Get all the data you need about the real estate market in Mexico
SUMMARY
No. Mexico did not change the 50 km coastal rule. Foreign individuals still cannot take direct title to residential land within 50 kilometers of the coast, and a fideicomiso remains the normal structure for buying there.
The strongest evidence is unusually simple: Article 27 of Mexico’s current Constitution still contains the 50 km coastal and 100 km border restrictions. The boundary itself has not moved.
What has changed is the machinery around the rule. Mexico has updated forms, fees, processing times and administrative procedures, which can make recent reforms look more fundamental than they actually are.
The biggest source of confusion is a 2013 reform that really did pass the Chamber of Deputies by 356 votes to 119. It would have allowed some direct foreign residential ownership inside the restricted zone, but it never completed the constitutional amendment process.
The fideicomiso system is hardly dormant. SRE reported 5,369 permits to establish restricted-zone trusts between October 2024 and June 2025, roughly 597 per month over that period.
The practical restriction is narrower than the phrase “foreigners cannot own coastal property” suggests. A foreign buyer using a fideicomiso can generally live in the property, rent it when permitted, sell the beneficial interest, receive the proceeds and name successor beneficiaries.
The two different “50” rules are worth keeping separate. The 50 km figure defines the coastal restricted zone; the separate 50-year figure is the maximum term of one fideicomiso, which can be extended.
Creating a Mexican company is not a clean shortcut for an ordinary personal beach home. Direct company ownership inside the restricted zone is mainly relevant when the property genuinely qualifies for non-residential use.
Recent beach-access rules are another distraction. They affect public access, federal coastal land and shoreline use, but they do not rewrite Article 27 or remove the foreign-ownership restriction.
For buyers, the useful dividing line remains location. Outside the restricted zone, direct foreign ownership is generally available under the applicable Article 27 convention; inside it, residential buyers normally use a fideicomiso.
Thinking of buying real estate in Mexico?
Acquiring property in a different country is a complex task. Don't fall into common traps – grab our guide and make better decisions.
Did Mexico change the 50 km coastal rule?
Mexico still applies the 50 km coastal rule to foreign property ownership today.
The clearest place to check is Article 27 of Mexico’s Constitution. The current text published by the Chamber of Deputies, incorporating constitutional reforms through 2026, still says that foreigners cannot acquire direct ownership of land or water within 100 kilometers of an international border or 50 kilometers of the coast.
The rest of the legal system still works around that same boundary. Mexico’s Foreign Investment Law keeps a specific chapter for real-estate trusts inside the restricted zone, and the Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, or SRE, continues to issue permits for those trusts.
The freshest administrative evidence is useful here too. Mexico’s current 2026 federal fee schedule charges MXN 21,650 for permission to create a fideicomiso in the restricted zone. It also sets separate fees for modifying a trust and extending its duration. Those are current government procedures built specifically around the 50 km rule.
So the answer is pretty firm. The coastal boundary survived, and foreign residential buyers inside it still generally need the legal structure created to deal with it.
| Rule | Current position | What foreigners can do | Main consequence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coastal zone | 50 km from the coast | Acquire residential rights through a fideicomiso | Direct personal title remains restricted |
| Border zone | 100 km from the border | Acquire residential rights through a fideicomiso | Same basic restriction |
| Outside restricted zone | Beyond those limits | Direct ownership is generally possible | Fideicomiso usually unnecessary for this reason |
| Current SRE system | Still active | Apply for restricted-zone trust permits | The rule remains operational today |
Why do so many people think Mexico removed the 50 km coastal rule?
The confusion around Mexico’s 50 km rule mostly comes from a reform that genuinely passed the Chamber of Deputies in 2013 and then failed to become constitutional law.
That reform was much more serious than a casual proposal. The Chamber approved it by 356 votes to 119, with two abstentions. It would have allowed foreigners to acquire land directly inside the restricted zone when the property was used exclusively as a home and had no commercial purpose.
For a foreign buyer in Cancún, Puerto Vallarta, Los Cabos or another coastal market, that would have been a major change. The fideicomiso requirement for many residential purchases could have disappeared.
The proposal then stalled before completing Mexico’s constitutional amendment process. Article 27 therefore kept the same restriction.
