Chile trademark filings rise and examination speeds up: what Chinese companies should verify before unused-mark cancellation opens in 2027

Chinese companies planning to enter the Chilean market or already holding trademarks there must recently face two opposite developments at the same time: filings have risen markedly and examination is speeding up; while trademarks that remain unused in a genuine sense for a long time after registration will, starting from 9 in 5, 2027, gradually enter the window in which cancellation may be requested.

First, the data. As of the end of 7, 2026, INAPI had received 29,787 multi-class trademark applications, an increase of 4,580 over 25,207 in the same period of 2025, a rise of 18.17%, the highest record for 1 to 7 since 2021 (29,524 in the same period of 2021). At the same time, the average examination period for new trademarks has fallen to 5.5 months, 2.2 months shorter than a year earlier; for applications that received no office action or opposition, the average processing time is 4.1 months.

The increase is concentrated in a few specific classes. Under the Nice Classification, Class 9 (technical, scientific equipment and software) increased by 370 items (+18.0%), Class 5 (pharmaceuticals) increased by 305 items (+21.8%), Class 3 (cosmetics and cleaning preparations) increased by 202 items (+19.9%), and Class 30 (processed foods) increased by 201 items (+20.4%); Class 10 (medical devices) had the highest growth rate, at 30.0% (an increase of 111 items). For Chinese companies expanding overseas, these are precisely the fields where exports are relatively concentrated.

The two figures need to be read separately when combined. Rising application volumes mean prior rights within the same class are denser and fewer openings remain in core classes; faster examination means less time from filing to decision, and the window available for adjustment after a refusal or opposition narrows accordingly. Treating "faster examination" as "easier registration" is the most common misreading of this kind of data.

The change on the other side is more worth preparing for in advance. Under the non-use revocation system introduced by Chile's Law No. 21,355, a registered trademark must be genuinely and effectively used in commerce in Chile; starting from 2027, 5, 9, the first batch of registrations will successively reach the five-year non-use period, and any interested third party may request revocation.

There is an easily overlooked detail in the rule for calculating the start date: according to INAPI's explanation, for trademarks registered as of 2022, 5, 9, the five years run from the date of registration; for earlier trademarks, they run from the first renewal after that date. In other words, "2027, 5, 9" is not a uniform deadline for all trademarks, but the starting point at which the first batch of trademarks enters the revocable range, rolling forward month by month thereafter. Understanding it as "automatic invalidation if unused upon expiry" is likewise inaccurate—revocation must be requested by a third party and determined through proceedings.

Regarding evidence of use, the sources list commercial use materials such as invoices, product catalogs, and website records, and include use by authorized licensees or distributors. This means that the registration certificate alone is not sufficient to prove use; enterprises need to be able to explain when the trademark was used, under which sign, for which goods or services, and by whom it was actually used. Where use is carried out by distributors or licensees, the authorization chain documents should correspond with the use records. The law also provides for exceptions: where commercialization is impossible due to regulatory or administrative obstacles beyond the owner's control, revocation may not apply; regulated industries (such as pharmaceuticals and food) are common cases, but this exception must be proven based on specific facts and cannot be asserted merely on the enterprise's unilateral statement.

In practical terms, enterprises that already hold trademarks in Chile can first check them one by one: whether the registrant and the actual user are the same entity; whether invoices, catalogs, and website records that reflect the time of use and the correspondence between the sign and the goods or services can be retrieved; and, where use is carried out by licensees or distributors, whether the authorization documents are complete. Enterprises preparing to apply can first conduct search and verification around core classes and goods or services, and then arrange the pace of applications and market entry in light of the actual situation of shortened examination cycles, rather than working backward from the market entry date to determine the application timing.

It should be noted that the sources do not provide the specific application conditions, allocation of burden of proof, or standards for determining exceptions in revocation proceedings. Enterprises should not infer the registration success rate for a particular class on this basis, nor should they understand 2027 year 5 month 9 day as the date on which all unused trademarks automatically become invalid. A more prudent approach is to treat application layout and evidence-of-use management as two parallel tasks: on the application side, check class coverage and timing; on the use side, check whether the evidence chain is complete and whether the entities are consistent. Only after completing these two checks can one judge whether supplementary applications are needed, whether use arrangements should be adjusted, or whether preparations should be made to respond to possible revocation requests.

Source: European IP Helpdesk, published on 2026 year 10 month 20 day, authored by the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (EISMEA), with data source INAPI (2026 year); information related to Law No. 21,355 is based on INAPI's explanation.

Note: This article is general intellectual property education and practical observation, and does not constitute legal advice for any specific case.