Las empresas con planes de distribuir sus productos en los Estados Unidos cuentan con varias opciones.  En un extremo del espectro existe la alternativa de abrir un establecimiento de venta al menudeo para la venta directa a clientes.  Esta opción contempla una fuerte inversión de capital para constituir una sociedad en los EE.UU., establecer la oficina de ventas, una base de inventario y la contratación de personal.  En el extremo opuesto se puede considerar el e-comercio, ventas a través de la red.  Ésta última implica un mínimo de inversión, o ninguna, en los EE.UU., por lo que resulta ser la alternativa menos costosa. Entre estas dos alternativas extremas se cuenta con una tercera opción que consiste en contratar a un representante de ventas o distribuidor.  Ésta tercera opción, “canal de distribución”, es la más utilizada por empresas nuevas al mercado de los EE.UU.

Los acuerdos de representación de ventas y distribución son populares debido a que generalmente no requieren gran inversión de capital ni llevan el riesgo fiscal de establecer un local permanente en los EE.UU.  Sin embargo, existen importantes diferencias entre representantes de venta y distribuidores.  Estas diferencias se basan en la relación contractual que cada uno asume con la parte con la que ha contratado (usualmente un fabricante, vendedor al por mayor u otro proveedor).  Por ejemplo, el contrato de representante de ventas y el contrato de distribución contienen términos fundamentalmente diferentes con respecto a: (i) la manera en que el representante de ventas o distribuidor es compensado por el proveedor de los productos, (ii) el procedimiento en el cual los bienes del proveedor son vendidos por el representante de ventas o el distribuidor, (iii) la autoridad del representante de ventas o del distribuidor para actuar en nombre del proveedor y (iv) el grado de control ejercitado sobre el representante de ventas o el distribuidor por parte del proveedor.

Dos diferencias importantes entre el representante de ventas y el distribuidor son la forma en que son económicamente remunerados y el procedimiento utilizado para vender los productos.  El representante de ventas normalmente no adquiere el título de propiedad de los productos sino que obtiene órdenes de compra de los clientes en nombre y representación del proveedor, de tal manera que el proveedor puede abastecer las órdenes directamente.  El contrato de compra de bienes en el caso del representante de ventas es directo entre el proveedor y el cliente.  El proveedor y el representante de ventas celebran un contrato por separado, el cual estipula que el representante recibe una comisión, misma que generalmente se basa en la porción de los ingresos de las ventas del proveedor derivadas de los clientes localizados en el territorio del representante de ventas. 

A diferencia de los representantes de ventas, el distribuidor adquiere el título de propiedad de los artículos del proveedor.  En un acuerdo típico de distribución, el distribuidor somete sus propias órdenes de compra al proveedor, compra los productos de éste y los revende directamente a sus propios clientes. El margen de utilidades del distribuidor se encuentra en la reventa de productos.

Una tercera disimilitud clave entre el representante de ventas y el distribuidor es que el representante de ventas en muchos casos cuenta con amplia autorización para actuar en nombre y representación del proveedor en el territorio designado.  Los distribuidores, por otro lado, típicamente cuentan con menos autoridad para actuar en nombre del proveedor y tal autoridad está claramente definida en los términos del contrato de distribución entre el proveedor y el distribuidor.

Un cuarto factor que distingue a los representantes de ventas de los distribuidores es que el proveedor tiene más control sobre el representante de ventas que sobre el distribuidor.  En el acuerdo del representante de ventas, el proveedor estipula el precio de venta al cliente y puede aceptar o rechazar cualquier cliente propuesto por el representante.  Sin embargo, en un acuerdo de distribución, el distribuidor compra los bienes del proveedor y puede definir sus precios para la reventa de productos a terceros.  Por ende el proveedor suele tener mínimo control sobre las ventas subsecuentes del distribuidor.  

El tema del control es importante por varias razones.  Por ejemplo, bajo la ley de Texas, entre más control una persona ejerza sobre otra, es más probable que los actos u omisiones de la persona controlada sean imputados a la persona controladora.  Debido a que el proveedor generalmente ejerce más control sobre el representante de ventas que sobre el distribuidor, es más probable que el proveedor pueda tener responsabilidad por los actos u omisiones de un representante de ventas que por los mismos de un distribuidor.  No obstante, un contrato de distribución en el cual el proveedor ejerce un nivel de control sobre el distribuidor similar al que típicamente se encuentra en los contratos de representante de ventas pudiera incrementar la posibilidad de que al proveedor le sea atribuida la responsabilidad de los actos u omisiones del distribuidor.  Como consecuencia, el proveedor, con la asistencia de un consejero legal, debe determinar y claramente establecer en el contrato los derechos y obligaciones de las partes.

