Real Estate Law

ZOFEMAT and Federal Maritime-Land Zone: Concessions, Rights and Risks

March 15, 2026 — Enrique Benet-Gregg

Legal Framework of ZOFEMAT: Concessional Regime, Real Rights and Risk Exposure

The coastal strip bordering real estate developments in the Mexican Caribbean is not private land susceptible to ordinary appropriation. The so-called Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone (ZOFEMAT) is a property of the public domain of the Federation, inalienable and imprescriptible in accordance with article 27 of the Constitution and article 7 of the General Law on National Assets (LGBN) published in the DOF on May 20, 2004, with amendments in force as of January 19, 2024. Any private use of that strip requires an administrative concession issued by the Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) or, in specific matters, by the Secretary of the Navy (SEMAR). Disregarding this distinction is the origin of most of the disputes faced by those who acquire or develop real estate facing the sea in Quintana Roo.

Delimitation and Extent of ZOFEMAT

Article 119 of the LGBN defines ZOFEMAT as the strip of twenty meters in width transverse to the coastlines of the national territory, measured horizontally from the line of maximum high tide, a rule whose technical specifications for measurement are developed by the Regulation for the Use and Exploitation of Territorial Sea, Navigable Waterways, Beaches, Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone and Lands Gained from the Sea. In coasts with slope, cliffs or rocky formations, the delimitation may vary in accordance with the technical procedures established by SEMARNAT. The Federal Law of the Sea, published in the DOF on January 8, 1986, complements that regime by defining inland waters and territorial sea, whose immediate strip is also subject to federal regulation of use and access.

Adjacent to ZOFEMAT is the so-called beach zone or lands gained from the sea, referred to in article 120 of the same LGBN. That zone does not count within the twenty meters but remains equally subject to federal domain, which expands the regulated perimeter beyond what an investor intuitively perceives when reviewing a cadastral map.

The application of the general twenty-meter rule admits an exception of special relevance for the Quintana Roo market: in ecosystems with the presence of mangroves, coral reefs or coastal dune systems, the official delimitation (deslinde) practiced by the General Directorate of Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone of SEMARNAT, based on article 119, second paragraph, of the LGBN, may materially expand the federal perimeter beyond the twenty linear meters. That official delimitation has binding legal force and prevails over any cadastral or private measurement. Consequently, investors must obtain and review the official delimitation file before that General Directorate, and it is not sufficient to rely exclusively on cadastral or notarial maps of the property.

The Concessional Regime: Scope and Limits

The concession of ZOFEMAT does not confer a real right over the federal property; it grants a right of temporary use and exploitation, intuitu personae and revocable. Articles 57 to 79 of the LGBN regulate the general regime of concessions over properties of the public domain, establishing that the ordinary maximum term is fifty years, with the possibility of extension without there being an acquired right to automatic renewal.

The Regulation for the Use and Exploitation of Territorial Sea, Navigable Waterways, Beaches, Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone and Lands Gained from the Sea (DOF August 21, 1991, with subsequent amendments) specifies in its articles 27 to 46 the requirements for application, the minimum content of the concessional title and the grounds for revocation. Among the latter stand out: non-compliance with the approved management program, unauthorized change of use, assignment without SEMARNAT consent and abandonment of the concession strip.

The rights for the use of ZOFEMAT are paid in accordance with the Federal Tax Law (LFD), in the articles that regulate the matter of federal maritime-terrestrial zone, whose numbering must be verified in the version in force at the time of each transaction given that the legislation is reformed annually due to the budgetary process and the numbering of articles may vary from one fiscal year to the next. The currently applicable version corresponds to the 2025 fiscal year according to publication in the Official Gazette of the Federation; the applicable fees are subject to annual review and adjustment. Non-compliance with payment constitutes an autonomous ground for revocation and generates surcharges and adjustment in accordance with the Federal Tax Code.

Transactional Risks and Due Diligence Protocol

Risk analysis in coastal real estate transactions and the due diligence protocol are inseparable: each identified risk requires a specific verification action to be mitigated. The main risk vectors and their corresponding control measures are set forth below.

