SiiLA data indicates that in Mexico, one in three companies occupying industrial properties is of U.S. origin. Between 2023 and 2024, 65% of American companies already operating in Mexico expanded their occupied space. Additionally, the nearshoring trend has been driving demand for logistics spaces, particularly among Asian companies. Currently, SiiLA tracks more than 150 Chinese companies operating in Mexico, a number that has been growing since 2020. As of today, 57% of Chinese firms occupying industrial warehouses in the country were not present in 2020. Geographically, these companies show a clear preference for northern Mexico, with over 60% concentrated in key markets such as Monterrey, Tijuana, Saltillo, and Ciudad Juárez.

"The rise in Chinese companies operating in Mexico can be attributed to three main factors: first, nearshoring, which has prompted companies to relocate production closer to the U.S. market to reduce logistics costs and delivery times. Second, U.S. tariffs imposed since 2018, which have made direct exports from China more expensive, positioning Mexico—under the USMCA—as an ideal platform for accessing the U.S. market. Lastly, Mexico’s strategic location, robust industrial infrastructure, and competitive operating costs contrast with rising labor costs in China, making Mexico a more profitable option for heavy manufacturing geared toward North America," analyzes Alejandro Delgado, Country Manager Mexico at SiiLA.

Geopolitics professor James Onnig, from the International Relations Research Lab at FACAMP, told REsource that the 25% tariff is steep but could create opportunities for Brazil.

"There are possibilities, primarily in agricultural exports and, to a lesser extent, in industrial product exports. This could allow Brazil to take Mexico’s place in certain areas. However, imposing this tariff on Mexican products, which are geographically closer, while not applying the same tariff to Brazil, would somewhat dilute the effect, as Brazil’s transportation costs are higher. So, there are many variables at play," Onnig explains.

The professor also notes that the situation for Canada is not very favorable due to its export profile. "Canada will likely suffer the most negative consequences since the country mainly exports manufactured goods and a small number of commodities, all tied to the oil and gas sector," he clarifies.

During his inauguration, Trump reaffirmed his intention to impose a 100% tariff on BRICS nations if they continue their de-dollarization plans—a threat he had already made during his campaign. The targeted countries include Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, along with new members such as Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Iran, and Indonesia.

The concept of de-dollarization has long been discussed within the economic bloc. It’s not just the idea of creating a new currency that has unsettled the U.S. government, but also the potential development of an alternative to the international transaction system SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication), which Russia has been barred from using since the start of its war against Ukraine.

"This has clearly disturbed the U.S. government, leading to threats of retaliation against countries that attempt to bypass the dollar in international transactions. Trump’s promise could very well materialize, and as a consequence, Brazil and other BRICS nations would face difficulties in purchasing American goods," Onnig comments.

With the expansion of the BRICS bloc, the professor believes the tariff situation could become more complicated, as the group is no longer composed of just five countries. The so-called Global South is developing its own industries, potentially creating a standoff.

"This is a serious deadlock and a result of the decline of the U.S. economy, which in the 1980s allowed its production sector to shift to Asia but failed to reindustrialize its own country—something it now lacks. This conflict is likely to persist, but if de-dollarization progresses, BRICS nations will undoubtedly face retaliation," Onnig concludes.