Bajo todas las circunstancias, los contratos entre proveedores de bienes y representantes de ventas o distribuidores deben ser por escrito. (Cito la Cláusula 54 del Código de Negocios y Comercio del Estado de Texas, la cual requiere que los contratos entre el proveedor y un distribuidor que solicite órdenes de venta al por mayor dentro del estado, se hagan por escrito o por medio computarizado.)  Como mínimo, el contrato debe indicar los productos a ser vendidos o comercializados por el representante de ventas o distribuidor, el área geográfica en la cual dicho representante o distribuidor está autorizado a desempeñar sus obligaciones y si esta relación es de carácter exclusivo o no.  El contrato también debe definir las garantías y claramente establecer los límites de autoridad del representante o del distribuidor para actuar en nombre y representación del proveedor.  Otras cláusulas importantes incluyen los términos de pago y entrega de productos, acuerdo de no competencia, obligaciones de confidencialidad, requerimientos de pólizas de seguros, del suministro de información y designación de tribunal competente y ley aplicable (expresamente incluyendo o excluyendo la Convención de Naciones Unidas sobre los Contratos de Compraventa Internacional de Mercaderias - CISG) en caso de presentarse un conflicto legal.

El contrato con un representante de ventas debe también incluir previsiones pertinentes (procedimientos y políticas) con respecto a la solicitud de órdenes de compra por parte del representante y sobre el pago de las comisiones.  El contrato con un distribuidor debe incorporar los términos de embarque y entrega (riesgo de pérdida) de los productos (incluso INCOTERMS), y puede obligar al representante a someter formularios de órdenes de compra que no contradigan los términos establecidos en el contrato de distribución.  Las disposiciones adicionales deben ser estipuladas según la industria y los productos específicos del proveedor.

Los proveedores de mercancías deben considerar cuidadosamente la gama de opciones disponibles para distribuir sus productos en los EE.UU. de la manera más eficiente y efectiva.  Una asesoría legal competente puede ser de gran utilidad para un proveedor en el logro de dichos objetivos.

El otro dia un cliente mexicano nos solicito apoyo en el establecimiento de una oficina representativa (representative office) en los EE.UU. para aumentar la venta de sus productos en los EE.UU.

Una oficina representativa es un termino que tiene un significado especial entre fiscalistas.  En general, significa que un agente de la empresa matriz (en este caso, la empresa mexicana) representa a la empresa matriz en el extranjero (en este caso, en los EE.UU.) y que las actividades del agente no son suficientes para resultar que la empresa matriz tenga un establecimiento fiscal permanente (permanent tax establishment) en el extranjero (en este caso, bajo el Tratado Fiscal Entre Mexico y los EE.UU.

En la mayoria de las situaciones en que una empresa mexicana contempla mantener una oficina representativa en los EE.UU., recomiendo que la empresa constituya una sociedad en los EE.UU. (por ejemplo, una corporation o limited liability company) en lugar de una oficina representativa en los EE.UU. por dos razones principales:

1. Riesgo de Crear Un Establecimiento Fiscal Permanente.  La apertura de una oficina representativa podria crear un establecimiento fiscal permanente de la empresa mexicana en los EE.UU. si, por ejemplo, la empresa lleva a cabo cualquier actividad en los EE.UU. que no sea el recibo de ordenes de compra para sus productos.  Por lo tanto, la oficina representativa no ofrece a la empresa mexicana mucha flexibilidad en las operaciones que desempena en los EE.UU.  Al tener un establecimiento fiscal permanente en los EE.UU., una empresa mexicana tendria que pagar impuestos en los EE.UU. y presentar declaraciones fiscales en los EE.UU. divulgando informacion de la empresa mexicana que normalmente seria confidencial.
2. Ninguna Proteccion Legal en Contra Demandas.  Una oficina representativa no otorga a la empresa mexicana ninguna proteccion legal contra demandas en los EE.UU., un pais bastante litigioso.  Por ejemplo, si la empresa mexicana y uno de sus clientes en los EE.UU. entran en una disputa sobre un contrato, el cliente podria demandar directamente a la empresa mexicana en los EE.UU. porque al mantener una oficina representativa en un estado de los EE.UU., la empresa automaticamente se somete a la jurisdiccion de los tribunales de ese estado.  La empresa mexicana generalmente tiene mas activos que su subsidiaria en los EE.UU., asi que la constitucion de una subsidiaria le daria a la matriz una capa de proteccion legal a traves de la subsidiaria.