Dissociation between private property and ZOFEMAT concession. The most frequent error in coastal operations is confusing private ownership of the property with the concessional right over the adjacent ZOFEMAT. The public deed that transfers domain of the lot does not transfer the concession, which requires express assignment authorized by SEMARNAT pursuant to article 75 of the LGBN. A buyer who does not verify the subsistence and validity of the concessional title acquires a property whose practical utility as waterfront property may be severely compromised. The mitigation action requires verifying the number, validity and conditions of the concessional title before the Environmental Procedures Registry of SEMARNAT, as well as confirming that the concessioned perimeter matches the appraisal and the property description in the deed.

Mechanics of concessional assignment and corporate structures. The process of authorization for assignment before SEMARNAT pursuant to article 75 of the LGBN requires, in practice, a timeframe that typically ranges between three and six months, the presentation of complete technical and legal documentation from both the assignor and assignee, and is subject to the authority’s discretionary power to condition or deny authorization. Faced with that procedural burden, some operations are structured as acquisition of the shares of the company holding the concession, rather than a direct transmission of the property and concessional title, for the purpose of avoiding the formal assignment procedure. This scheme, referred to as a corporate transaction or share deal, does not eliminate the risk: the acquirer inherits in full the environmental, tax and administrative liabilities of the company, including infractions to the concessional title and outstanding fees. SEMARNAT has questioned these structures in inspection and revocation proceedings, arguing that the change of control of the concessionaire company may constitute an unauthorized indirect assignment. This risk must be explicitly evaluated in due diligence of any operation structured under that scheme.

Restrictions by Protected Natural Areas and ecological zoning. The General Law on Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (LGEEPA), articles 44 et seq., and the ecological zoning programs for coastal territory in Quintana Roo add an additional regulatory layer: certain strips of ZOFEMAT form part of Protected Natural Areas or buffer zones where concessional use is restricted or prohibited, regardless of what the previously granted concessional title states. The mitigation action consists of analyzing the applicable ecological zoning program, including the decrees of federal and state Protected Natural Areas in effect in the zone.

Environmental liability for preexisting works. The failure to verify the environmental status of the property exposes the acquirer to liabilities arising from works executed by the previous concessionaire without the corresponding authorizations. Article 203 of the LGEEPA establishes the civil environmental liability applicable in these cases, and the inspection and sanction regime of the Federal Procuratorate for Environmental Protection (PROFEPA) constitutes the mechanism for effective enforcement: it is PROFEPA, and not SEMARNAT directly, that conducts inspection visits, documents infractions and issues sanction acts that may result in closure, demolition or fine. The joint and several liability of the acquirer does not arise from the mere fact of acquiring the property, but from continuing with unauthorized works or structures once the acquirer has assumed control of the property. To delimit that exposure, due diligence must include a physical inspection of the site prior to closing of the operation, with photographic and technical documentation of the current state of the works, in order to establish the preexisting conditions.

Validity and transferability of the concessional title. Verification of the title must extend to its specific conditions of transferability, to compliance with the approved management program and to the absence of revocation proceedings in process. Review of compliance with fee payments before the SAT is an integral part of this analysis, given that arrears in this matter constitute an autonomous ground for revocation.

Official boundary survey and coherence of the concessioned perimeter. In zones with mangroves, dunes or reefs, the specific mitigation action consists of obtaining the official boundary survey file before the General Directorate of Federal Maritime-Land Zone of SEMARNAT and comparing it against the property description in the deed and in the concessional title. The lack of correspondence between the official boundary survey and the cadastral plan is a frequent finding in Quintana Roo and may invalidate the actual utility of the asset.

Dynamics of the maximum high tide line and coastal erosion. A specific risk in the Mexican Caribbean, frequently omitted in transactional analyses, is that the maximum high tide line, and therefore the terrestrial boundary of the ZOFEMAT, is not a static border. Coastal erosion and the rise in sea level resulting from climate change displace that line in a continental direction over time. SEMARNAT has the authority to conduct new demarcations that reflect that variation, which may reclassify as federal property structures that were legally constructed on the private portion of the property according to the demarcation in effect at the time of construction. This risk is documented and ongoing on the Caribbean coast of Quintana Roo. Mitigation action requires that due diligence include a recent topographic survey conducted by a certified surveyor, accompanied by the systematic comparison of that survey against the historical demarcation available in the SEMARNAT file, to identify whether there is displacement of the line affecting existing structures.