Old coverage is what keeps tripping people up. Search results can still surface headlines saying Mexican deputies “approved” foreign ownership near beaches. That was true at one stage of the legislative process, but it never became the law buyers operate under now.
Don't buy the wrong property, in the wrong area of Mexico
Buying real estate is a significant investment. Don't rely solely on your intuition. Gather the right information to make the best decision.
Did Mexico’s 2013 reform ever become law?
Mexico’s 2013 foreign-property reform never completed the constitutional process, so the 50 km rule survived intact.
The Chamber of Deputies gave the proposal a large majority, which explains why the episode still looks important more than a decade later. Yet changing Article 27 required considerably more than that vote. A constitutional amendment also had to clear the remaining federal process and receive the required approval from state legislatures.
That never happened.
We can verify the outcome directly in the current Constitution. Article 27 still contains the 50 km coastal and 100 km border restrictions. The current Foreign Investment Law then tells us how foreigners can acquire rights inside those areas through fideicomisos.
The failed reform is useful because it shows what a real change would look like. Mexico would need a visible constitutional process. A new SRE form, a lower fee or a different administrative procedure would not be enough on its own.
| 2013 reform stage | What happened | Legal effect |
|---|---|---|
| Reform proposed | Direct residential ownership for foreigners was proposed inside the restricted zone | No immediate change |
| Chamber vote | Approved 356–119, with 2 abstentions | Reform advanced |
| Remaining constitutional process | Never completed | Article 27 stayed unchanged |
| Current Constitution | 50 km coastal language remains | Existing restriction still controls |
What does Mexico’s 50 km rule actually stop foreigners from doing?
Mexico’s 50 km rule blocks direct foreign ownership of coastal land; it does not stop foreigners from buying and controlling coastal homes through approved legal structures.
That distinction explains why the rule can sound much harsher than it feels in an actual real-estate transaction.
A foreign individual purchasing residential property inside the restricted zone will normally use a fideicomiso. A Mexican bank holds legal title as trustee, while the foreign buyer becomes the beneficiary.
Mexico’s Foreign Investment Law gives that beneficiary broad rights to use and enjoy the property. Article 12 specifically covers the right to use the property and receive income or other economic benefits from it.
In practice, foreign owners can live in these properties, sell their beneficial rights, rent the property when local rules allow it, designate successor beneficiaries and receive the economic value when the property is sold.
The constitutional restriction still matters because the foreign buyer’s name does not appear as the direct owner of the land. For everyday use of a vacation home or retirement property, though, the fideicomiso gives the buyer substantial control.
Get to know the market before buying a property in Mexico
Better information leads to better decisions. Get all the data you need before investing a large amount of money.
Can foreigners still buy beachfront homes in Mexico?
Foreigners can still buy residential property near Mexico’s beaches today, including inside the 50 km restricted zone, by using a fideicomiso.
That is why international buyers continue to purchase homes in coastal markets such as Los Cabos, Puerto Vallarta, Riviera Nayarit, Cancún, Playa del Carmen and the Riviera Maya.
The SRE’s own numbers give us a sense of scale. From October 2024 through June 2025, the ministry reported granting 5,369 permits to establish fideicomisos in restricted zones. That comes to roughly 597 permits per month.
At that pace, the system was processing the equivalent of more than 7,000 permits a year. The annualized figure is only a way to show scale—nine months obviously does not guarantee the same pace for a full year—but the order of magnitude is clear. This remains a system used thousands of times.
The federal government’s public-data portal also continues to publish monthly restricted-zone trust permits, with the dataset scheduled for quarterly updates. That gives us a second administrative sign that fideicomisos remain part of ordinary foreign-property activity rather than some forgotten legal workaround.
| Recent evidence | Volume or status | What it shows |
|---|---|---|
| SRE permits, Oct. 2024–Jun. 2025 | 5,369 | Foreign restricted-zone purchases remain common |
| Average monthly pace | ~597 | Hundreds of permits are still issued each month |
| Annualized nine-month pace | >7,000 | The system operates at meaningful scale |
| Federal open-data series | Still maintained | Restricted-zone permits continue to be tracked |
| 2026 SRE trust fee | MXN 21,650 | New fideicomisos are still an active government procedure |
Does a fideicomiso mean a Mexican bank owns your house?
A fideicomiso puts legal title in the Mexican bank’s name, while the foreign beneficiary keeps the economic and practical rights defined in the trust.
