He bleach that is promoted by the government of Javier Milei in Argentina It is an attraction for those Argentines who migrated to Uruguay in recent years by the tax benefits, the stability and the clear rules, as well as for Uruguayans who are thinking about investing or diversifying their portfolios.
However, beyond the growth of queries in some cases, it is far from representing a large outflow of investments based in the country, according to warnings from different sectors. In parallel, they assure that for the moment there has not been a decrease in interest from the other side of the pond to continue reinvesting their money in Uruguay, something that is verified, for example, in the real estate market.
In this regard, the tax specialist and CEO of the Lisicki, Litvin & Asociados Firm, Cesar Litvin, He assured in dialogue with Scope that “there are intense consultations from a large part of the Argentine residents who went to ask tax residence to Uruguay”.
In contrast, the partner and director of the Vuille Lafourcade Studio, Federico Vuille Lafourcade, He considered in statements to this medium that “investors are clear that the Political and economic cycles of Argentina “Many times they do not generate the certainty and confidence necessary to return those investments to the country.”
The appeal of Argentine money laundering
Among the benefits of the whitewash, whose adhesion period expires at the end of the month, Litvin indicated that “it has as its first attraction a very low or zero cost If you invest in one of the instruments that the government makes available, unlike previous money laundering schemes that were very expensive.”
On the possibility of Argentines who years ago opted to return to that country Uruguayadmitted that “in some cases there is interest and others are still evaluating moving” and illustrated: “There is family and personal issues that have to do with each one. It is an evaluation that goes beyond the tax issue, but where one wants to live, how and under what conditions.”
Meanwhile, Vuille Lafourcade acknowledged that “the rule approved in the Argentine Parliament to encourage money laundering may be attractive on paper,” but was emphatic in stating that “there is currently no re-domiciliation of investments “towards Argentina.”
Regarding these possible advantages, he observed that “one aspect that can become attractive is being able to return to live in Argentina without worrying about setting up a vital center of interests, paying lower rates with respect to personal property”, to then point out that “the uprooting It is not easy for those who have faced it.”
As for the type of sector that could be attracted by the Asset Regularization Regime, He clarified that this “does not depend on the branch of activity, but on how companies have set up their operations abroad.”
Uruguay’s competitive advantages
For Vuille Lafourcade, the fact that investors do not want to leave has a lot to do with the Uruguayan strengths. “Argentina has not developed the competitive advantages that it should develop and it cannot develop them overnight, they are State policies which take years,” he noted.
Along these lines, he recalled that the neighboring country had in the past “a great differential” such as the domestic consumption. “Currently, it is very low and, without this internal consumption, Argentina is losing its competitive advantages,” he said.
For all this, he concluded: “We understand that Argentina will not become an attractive destination for establishing foreign or local productive investments until at least the embargo is lifted. exchange rate trap and allow the free remittance of capital abroad in foreign currency.”
For his part, Litvin admitted that “it is practically impossible to compete with the tax holidays that Uruguay offers”, pointing out that the money laundering represents “a middle ground between the exorbitant tax burden of the previous government and a low tax burden projected for this government”, although he insisted: “Compared to tax holidays, it is incomparable”.
He also made a distinction between Argentines who “initially left for tax reasons, legal security, quality of life and to get away from populist governments,” but he also suggested that “in some cases Uruguay knew how to earn a place beyond tax issues.”
Does the fact that it is an election year have an influence?
When asked about the influence of the 2024 elections In the decision, Litvin gave him a central role. “I think the result will have a big impact on the decision of the Argentines who went to Uruguay with the current government,” he said.
Instead, Vuille Lafourcade assured that “in Uruguay this is not a relevant factor” and recalled: “Historically all political signs have governed and the country has proven to be predictable and respect the rules of the game. “You don’t ‘shift the bow’ when the sign of government changes.”
Source: Ambito
