Garnishment via the tax mailbox is clearly defined and respects legal certainty
Garnishment through the tax mailbox. Article 151 Bis of the Federal Tax Code, which provides for it, does not violate the right to legal certainty.
Official heading (Spanish): EMBARGO POR BUZÓN TRIBUTARIO. EL ARTÍCULO 151 BIS DEL CÓDIGO FISCAL DE LA FEDERACIÓN QUE LO PREVÉ, NO VULNERA EL DERECHO A LA SEGURIDAD JURÍDICA.
The ruling
Taxpayers challenged an order garnishing assets via the tax mailbox to collect outstanding tax assessments and asked for a constitutional review of article 151 Bis of the Federal Tax Code. The TFJA upheld the order. On direct amparo, the Collegiate Circuit Court held the provision does not violate legal certainty: it applies only to final assessments and to the assets it lists.
Our take
This ruling confirms that electronic garnishment is here to stay. For the court, the provision makes clear when it applies and to which assets, which satisfies legal certainty. The practical value lies in the limit the ruling itself stresses: it applies only to final, enforceable assessments, not as a precautionary measure. That is where the defense margin lies. If the authority garnishes via the mailbox on an assessment that is not yet final, or on assets outside the statutory list, there are grounds to challenge. Otherwise, the priority is checking the mailbox often and not finding out late.
What to do
- Check the tax mailbox of every group entity at least weekly.
- Confirm the assessment is final and the asset type is eligible before accepting a mailbox garnishment.
- Drop legal-certainty challenges to article 151 Bis in new defenses.
Details
- Court
- Collegiate Circuit Court
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- I.11o.A.6 A (12a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032739
- Published
- October 9, 2026
- Area
- Tax litigation
- View official source ↗
Does this ruling affect your company? Let’s talk.
Schedule a conversationOther precedents in the same area
- Conagua: without prior alert, water-mailbox service is unlawful
- Poorly grounded delegation to report audit findings leads to remand, not annulment
- Nullity complaint by mail: no proof of exact hour when time compensation applies
- Tax-mailbox garnishment without a prior hearing is upheld as constitutional
Prepared by Artegia for information only; not legal advice. Headings in English are unofficial translations. The official text is the one published in the Semanario Judicial de la Federación or the TFJA journal.