Operating between the United States and Mexico is no longer a purely commercial decision. The integration of both economies has raised the bar and transformed how companies understand risk. Estela Cachoua, executive director at the United States–Mexico Chamber of Commerce, Inter-American Chapter, observes this shift from a privileged position: at the intersection of investment, regulation, and strategy. In this conversation, she explains why the biggest challenge is no longer structuring an operation, but understanding everything surrounding it.

“Today, risk is no longer seen solely as a legal or financial issue.”

From the outset, Estela Cachoua proposes a shift in approach that redefines how companies should operate in the binational environment. For years, risk analysis focused on contractual structure, tax planning, or financial viability. However, this perspective is now insufficient in the face of a much more complex scenario.

“Companies increasingly understand that there are also regulatory, operational, reputational, geopolitical and cultural risks.”

This shift involves moving from a technical perspective to a systemic one, where operations, logistics, compliance, and relationship building are all part of the same equation. Therefore, he explains, the strongest companies are not only those that structure their contracts well, but also those that understand that operating between the two countries requires comprehensive preparation: “in-depth market research, a long-term vision, sufficient capital, and the right partners,” in addition to a local network that allows for building trust and real market access.

The unseen decisions that define the outcome

This change is also reflected in the types of decisions companies are making today. “Often, the most important decisions are not the most visible.”

It’s not just about moving production or opening new operations, but about redesigning how the business works as a whole. Where to locate inventory, how to diversify suppliers, what legal structure to adopt, and which partners to work with are decisions that, although less visible, ultimately define the success or failure of an expansion.

“Those are the decisions that really determine whether an operation is going to work.”

At this point, one constant emerges: the most successful organizations are those that manage to integrate legal, tax, commercial, and operational aspects into a single strategy. When these dimensions are addressed separately, execution loses coherence and risk multiplies.

Nearshoring: the opportunity that is only being half understood

Meanwhile, nearshoring has been presented as a clear opportunity. However, in practice, many companies continue to underestimate its complexity. “One of the main mistakes is seeing it only as a cost or proximity opportunity,” he states.

Because, although it is, it also involves demands that are not always being properly assessed: due diligence, regulatory compliance, corporate structure and labor management.

But there is also a less tangible and more difficult factor to manage: culture. “People think that because they are close markets, the way of working is the same, and it isn’t.”

Differences in negotiation, timing, decision-making, and relationship building create friction that, if not understood from the outset, tend to escalate. In this sense, prior experience makes all the difference: companies that have already operated in both environments are better able to navigate these complexities.

The difference is not in the strategy, but in the preparation

From that point on, the gap between companies that manage to consolidate their position and those that don’t becomes evident. “The difference lies in preparation, flexibility, and relationships built on trust.”

Successful organizations don’t replicate models, they adapt them. They invest time in understanding the market, build alliances, and accept that expansion is a costly, long-term process.

Here a key factor that is often underestimated comes into play: capital. “We’ve seen many companies that want to expand… but they don’t have enough capital and they fall by the wayside.”

Expansion is not just a strategic decision, but also the ability to sustain it. And that requires resources, time, and a realistic understanding of the environment.

A change of role for the lawyer and the business leader

This context also redefines the role of the lawyer and the legal leader.

“It can no longer limit itself to interpreting the law.”

For Cachoua, the legal role has evolved into a strategic function. Lawyers must understand their clients’ businesses, industries, and operating environments to anticipate risks and make sound decisions.

This will be one of the key themes she will address at Foro Gerencias Legales y Arbitraje en Miami, where she will participate as a speaker. Based on her experience, the conversation can no longer focus solely on compliance, but rather on how the legal field is integrated into increasingly complex business decisions.

“Today, legal leaders need to know their client, their industry, and the market in which they operate very well.”

This shift is especially relevant in areas such as foreign investment and national security. “Many companies still believe that CFIUS applies only to extraordinary cases,” he warns, when in reality it is increasingly becoming part of strategic analysis.

Added to this is a key moment: the review of the USMCA in 2026 and a constantly evolving regulatory environment.

“Today more than ever, legal leaders need to combine legal expertise with a deep understanding of the business and the binational context.”

The relationship between the United States and Mexico can no longer be understood as an isolated opportunity; on the contrary, it is a complex system, where every decision is influenced by legal, operational, cultural, and geopolitical variables that interact simultaneously.

In that context, the mistake is not failing to see the opportunity, the mistake is oversimplifying it.

Because operating between the two countries is no longer about structuring an entry properly, but about understanding how to sustain it over time. And there—as will be discussed at the Forum—the role of the legal department ceases to be interpretive and becomes structural. Not to support the business, but to help it function in an environment where making a mistake is no longer a slip-up, but a decision poorly understood from the outset.