M&A’s Under Pressure: How Trade Wars Are Reshaping the M&A Landscape

For decades, mergers and acquisitions followed a relatively stable logic: strategic and financial value were the primary drivers behind every deal. Today, that logic is being challenged by an increasingly powerful force—global trade politics.

The recent U.S. government intervention in Nippon Steel’s planned acquisition of U.S. Steel sent shockwaves through the business world. Ostensibly framed as a national security concern, the message was unmistakable: in the midst of a trade war, strategic state interests can override dealmaking, no matter how compelling the financial rationale.

This shift has immediate implications—stock volatility, investor hesitation, and a growing need to rethink how cross-border transactions are structured. From a legal perspective, we’re seeing a clear pivot: parties are introducing tariff contingency clauses, exploring staggered acquisitions, and leaning on hybrid deal structures to remain flexible in uncertain environments.

In this new context, Mexico is emerging as a strategic platform. Its geographic proximity to the U.S. and the protections afforded by the USMCA make it an increasingly attractive jurisdiction for operations seeking to avoid new tariffs. At the same time, U.S. buyers are reconsidering international targets and focusing on domestic or regional acquisitions to strengthen local supply chains.

Legal counsel can no longer be reactive. It must anticipate regulatory risks, navigate multilateral trade frameworks, and design transaction structures that are global in outlook but locally optimized. The opportunities are still there—but the rules of the game have changed. Today, a sound legal strategy is just as critical as the deal valuation itself.