Conferencia | Diputadas y diputados del Grupo Parlamentario de Morena | 01/07/2026

The annual review of the USMCA does not mean that the agreement will end; This mechanism will allow for monitoring the region's productive integration: Arturo Ávila ⚫While there is no formal complaint or legal proceeding, the statements from the U.S. Treasury Department “remain in the realm of speculation”: Gabriel García Note No. 3999 https://comunicacionsocial.diputados.... San Lázaro Legislative Palace, July 1, 2026. – Representative Arturo Ávila Anaya (Morena) stated that the annual review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) does not mean the agreement will end, as the review mechanism will allow for monitoring productive integration. of the region. "The decision wasn't made to terminate the Treaty; rather, the decision was made to conduct an annual review of the Free Trade Agreement. In that sense, I believe the annual review involves monitoring which productive activities are part of the integrated value and supply chains," he commented at a press conference during the Permanent Commission meeting in the Senate. Regarding the imposition of tariffs, he explained that it would affect all three economies, and "it's not in the United States' best interest to have tariffs imposed, especially in sectors like automotive and other predominantly productive sectors that have significant integration between Canada, Mexico, and the United States. "It would generate a terrible inflationary impact on the U.S. and Canadian economies, and of course, it would also affect the Mexican economy." “It is undoubtedly in the best interest of this Free Trade Agreement bloc, better known as the USMCA, to be strong regionally and compete regionally.” When questioned about a report from the U.S. Treasury Department that allegedly links resources from “tax evasion” to Morena's political campaigns, Ávila Anaya stated that all accusations must be supported by evidence. “What we have always asked for, in every case, is proof, not just allegations, and once there is proof, to be able to make the corresponding determinations. “I believe the Mexican government has been an example of how, when these types of allegations are accompanied by evidence, the authorities and the Security Cabinet have immediately frozen accounts and initiated investigations and case files through the Attorney General's Office.” He considered that the investigations should also extend to U.S. territory, “because reviewing the statement, it even mentions triangulations with banks in the United States [...] it would be interesting to know the entire scheme, to investigate it thoroughly. We will never support any activity related to crime or links to drug trafficking.” For his part, Congressman Gabriel García Hernández (Morena) maintained that, until there is a formal complaint or legal proceedings, the allegations remain in the realm of speculation. “According to U.S. law, he would have to appear before a court and be part of a complaint. Until that happens, it becomes a sea of ​​speculation, just like the alleged leaks from New York Times informants.” He added that the document used to link these organizations to Morena “is not part of any investigation. Evidence, always the evidence.” On the other hand, Representative Magdalena Rosales Cruz (Morena) emphasized that such accusations must be substantiated with evidence, and recalled that the recent electoral reform seeks to prevent the use of illicit funds in political campaigns. “We have implemented a series of reforms, including the electoral reform, which addresses this issue of illicit money in political campaigns. It doesn't target a specific party; it addresses electoral campaigns in general to safeguard against this very issue.” She pointed out that there is a media narrative aimed at discrediting the Mexican government, “making accusations without evidence, trying to attack Morena in particular, and whose intention is to create doubt, destabilization, and misinformation among the people.” -oo0oo-