Empresas mexicanas que estan considerando expandir sus operaciones a los EE.UU. deben acudir a un abogado corporativo en los EE.UU. con experiencia en trabajar con empresas mexicanas.

Operating a Mexican company is more labor-intensive than operating a U.S. company, mainly because of the monthly and annual tax filings that must be prepared and filed for income tax, value added tax, labor tax, and withholding tax.  

Businesses considering forming a Mexican company should budget for these operational costs of before forming the company.  Since the cost to outsource tax and bookkeeping management can range from US$2,000-$4,000 per month, it can be more economical in some cases for the compamy to employ an accountant to handle routine tax filings and bookeeping functions.

Below is a list of the main ongoing operational requirements for a Mexican company.

1. Prepare monthly and annual value added tax reports and deliver them to the Mexican Tax Administration Service (SAT).
2. Prepare monthly and annual income tax returns and pay taxes to SAT.
3. Prepare withholding tax reports and deliver them to SAT.
4. Pay labor taxes and contributions to SAT.
5. Prepare annual report for the National Registry of Foreign Investments (RNIE) (for companies owned by non-Mexicans).
6. Prepare quarterly informational reports to be filed with the RNIE indicating the company’s income and expenses if: (i) the shareholders make contributions to or withdraws from the company’s variable capital that do not affect the company’s fixed capital; or (ii) the company has retained profits during any preceding fiscal year and it disposes of such retained profits or any accumulated profits; or (iii) the company makes a loan to any related third party.  Even if one or more of the foregoing circumstances have occurred, no report must be filed unless the total income or expenses of the company during a given quarter exceeds three thousand times the General Minimum Wage (daily) in force in the Federal District (if the company is formed in the Federal District), which is approximately MX$50).
7. Prepare and formalize annual shareholder meeting minutes (which, among other requirements, must inform the shareholders of the company that the company has complied with all tax obligations).
8. Obtain/renew (annually) FM-3 visas for non-Mexican nationals who manage or are employed by the company in Mexico.
9. Deliver (annually) a list of all shareholders, including address, country of tax residence and taxpayer identification number to the Federal Taxpayers’ Registry.
10. Prepare and file annual registration with the Mexican Business Information System (SIEM).

Opening a bank account for a new company in Mexico is more time consuming and requires more documentation than in the U.S.  The following is a list of the actions generally required to open a bank account in Mexico for a new company.  The requirements of each bank are often different so readers should check with their banks before relying on this list.

1. Original or copy of document issuing the tax identification number (Registro Federal de Contribuyentes – RFC) to the company.
2. Original of the registered public deed and bylaws (escritura constitutiva y estatutos sociales) of the company.  If the public deed is pending registration with the Public Registry of Commerce in the state of organization (e.g., the Federal District), then a letter from the notary public explaining this fact is generally accepted in lieu thereof.
3. Original of the registered public deed showing the powers of attorney (poderes) granted to the person opening the bank account on behalf of the company (this person is called the company’s representante legal or legal representative).  This legal representative must appear at the bank in person to open the bank account.  To the extent possible, the attorneys for the company should plan ahead when forming the company to make sure the powers of attorney for bank account management are granted to the appropriate people in the bylaws of the company upon its formation to avoid having to prepare separate powers of attorney after formation, which will add expense and time to the process.  The powers of attorney for bank account management can be drafted creatively to limit the legal representative’s authority to act on behalf of the company (e.g., to open and close bank accounts and to grant, sign, and negotiate credit instruments on behalf of the company up to the value of MX$100,000 acting alone or in unlimited amount if acting with Juan Valdez).
4. Original of the proof of the company’s tax domicile (domicilio fiscal).  Often this is a lease agreement or a utility bill issued to the company showing the tax domicile.
5. Original official identification of the legal representative.  If the legal representative is a foreign national, then he/she must have a valid FM-3 visa that shows the name of the company on behalf of which the bank account will been opened and that the foreign national is authorized to act on behalf of such company. 
6. Document proving place of residence of the legal representative.
7. Initial deposit to open the account (generally MX$5,000-MX$10,000).
8. List of the individuals who will be authorized to perform transactions under the account (i.e., additional legal representatives).  Each such individual must provide an original official identification and must meet the FM-3 visa requirements set forth in #5 above if they are foreign nationals.
9. Once all of the information above (and any additional information required by a particular bank) has been supplied, the bank will generally take three-five business days to open the account.

