, carrying out a promotion without said authorization or in breach of any other aspect of the regulations exposed the organizer to sanctions of warning, request for suspension of the promotion or confiscation of prizes in extreme cases. And, if there are three prior warnings, the prohibition of carrying out promotions for a period of 180 days

Since the last Accountability Law, it was established that economic sanctions may also be applied. They range from 10 to 1,000 Adjustable Units, which will be graduated taking into account the offender’s background, market position and the severity of the non-compliance.

The above represents an important change by introducing the possibility of applying fines that until now were not in the list of possible sanctions, which, depending on the case, could become considerable.

For more information contact:

Carla Arellano  | Counselor Ferrere |

Uruguay | The modifications to the Law on Defense of Competition come into force

Compliance Latam | The importance of regulatory compliance on Human Rights in companies in Latin America and the United States

At present, respect for human rights in business has become an issue of increasing importance throughout the world and is already part of the central core of business activity that must be aligned with principles of environmental, social and governance standards. (IS G). Regulatory compliance plays a critical role in protecting human rights and promoting ethical business practices. This article focuses on analyzing the relevance of compliance in Latin America and the United States and its relationship with Human Rights.

Regulatory compliance in companies not only refers to compliance with laws and regulations, but also to respect for and promotion of Human Rights. Companies have a responsibility to carry out due diligence to ensure that their operations do not contribute to violations of fundamental rights, both within their own facilities and in their supply chain. This implies adopting measures to prevent and address cases of discrimination, forced labor and child exploitation, among others.

In Latin America, the relationship between compliance and human rights presents particular challenges. The region is characterized by the presence of industrial sectors that present greater risks both related to corruption and Human Rights. These risks exist in the extractive industries, which include mining and oil, and which are often associated with negative impacts on local communities and the environment or agriculture that features a greater presence of informal or child labor. In this context, Compliance plays a crucial role in ensuring that companies comply with environmental and social regulations, and respect the rights of neighboring communities, in response to the multiple considerations that have been adopted internationally by various countries.

There are certain factors that have contributed to the increase in importance of this topic. Several Latin American countries have enacted stricter laws and regulations to promote regulatory compliance with positive impacts on the promotion and respect of Human Rights, for example, in defense of the environment, decent wages and the protection of children. In this same context, civil society and non-governmental organizations have contributed to the surveillance and denunciation of irresponsible business practices, thus focusing on a greater commitment to Human Rights.

“In Chile, the promotion of Human Rights in the business context has been reinforced with regard to the work that different industries have carried out to achieve international compliance. This has not only meant an ethical commitment to the promotion of Human Rights, but also an improvement in the reputation and sustainability of companies”, explains Jaime Viveros, associate of the firm AZ de Chile.
Aligned with these trends, more and more countries have converted into law the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, due diligence in the field of human rights (DDHR) and hold companies accountable for infringing human rights with their activity. abroad. In this context, one can mention France with its “loi sur le devoir de vigilance” or Germany with its recent law on due diligence in the value chain “LkSG”. The European Union, in turn, has its project for a Directive on due diligence of companies in terms of sustainability, which will unify the standards of all member countries in terms of human rights and the environment and will globally require suppliers of European companies, including those from Latin America and the US, to comply with the new legal requirements.

In the United States, Human Rights compliance has gained prominence in recent years, promoting its application in other jurisdictions. Indeed, the Law for the Protection of Human Rights Abroad and the Supply Chain Transparency Law require companies to report on their measures to prevent human trafficking and forced labor. Another important Law on import restriction is the Uighur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA), which has been in force since 2022 and prohibits the importation of goods extracted, produced, manufactured in whole or in part in the People’s Republic of China, especially in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region or by any other entity within the UFLPA List.

However, there are challenges in the effective implementation of these laws and in the supervision of business practices, since globalization and the complexity of supply chains make it difficult to identify and eradicate practices that violate Human Rights. In this regard, it is essential to strengthen compliance mechanisms and promote collaboration between the private sector, government, and civil society to address these challenges.
From a business perspective, while Human Rights due diligence has many similarities to traditional due diligence in business compliance programs, there are some important differences to consider. The main differences are: (i) the need to analyze the risks from the perspective of the rights holders (eg, the people affected by the negative impacts) and not only from the perspective of the company’s risks; and (ii) placing greater emphasis on stakeholder engagement and transparency, with the expectation that the company should share information with a broader range of stakeholders (eg, employees, community members), should seek their feedback. and reactions and publicly report the efforts made.

Regulatory compliance and the protection of Human Rights are interdependent aspects that must be addressed jointly in Latin America, the United States and throughout the world. Only through a comprehensive and committed approach can we ensure that companies act ethically, respect and promote with integrity the fundamental guarantees of people in all their business activities.