Mexico and the United States have wrapped up the first formal round of trade talks tied to the 2026 T-MEC review, but the hardest questions remain on the table. Autos, steel, aluminum, and supply-chain security are now moving into a June round in Washington, while Canada is pressing to keep the agreement firmly trilateral. The result could shape investment confidence, the peso outlook, and Mexico’s role in North American manufacturing without giving Mexico a clear finish line.
First round ends with more pressure ahead
Mexico and the United States have finished the first formal bilateral round tied to the 2026 T-MEC review, setting up two more rounds before the agreement’s scheduled six-year checkup begins.
USTR said the May 29 talks in Mexico City covered automotive rules of origin, steel and aluminum, and economic security. The U.S. delegation also put its stated goals plainly: “reducing the trade deficit with Mexico” and “strengthening American supply chains.”
The next round is scheduled for June 16 and 17 in Washington, with agriculture and “a level playing field” added to the agenda. A third round is planned for the week of July 20 in Mexico City, keeping the process moving through the same month the trilateral review is supposed to begin.
Mexico’s Economy Secretary Marcelo Ebrard described the session as ending with a “positive balance” and said the talks covered rules of origin, the auto sector, and competition with Asia. He called the round “a very cordial conversation” and said Mexico is “on the path” toward the review set out by the trade agreement.
A scheduled review with room for bigger demands
The USMCA, known in Mexico as T-MEC, entered into force on July 1, 2020. It replaced NAFTA and set a mandatory joint review six years later. Trade officials from the three countries must evaluate the agreement, consider changes, and decide whether to extend it for another 16 years.
The structure is supposed to prevent a sudden break. It also gives each government leverage. If one country does not confirm support for extension, the treaty does not immediately die. It moves into annual reviews until 2036 unless the countries later agree to extend it.
That uncertainty is why previous coverage on Vallarta Daily has focused on Mexico’s dependence on the U.S. economy and on the risk that USMCA talks could leave Mexico waiting for a decade. The review can shape business plans even before any rule changes are final. Investor confidence moves ahead of paperwork.
Autos, metals and economic security dominate
The biggest pressure point is the auto sector. Current USMCA rules require 75 percent regional content for passenger vehicles to qualify for preferential treatment. Details circulating about the U.S. negotiating stance include a push for 82 percent North American content, with 50 percent of a vehicle’s value sourced from the United States. That would be a sharper U.S.-specific rule than the current regional approach.
For Mexico, that lands directly on manufacturing. Autos, machinery, electronics, and medical devices sit near the center of the U.S.-Mexico supply chain. USTR’s country profile says U.S. goods trade with Mexico reached $872.8 billion in 2025 and describes Mexico as a consistent top two U.S. trading partner.
Steel and aluminum are part of the same fight. The U.S. side has linked those sectors to economic security and concerns that third-country inputs, especially from nonmarket economies, can move through North American supply chains. IMCO, a Mexican policy institute, has argued that Mexico should defend the trilateral treaty while pushing stronger regional coordination in steel, semiconductors, critical minerals, and border modernization.
Canada is not in the room yet
The most awkward piece is Canada. The treaty is trilateral, but the first formal round was bilateral. Canada sent a June 2 letter to the United States and Mexico proposing a 16-year renewal of the agreement while seeking parallel talks on sectoral tariffs. Canada’s trade minister Dominic LeBlanc was set to meet USTR Jamieson Greer the same day.
That does not mean Canada is outside the scope of the review. It means the three partners are entering the formal stretch at different speeds. Canada has its own tariff disputes over steel, aluminum, and autos. Mexico has moved earlier with Washington. The U.S. has been pressing both partners over autos, market access, and rules meant to limit third-country “free-riding.”
For Mexico, a bilateral track can be useful until it is not. It may help resolve Mexico-specific technical issues faster. It may also produce terms Canada resists, especially if auto rules move away from a North American formula toward a U.S.-centered one.
Peso and investment risks sit in the background
No tariff change takes effect because one round ends. The immediate pressure is expectation. Companies delay spending when rules are unclear. Currency traders watch whether uncertainty makes Mexico look safer or riskier. Importers watch whether costs could shift if the rules of origin become harder to meet.
That is the link to the peso and prices. The effect would not arrive as a neat line item on a receipt. It can move through investment, trade flows, production costs, and the exchange rate. Vallarta Daily’s recent coverage of T-MEC lifting Mexico growth in late 2026 and Mexico reaching a record share of U.S. goods trade tracks the same underlying issue. Mexico benefits from being deeply plugged into the U.S. market. It also absorbs shocks when Washington changes the terms of access.
The next marker is June 16. If Washington and Mexico stay focused on technical issues, the talks may keep moving toward a controlled review. If the discussion widens into bigger tariff demands, Canada’s role and the treaty’s trilateral structure will become harder to treat as background.