The bank acts as trustee. It does not normally choose who lives in the property, collect the appreciation for itself or treat the home as its own asset.
The trust agreement gives the beneficiary the right to use and enjoy the property, and Mexico’s Foreign Investment Law explicitly allows the beneficiary to receive economic returns generated by it.
That makes the structure quite different from a lease. The foreign buyer can generally direct a sale, transfer the beneficial interest, designate substitute beneficiaries and receive the proceeds.
There is still a real difference compared with direct title. A bank remains in the ownership chain, trust administration costs money, and some transactions require trustee participation.
For most foreign residential buyers, though, the practical gap between a fideicomiso and conventional ownership is much narrower than the phrase “foreigners cannot own coastal property” suggests.
Buying real estate in Mexico can be risky
An increasing number of foreign investors are showing interest. However, 90% of them will make mistakes. Avoid the pitfalls with our comprehensive guide.
Does Mexico’s 50-year fideicomiso expire and take the property away?
Mexico allows restricted-zone fideicomisos for up to 50 years at a time, and the Foreign Investment Law explicitly allows that period to be extended.
Article 13 is straightforward on this point. The trust can last a maximum of 50 years and may be renewed at the interested party’s request.
That removes one of the more persistent fears around Mexican coastal property. The end of the initial trust term does not create an automatic government seizure mechanism.
Current SRE procedures confirm how the rule works in practice. The ministry still has a specific process for extending a fideicomiso and currently charges separate federal fees for an extension filed on time and one filed late.
There are also two unrelated “50” numbers that regularly get mixed together. One describes the 50-kilometer coastal restricted zone. The other describes the maximum 50-year term of a single fideicomiso before renewal.
| “50” rule | What the number means | Can it change for an existing buyer? |
|---|---|---|
| 50 km | Distance of the coastal restricted zone | Only a legal change could alter the rule |
| 50 years | Maximum term of one fideicomiso | Yes, the trust can be extended |
| SRE extension procedure | Administrative renewal process | Currently available |
| Late extension | Separate SRE treatment and fee | Still possible under the applicable process |
Are condos inside Mexico’s 50 km coastal zone exempt?
Foreign buyers of residential condos inside Mexico’s restricted coastal zone generally face the same fideicomiso rule as buyers of houses.
A condo does not escape Article 27 simply because the foreign buyer is purchasing an apartment rather than a detached parcel.
This is easy to misunderstand in markets where international condo sales are routine. A new development in Cancún or Puerto Vallarta may advertise that foreigners can buy freely, and that can be perfectly true in practical terms. The buyer can acquire the unit, use it, resell it and receive its economic value.
The legal structure still matters. When the residential condominium falls inside the restricted zone, the foreign buyer’s interest will generally sit inside a fideicomiso.
The condominium regime and the fideicomiso then operate together. Condominium documents govern issues such as common areas, owner obligations and building rules, while the fideicomiso deals with the foreign buyer’s rights in the underlying real estate.
Don't lose money on your property in Mexico
100% of people who have lost money there have spent less than 1 hour researching the market. We have reviewed everything there is to know. Grab our guide now.
Can foreigners avoid a fideicomiso by creating a Mexican company?
A Mexican company can directly own some restricted-zone property with foreign participation, but this route works mainly for qualifying non-residential uses rather than an ordinary foreigner’s personal beach home.
Mexico’s Foreign Investment Law draws an important line between residential and non-residential property.
A Mexican company that admits foreign investment can acquire direct ownership of restricted-zone real estate intended for non-residential activities, provided it follows the required notification process.
The regulations give concrete examples of non-residential uses. They include certain industrial, commercial and tourism activities, marinas and tourism developments that do not contain residential property.
A private villa bought through a newly created company sits on much shakier ground if its real purpose is residential. Putting a company in the middle does not magically change how the property is actually being used.
For a foreign buyer simply purchasing a home near the coast, the fideicomiso remains the normal starting point. A company structure becomes more relevant when there is a genuine business operation and the property qualifies under the non-residential rules.
Has Mexico made coastal property ownership easier recently?
Mexico has made parts of the restricted-zone process easier, while leaving the underlying 50 km rule in place.