The legal representative should make at least one copy of all of the documents referenced above in case they are requested by the bank.

The U.S. Commercial Service’s Mexico offices released the following new reports on Mexico in June and July, 2009.  Copies are available at the links below:

• IT Cluster Development in Monterrey;
• Mining Equipment Market;
• Airport Opportunities and Trends in the National Infrastructure Program;
• Business & Regulation Insights in the Pay-TV Market; and
• Mexico’s Retail Sector: “Selling Inside the Box”.

I continue the Mexican Real Estate 101 series with a list below of some of the essential due diligence actions that should be performed before entering into a Mexican real estate transaction.   

Investors in Mexican real estate should always consult with a licensed Mexican real estate attorney before buying any property in Mexico.

1. Title Review.  The buyer’s Mexican counsel must review the chain of title by analyzing certified copies of the title deeds obtained from Public Registry of Property located in jurisdiction of the real estate.  Any liens and encumbrances on the property will appear in the property records obtained from the Public Registry.  The property records are kept in different books, which are page numbered and organized in volumes.  If possible, a recognized title insurance company in Mexico (such as Stewart Title, First American Title Insurance, Chicago Title, etc.) should perform a supplemental title review in addition to the review performed by local counsel.  If the title review indicates that the chain of title is unclear or interrupted, further research should be performed to determine if there is a serious title defect.  If the title defect involves corrections to the metes and bounds property description, the problem is generally solved by requesting that corrections be made at the Public Registry, provided that the modifications have been agreed to in writing by the owner of the adjacent land.  If such agreement cannot be obtained, judicial action may be necessary, which could be costly and protracted and the buyer may instead decide to terminate the transaction.
2. Title Insurance.  If possible, the buyer should obtain a commitment for title insurance from a recognized title insurance company in Mexico.  Stewart Title and First American offer owner and mortgagee policies adapted from the American Land Title Association (ALTA) policy forms.  Policies can be issued in either U.S. Dollars or Pesos and can be written to insure any recognized land interest in Mexico, including direct ownership, leasehold, trust, or beneficial ownership.  Among the risks insured are mortgages, mechanic’s and tax liens, easements, contractual obligations restricting the use of the property, and adverse possession.  Approximate cost for title insurance is .0065% of the total transaction amount.
3. Availability of Utilities. Buyer’s counsel should review and analyze availability of water, sewer, gas, electric and telephone services to the property provided by the applicable local authorities.  Water utilities are particularly important if the target property is located in a dry region and the proposed development includes a golf course or other feature that requires irrigation or significant water use.  Local counsel should review the arrangement between the property and the local water utility provider, which should have a National Water Commission (Comisión Nacional del Agua) concession.  Water provided under a water supply agreement with the local water utility company must derive from a federal NWC concession.  Buyer’s lawyer should confirm that the water supply agreements are in full force and effect and that they provide certainty to the buyer, both in terms of amounts of water required and for the time periods required.  If water is unavailable, other options (e.g., a well or desalination plant) should be considered.
4. Zoning/Use Restrictions; Condominium Regulations. Buyer’s counsel should confirm that the current and intended uses of the property do not violate zoning, development, and land use (uso de suelo) laws and regulations.  Each Mexican municipality of regional importance will have an urban development plan.  Buyer’s counsel should determine whether there are any limitations on construction of the target property.  Most urban development plans contain density limitations.  If an existing condominium is to be purchased, local counsel must review the condominium regulations regarding design and architectural restrictions and any review process required.
