PROBLEMATIC.
In the explanatory memorandum of the Customs Law of September 8, 2013, it was incorporated, as a means of obtaining the customs broker patent, that natural persons comply with various legal requirements, as well as those established in the Call issued for this purpose by the customs authority; eliminating the figure of the substitute customs agent.
In this sense, it was regulated in Article 159, second paragraph of the Customs Law, that natural persons interested in obtaining a customs agent patent must comply with the requirements indicated in the law, as well as in the corresponding Call.
For its part, Article 212 of the Regulations of said Law, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on April 20, 2015, established
the regulated power of the authorities to issue the call for applications at least every two years. It should be noted that, in accordance with the first transitory article, it was established that said regulatory provision would enter into force two months after its publication, that is, on June 20, 2015.
However, since 2015, the Customs Authority has not issued any call for applications in order to comply with the aforementioned articles and, consequently, that interested parties can compete for a customs broker patent.
ACTIONS AND STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTED BY STRATEGO
Our area of Legal Practice, with high specialization in Tax, Customs and Constitutional matters, promoted various amparo lawsuits, in order to demand the unconstitutionality of the omission acts of the Customs Authorities, by not issuing the Call for Applications to obtain an agent’s patent. The foregoing, considering that these omission acts affect various human rights protected at the Constitutional level and by International Treaties to which Mexico is a party.
RESULT.
The judges granted the Amparo and Protection of the Federal Justice, so that the Responsible Authorities, within the scope of their respective competences, issue within a period of three days in favor of the Complainants a Call to obtain the customs agent license; this because the violations asserted have been demonstrated and therefore, a FAVORABLE resolution has been obtained.
For more information about this case study and its supports, contact us.
At Stratego, we are distinguished by our extensive experience in providing comprehensive advice to companies on tax issues, covering both accounting and legal aspects. Our team of specialists performs a complete analysis of cases, offering broad and multidisciplinary solutions, always in defense of our clients. If you have questions or are looking for detailed information about what we provide, we encourage you to contact us.
Legal Notice and Copyright
The content of this article is for informational and general information purposes only. It does not constitute a legal opinion, personalized advice, or specific tax advice. Consequently, ST STRATEGO assumes no liability arising from the interpretation or use of this document.
Reproduction of this publication in whole or in part, by any means or format, is strictly prohibited without prior, express, and written authorization from the author. Any unauthorized use will be punished in accordance with the Federal Copyright Law and other applicable provisions.
If you would like more information on the information presented here or to learn more about our legal, tax, and foreign trade solutions, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@stratego-st.com.