The end of the zero-tariff era
For two decades, free-trade agreements made one question almost irrelevant to infrastructure developers: who acts as the importer of record? With duties on most capital equipment at or near zero, owners typically developed their projects under turnkey contracts, with their EPCs acting as importers of record who could often buy equipment on DDP terms from the OEMs. The owner rarely touched the customs process.That era is closing. The realignment of global trade triggered by the US–China dispute is pushing tariffs onto categories of goods long treated as exempt, raising the landed cost of building new infrastructure. As duties return, the identity of the importer stops being a formality and becomes a lever — one that can materially change a project’s cost base. This capsule sets out what changed, why it matters, and what owners of infrastructure assets can do about it.2. A bifurcating trade landscape
Mexico’s trade position is not simply becoming “more protectionist” — it is bifurcating. On one side, preferential access is deepening: the modernised EU–Mexico Global Agreement and the activation of CPTPP provisions with the United Kingdom expand tariff-free access and modern rules of origin across Europe and the Pacific bloc. On the other, duties and defensive measures are rising on other origins — notably the Chinese-origin components that dominate the supply chains for capital equipment.
This is already concrete policy. Mexico’s 2026 trade-policy decree raised the general import duty (IGI) on a broad range of goods from non-FTA origins — particularly Asian markets — to rates of up to 25% or 35%, and strategic capital goods, steel components and electronic modules have come under substantial upward pressure.
For an infrastructure owner, the practical consequence is sharp: the tariff outcome of a project now depends heavily on where components originate and how their importation is structured. Origin planning and importer strategy have moved from back-office detail to boardroom decision.
3. The mechanisms that mitigate the cost belong to the owner
Here is the pivot that is reshaping contracts. The instruments available to reduce or defer these new duties are, by design, tied to the owner or operator of the infrastructure — not to the EPC contractor or the OEM. Under a DDP purchase, the manufacturer imports, absorbs the duty, and prices it back into the contract; the owner pays it, but cannot optimise it. To capture the benefit, the owner’s own Mexican entity must take the role of importer of record.
The principal instruments include:
- Sectoral programmes that reduce duties on inputs and machinery for qualifying producers.
- Rule-based classification relief that lets components imported in an unassembled or disassembled state — even when they arrive at different times or through different customs offices — be classified under the tariff heading of the finished article.
- Temporary-import regimes that defer duties and VAT on equipment and inputs used for export-oriented production.
None of these can be accessed by an OEM importing on DDP terms. Each requires the owner to hold the corresponding authorisation and to act as importer — which is precisely why developers are beginning to restructure their EPC and supply contracts.
Case 1 — Power generation + storage.
In a utility-scale generation-plus-storage project, many components are exposed to the new tariff environment, given their predominantly Chinese origin. For example, a photovoltaic plant imported as a complete unit enters duty-free — but if its components are imported separately, solar panels attract a 15% duty, inverters 10% and steel structures 35%, plus mandatory NOM compliance and automatic import licences (Avisos Automáticos). The applicable sectoral programme and classification rules can materially reduce that duty, but only where the project owner’s Mexican entity holds the programme and acts as importer. An OEM importing the same equipment on DDP terms cannot reach these benefits — so restructuring the import to the owner turns a rising, unmanaged cost into a planned, mitigated one.
Case 2 — Export-oriented facility.
A large, export-oriented facility can import its process equipment and inputs with duties and VAT deferred under a temporary-import regime — but only if the owner’s registered entity is the importer of record. Structured correctly, this materially improves the project’s cash position through construction and remains available for the entire life of the plant, for the import of foreign supplies and equipment. Structured as a conventional DDP supply, the benefit is simply lost.
4. The other half of the equation: Liability under Mexico’s 2026 Customs Law reform
Taking the importer role captures the upside — but it also transfers responsibility. Mexico’s 2026 reform to the Customs Law tightens the chain of liability and introduces the electronic Manifestación de Valor (MVe — electronic Value Declaration), with real exposure to steep penalties as well as suspension of a customs broker’s licence (patente) where obligations are not met. This exposure is present even when the owner is not the importer of record, as the materiality of all purchasing transactions is being audited. The difference is that when the owner becomes the importer of record, it assumes this compliance burden directly — and gains a means of mitigating it.
This is why the restructuring cannot be a purely contractual exercise. Capturing the tariff benefits and controlling the new liability have to be designed together: the legal structure of the contracts on one side, and rigorous customs compliance — correct valuation, classification and a properly licensed broker — on the other. Done in isolation, either half creates risk; done together, they turn a threat into an advantage.
5. What infrastructure owners should be asking now
For owners across mining, energy, water, and other capital-intensive infrastructure, four questions are worth putting on the table for any current or upcoming project:
- What incoterms govern our equipment procurement — and who is the importer of record today?
- What is the landed-cost impact of the new tariff environment on our key components, by origin?
- Would taking the importer role unlock sectoral programmes, temporary-import regimes or rule-based savings that an OEM or an EPC cannot access on our behalf?
Are our contract structures and our customs-compliance capabilities being designed together, or separately?
The answers increasingly determine whether new duties land as an unmanaged cost or a mitigated one — and the tariff environment is not going to revert. Owners who address contract structure and customs identity now will build at a materially lower cost than those who leave it until the equipment is already on the water.
How DWF can support your clients
DWF’s Latin American Group, combined with BLK’s customs and project-logistics capability in Mexico, gives clients an integrated way to capture tariff mitigation and control the new customs liability. Working together, we can assist with:
- Structuring EPC and supply contracts so the owner holds importer-of-record status where it unlocks duty relief
- Assessing eligibility for sectoral programmes, temporary-import regimes and rule-based classification relief
- Landed-cost and origin analysis across a project’s equipment package
- Customs-compliance design under the 2026 reform — valuation, classification, the electronic Manifestación de Valor and broker licensing
- Managing the expanded chain of liability and audit exposure across purchasing transactions
- End-to-end import execution: multimodal transport, customs clearance and specialised or oversized cargo
We would like to thank Miguel Gutiérrez for their contribution towards this article.