5. Survey/Legal Description of Property. Although surveys are not obtained in all real estate transactions in Mexico, it is strongly recommended that buyer obtain a real estate survey prepared by a qualified Mexican surveyor showing the boundaries and measurements of the property.  Surveyors in Mexico are now making use of GPS to create detailed surveys.  
6. Certificate of Encumbrances. Buyer’s counsel should request a certificate of encumbrances (Certificado de Gravámenes) from the Public Registry of Property.  This certificate will enable the Mexican Notary Public to assess whether the property has any liens, encumbrances or claims attached.  At a minimum, this document must contain the following information: (i) the time period covered by the certificate; (ii) the surface area of the property; (iii) a metes and bounds description of the property; (iv) the name of the property owner; (v) the classification the property (urban or rural); (vi) a legal description of the ownership of the property (e.g., whether held in trust, owned by several individuals, etc.); and (vii) the name and signature of the Public Registrar and the official seal of the Public Registry of Property.
7. Tax Certificate. Obtain a tax certificate from the Municipal Treasury Office showing that all property taxes are paid in full.  At a minimum, this certificate should contain the following information: (i) the property tax identification number (clave catastral); (ii) the tax appraisal value; (iii) the name of the owner; and (iii) the signature of the department head and seal of the Municipal Treasury Office.  It is not uncommon in Mexico for property owners to fail to pay taxes for several consecutive years.  In order to register the public deed in the Public Registry of Property after the sale has closed, the taxes must be paid in full.  In the State of Baja California and certain other Mexican states, the tax certificate must also state that there are no pending debts with local authorities such as the State Water Services Board.
8. Environmental Laws. Buyer should confirm that the property is in compliance with all environmental laws, preferably using well-qualified Mexican environmental auditors (of which there are few; Buyer should check background and experience before hiring).  If the real estate is acquired to develop a tourist or industrial activity, an environmental impact authorization may be required from the applicable environmental authorities.  Other specific studies may be necessary depending on type of development (e.g., geological studies if buildings are to be constructed on a hillside).
9. Appraisal. Obtain an appraisal (Avalúo) of the property from a certified appraiser.  An appraisal of the property is required in connection with any sale by Mexican real estate law.  A Mexican Notary Public will generally obtain the appraisal on behalf of the parties.
10. Federal Maritime Zone.  Beachfront property is likely to be located in the Federal Maritime Zone, which is the area located along the full length of the Mexican coast and twenty meters inland from the mean high tide line.  Land in the Federal Maritime Zone is public property, but the Mexican Government often grants 15-year concessions to landowners for exclusive use of the property.  Buyers of coastal property should confirm (1) that the payment of dues on the concession, if any, is current, (2) if the concession is soon to expire, whether it may be renewed, and (3) whether third parties may seek or maintain rights to the concession.
11. Labor Issues.  If the buyer seeks to acquire an existing hotel/resort development, factory, etc. that has employees, buyer’s Mexican labor and employment counsel should review all existing collective bargaining and individual labor agreements with unionized and other employees to confirm that the transaction will not violate the terms of those agreements and determine any obligations of seller or buyer in connection with the transaction (severance obligations, etc.).  A purchase of the assets of a Mexican entity invokes the concept of “employer substitution” under Mexican labor law, which renders the buyer liable jointly with the seller for all of the labor compensation and other labor obligations of the seller for six months from the date the employees or union are notified of the substitution.  After six months, only the new employer (buyer) is liable.  The buyer and the seller may agree in writing to limit such liability.