The current SRE system gives us several recent examples. The ministry maintains dedicated procedures for creating fideicomisos, changing their terms, extending their duration and reporting certain company acquisitions in the restricted zone.
The government also refreshed the federal fees for 2026. A permit to establish a restricted-zone fideicomiso currently costs MXN 21,650. Modifications involve a MXN 595 review charge plus MXN 9,740 for issuance, and timely extensions use the same MXN 595 review fee plus MXN 9,740 for issuance.
Those changes can make a transaction cheaper, quicker or less annoying. They do not move the coastal boundary or grant foreign individuals direct residential title.
This is where some recent coverage gets muddled: the administration around the rule changes more often than the constitutional rule itself.
Get the full checklist for your due diligence in Mexico
Don't repeat the same mistakes others have made before you. Make sure everything is in order before signing your sales contract.
Do new Mexican beach-access laws change the 50 km foreign-ownership rule?
Mexico’s stronger focus on public beach access does not change whether a foreign buyer needs a fideicomiso inside the 50 km coastal zone.
Beach access and foreign ownership deal with different legal rights.
Mexico treats beaches and the federal maritime-terrestrial zone under public-law rules that limit a private owner’s ability to treat the shoreline as a completely private extension of a house or resort.
Foreign-ownership restrictions deal with who may hold direct title to land near the coast.
A foreign buyer can therefore face both sets of rules at the same property. The fideicomiso determines how the buyer holds residential rights, while beach and federal-zone rules determine what can happen along the shoreline and how public access is treated.
Recent attention around beach access has made the broader coastal-property debate look more dramatic than it is. For a foreign homebuyer asking whether Article 27 still applies, it changes very little.
Does being American or Canadian get around Mexico’s 50 km rule?
American and Canadian buyers receive no general exemption from Mexico’s 50 km coastal ownership restriction.
USMCA did not give citizens of the United States or Canada a special right to take direct residential title inside the restricted zone.
Mexico preserved its constitutional land-ownership rules when entering its international trade commitments. That leaves Article 27 in control of the basic question.
An American buying a house in Los Cabos and a European buying the same house therefore face the same core restricted-zone issue. Nationality alone does not remove the fideicomiso requirement.
The same principle is a good reason to be skeptical of sales claims suggesting that a passport from a particular country creates an ownership shortcut. The relevant questions are where the property sits, what it will be used for and which legal vehicle is buying it.
Don't sign a document you don't understand in Mexico
Buying a property over there? We have reviewed all the documents you need to know. Stay out of trouble - grab our comprehensive guide.
What happens if the property is just outside the 50 km coastal zone?
A foreign buyer outside Mexico’s restricted zone can generally acquire direct title, so crossing the 50 km boundary can materially change the ownership structure.
Foreign buyers outside the zone still have legal requirements to satisfy. Mexico uses the Article 27 convention under which the foreign owner agrees to be treated as Mexican with respect to the property and gives up the right to invoke diplomatic protection over it.
The SRE currently maintains a separate procedure for foreigners acquiring real estate outside the restricted zone. Its existence makes the distinction especially easy to see: Mexico runs one route for foreign acquisitions outside the zone and a fideicomiso route for residential rights inside it.
Properties near the edge deserve careful checking. The Foreign Investment Law even distinguishes municipalities located entirely outside the restricted zone from municipalities that sit partly inside it.
A buyer should therefore use the property’s legal location and cadastral information rather than estimating the distance from a map or from the nearest tourist beach.
Could Mexico remove the 50 km coastal rule soon?
Mexico could eventually change the 50 km rule, but the evidence today does not point to an imminent abolition.
We know what a serious attempt looks like because Mexico already tried one in 2013. That proposal reached the Chamber floor, won 356 votes and directly targeted Article 27.
Nothing comparable has completed the constitutional process since then.
More recent evidence points toward continued administration of the existing system. The Constitution, updated through 2026, still carries the restriction. The Foreign Investment Law still contains its restricted-zone fideicomiso chapter. The SRE still publishes procedures and current fees for creating and extending those trusts.
The permit system also remains busy, with 5,369 new restricted-zone trust permits reported over nine months in the latest broad SRE period we found.
A future reform is certainly possible; lawmakers have challenged the rule before. But calling abolition “close” today would get ahead of the evidence.