Applicable judicial criteria. The Collegiate Courts of Circuit with jurisdiction in the XXVII Circuit (Quintana Roo) have consistently held, in accordance with the circuit’s judicial interpretation on the matter, that the nullity or revocation of a ZOFEMAT concession does not in itself generate the nullity of the sale of the adjoining private property, but it may substantiate an action for remedy by partial eviction when coastal use was a determinative element of consent. This distinction requires precise structuring of contractual representations and warranties in any transaction that includes access to or use of the federal coastal strip. The Federal Administrative Justice Court has likewise held criteria regarding grounds for revocation of concessions over national assets and on the non-existence of an acquired right to automatic renewal of coastal use concessions.

Operational Conclusion

ZOFEMAT is not an ancillary attribute of coastal property: it is an autonomous legal regime whose correct structuring determines the real value and operational viability of any coastal asset. The soundness of a development project or individual acquisition depends on the concession being valid, current, transferable, and consistent with the projected use, and on the federal perimeter having been verified against the most recent official demarcation. No contractual clause can substitute for direct verification before the competent federal authorities.

IBG Legal is a boutique firm specializing in litigation related to coastal real estate law and ZOFEMAT concessions, headquartered in Cancún with offices in Mexico City and Querétaro. Our practice includes the defense of concessionaires in revocation proceedings before SEMARNAT and the Federal Administrative Justice Court, the structuring of concession assignment transactions including risk analysis in corporate transactions involving entities holding concessions, and the representation of acquirers in actions for remedy by partial eviction over coastal strip. Request a review of your concession title before your next coastal acquisition.

Sources and References

Legislation

Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, article 27. Last amendment: DOF November 18, 2022.
General Law on National Assets (LGBN), DOF May 20, 2004. Articles 7, 57 to 79, 119 (including second paragraph), 120. Last amendment: DOF January 19, 2024.
Federal Law of the Sea, DOF January 8, 1986. No subsequent amendments as of publication date.
Regulation for the Use and Exploitation of Territorial Sea, Navigable Waterways, Beaches, Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone and Lands Gained from the Sea, DOF August 21, 1991. Articles 27 to 46. Applicable subsequent reforms in effect.
Federal Rights Law (LFD), applicable articles regarding federal maritime-terrestrial zone. Version in effect: fiscal year 2025, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation. Note: article numbering is subject to review with each fiscal year; verify the version in effect at the time of the transaction.
General Law on Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection (LGEEPA), DOF January 28, 1988. Articles 44 et seq., 203. Last relevant amendment: DOF January 7, 2021.
Federal Tax Code, articles on surcharges and adjustments. Last amendment: DOF January 1, 2026.

Judicial Criteria

Collegiate Courts of Circuit of the XXVII Circuit (Quintana Roo): judicial interpretation consistent with regard to distinction between nullity of ZOFEMAT concession and nullity of the sale of the adjoining property; basis of remedial actions for partial eviction when coastal access was a determining element of consent. No theses with verified registration numbers are cited; the criteria are referenced in accordance with the uniform interpretation of the circuit in this matter.
Federal Court of Administrative Justice: criteria regarding grounds for revocation of concessions over national property and the non-existence of an acquired right to automatic renewal of coastal use concessions.

Doctrine

Acosta Romero, Miguel. Special Administrative Law. Editorial Porrúa, México, 1997.
Fraga, Gabino. Administrative Law. Editorial Porrúa, México. Edition updated by Manuel Fraga, 42nd ed., 2002.
SEMARNAT, General Directorate of Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone and Coastal Environments. Procedures Manual for the Administration of the Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, México. Primary reference source for procedures of delimitation, transfer and concession revocation.

Official Sources

Official Gazette of the Federation (DOF): publications referenced in the text.
Official Gazette of the State of Quintana Roo: decrees of coastal territorial ecological planning applicable.
SEMARNAT, General Directorate of Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone: official delimitation files, Environmental Procedures Registry and database of current ZOFEMAT concession titles.
Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection (PROFEPA): regime of inspection, verification and sanctions in matters of ZOFEMAT and environmental responsibility.
Ministry of the Navy (SEMAR): concessional competencies over areas of naval jurisdiction.