In the wake of TSD Loreto Partners, S. en C. por A. de C.V.’s June 6, 2009 announcement that it had suspended all operating and construction activities on the Loreto Bay project, I decided to perform an informal internet-based investigation on the companies involved in the development of the project.

At the top level appears to be The Trust for Sustainable Development, a Canadian non-profit corporation.  According to its website, the Trust first identifies and provides seed financing for sustainable projects.  It then creates a for-profit company to develop each project.  The Trust has developed (or commenced the development of) projects in Canada, the U.S., and, of course, Loreto Bay, Mexico.  We did not investigate the projects the website says were developed in connection with the Trust.

The Trust created several affiliated for-profit entities to develop the Loreto Bay project.  TSD Loreto Partners, S. en C. por A. de C.V., a Mexican partnership, is the principal Mexican development entity.

The Loreto Bay Company, an Arizona corporation, appears to have initially been the principal U.S. sales and marketing arm for the project.  Based on public records obtained from the Arizona Secretary of State, Mr. David Butterfield (who is discussed below) served as Chairman of the Board of the Loreto Bay Company, Mr. James Grogan served as Director and President & CEO, and Mr. David J. Shreene served as Senior Vice President and Secretary.

In January 2007, the Loreto Bay Company was merged into Baja Developments, LLC, a New York limited liability company, the Manager of which is The Trust for Sustainable Development.  Upon the merger, Baja Developments, LLC likely became the principal U.S. sales and marketing entity for the Loreto Bay project.

Another entity indirectly involved in the project was a British Columbia entity named Baja Developments Limited Partnership, which was probably Mr. Butterfield’s holding company for his investment in TSD Loreto Partners and/or Baja Developments, LLC.

One or more of Baja Developments, LLC, Baja Developments Limited Partnership, and the Loreto Bay Company likely controls a portion of TSD Loreto Partners, but there is no public document by which we could confirm the ownership structure of TSD.  The formation documents of TSD filed in the Public Registry of Commerce in Mexico located in its state of organization would show only the initial partners of TSD and not any subsequent changes in ownership structure (we have not sought to obtain copies of TSD’s Public Registry documents).

Based on the press release discussing the formation of a joint venture between the Loreto Bay Company and Citi Property Investors to develop the Loreto Bay project, we speculate that the remaining portion of TSD is owned by Citi and other persons.  However, we would have expected that Citi would have preferred to make its equity investment in the Loreto Bay project through a U.S. joint venture entity, such as Baja Developments, LLC, in order to avoid the difficulty of enforcing joint venture obligations under Mexican law.

The Trust for Sustainable Development is led by Mr. Butterfield, whose LinkedIn profile is available here.  The profile indicates that Mr. Butterfield is a Director at Arizona State University’s Global Institute of Sustainability and the President of ICC Power, Inc., which the profile says was formerly International Composting Corporation.  The Institute’s website no longer names Mr. Butterfield as a Director and ICC Power, Inc.’s website is under construction.  International Composting Corporation has a website, which may or may not be the same International Composting Corporation that Mr. Butterfield is referencing on his LinkedIn profile, but we did not find any mention of Mr. Butterfield on that site.  Mr. Butterfield probably has not recently updated his LinkedIn profile.

(Note: Loreto Bay’s developers have taken down the original project website, which may now be viewed via the Wayback Machine.)

According to NAFTA Works, a website published by Mexico’s Ministry of the Economy’s NAFTA office, Mexico will reduce the time to “open a new business” from 30 days to 2 hours under its new Fast Opening Business System (FOBS).  A June 22, 2009 NAFTA Works press release claims that the FOBS program will, in connection with such time reduction, reduce the number of new business regulatory requirements from 16 to 3.

Other than the limited information provided above, the press release did not discuss the specific ways in which FOBS would achieve its ambitious objectives; accordingly, I remain skeptical, but hopeful, that FOBS will function as advertised.

One of the most significant problems in finalizing the formation of a new business entity in Mexico is the lengthy time period required for the Public Registry of Commerce in the jurisdiction of formation to issue the registered copy of the formation deed, which can take up to 2 months or longer.  Although a certification from a Mexican Notary Public that the deed is in the process of registration in the Public Registry is generally sufficient evidence for third parties and other governmental agencies that the entity has been formed, upgrade of the information management systems at the Public Registries that would expedite the formation deed registration process is a much-needed reform.

Antonio “Tony” Garza, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico from November 18, 2002-January 20, 2009, has joined ViaNovo, a Austin, Texas-, Washington, DC, and Monterrey-based management and communications consulting firm.  ViaNovo’s press release on the matter is available here.

Ambassador Garza also announced he would also join the law firm of White & Case, LLP, as Counsel in its Mexico City offices.

Both appointments are effective June 23, 2009.

On April 23, 2005, Ambassador Garza married Maria Asuncion Aramburuzabala, heiress to a significant portion of the Grupo Modelo brewing company.

The University of San Diego Law School – Procopio International Tax Institute Conference will be held October 19-20, 2009, at the law school’s lovely campus in San Diego.

Topics include:

• international tax problems in times of economic crises (cross border bad debts, etc.)
• current developments in Mexico’s REFIPREs cases (Televisa, Pepsi, etc.)
• global tax efficiency and wealth preservation in risky times (transferring devalued assets, etc.)
• U.S. international tax in the Obama era
• international tax audits and enforcing cross-border tax claims
• current issues – cross-border maquiladora operations with a cheap peso
• Obama initiatives – the future of international tax
• off-shore compliance initiatives – current and future trends

The conference agenda includes speakers from both government and private practice.

Disclosure:  Mexico Law Blog is a sponsor of this conference.