Get fresh and reliable information about the market in Mexico
Don't base significant investment decisions on outdated data. Get updated and accurate information.
So did Mexico change the 50 km coastal rule?
No. Mexico still has the 50 km coastal rule today, and foreign individuals generally cannot take direct title to residential land inside that zone.
We can be quite firm about this because the freshest legal and administrative evidence all lines up. The current Constitution still contains the restriction. The Foreign Investment Law still explains how fideicomisos work inside the restricted zone. The SRE is still issuing permits, publishing restricted-zone data and charging current 2026 fees for new trusts and extensions.
The confusion has a real historical source. Mexico’s Chamber of Deputies voted overwhelmingly in 2013 to loosen the rule for residential property, but the proposal never became part of the Constitution.
For foreign buyers, the practical picture is much less restrictive than the constitutional wording first suggests. Americans, Canadians and other foreigners continue to buy condos, villas and houses throughout Mexico’s coastal markets. Inside the restricted zone, a fideicomiso usually provides the structure that makes those purchases possible.
Anyone waiting for Mexico to have quietly reduced the 50 km distance or abolished the rule is looking at the wrong kind of change. The buying process has evolved over time; the constitutional boundary itself remains where it was.
OUR METHODOLOGY
This analysis tests whether Mexico has actually changed the 50 km coastal restriction on foreign property ownership. We separated the question into the parts that can genuinely change the answer: the constitutional rule, the Foreign Investment Law, current SRE administration, real-world fideicomiso use, the failed 2013 reform, company ownership rules, beach-access regulation and Mexico’s treaty commitments.
Formal legal text carries the most weight. The current text of Article 27 of Mexico’s Constitution is the anchor source for the 50 km coastal and 100 km border restrictions, while Mexico’s Foreign Investment Law is the main source for fideicomisos, beneficiary rights, the 50-year trust term and the distinction between residential and non-residential property.
We then checked whether the framework is still being administered in practice. The SRE procedure for establishing a restricted-zone fideicomiso, its extension and modification procedure, and the 2026 SRE fee schedule are treated as evidence that the legal mechanism remains operational, not as substitutes for the underlying law.
Permit volumes are used to measure scale rather than legal status. The federal restricted-zone fideicomiso dataset and the SRE’s Primer Informe de Labores 2024–2025 show that thousands of permits continue to be issued. When we calculate an average monthly pace or annualize a partial-year figure, we use it only to illustrate the size of the system, not as a forecast.
The 2013 reform is treated separately because a legislative vote is not the same thing as a completed constitutional amendment. The Chamber of Deputies’ own record of the 356–119 vote establishes how far the proposal advanced, while the current Constitution establishes the outcome: the 50 km language remains.
We also separated administrative simplification from substantive legal change. The 2026 federal simplification measures and the Secretaría de Economía’s current investment procedure help show how the process has been updated without implying that the constitutional boundary itself moved.
For the company-ownership question, we relied on the Foreign Investment Law, its implementing regulations and the SRE procedure for Mexican companies acquiring restricted-zone property for non-residential purposes. That distinction is important because a corporate structure does not by itself turn a residential property into a qualifying non-residential use.
Beach-access rules were assessed independently so they would not be confused with foreign-ownership rules. The General Law of National Assets and recent federal coastal enforcement concern public access, beaches and the federal maritime-terrestrial zone; they do not amend Article 27’s foreign-ownership boundary.
Finally, for the American and Canadian sections, we checked Mexico’s treaty treatment against the official CUSMA/USMCA Annex I schedule for Mexico and the U.S. Trade Representative’s official USMCA materials. Mexico’s reservation preserves the restricted-zone framework rather than creating a special ownership exemption for U.S. or Canadian citizens.
The conclusion comes from convergence across those sources. The Constitution establishes the rule, the Foreign Investment Law explains the legal structure around it, current government procedures show that structure is still active, permit data show that it is still widely used, and the legislative record explains why older headlines can suggest a change that never became law.
Get to know the market before buying a property in Mexico
Better information leads to better decisions. Get all the data you need before investing a large amount of money.
Related blog posts
- Are property prices in Mexico likely to rise or fall?
- How expensive are homes in Mexico now?
- Are rents in Mexico still rising?
- Are property prices in Mexico City likely to rise or fall?
- How much are property taxes and buying fees in Mexico City?
