The relationship of the various aspects of economic policy with the agricultural sector is ambiguous. Punctually, every year on the occasion of the rural exhibition, each minister or secretary of the area keeps an ace in the sleeve, although many times the demands of cash, the reserves of the Central Bank or of the political opportunism reduce them to a false width. But also, for at least 70 years, the imposition of export rights was an effective, instant and apparently of low intensity damage to other tax alternatives.
Skinny cows
This time the announcement of a “permanent” decrease of between 20% and 25% in export rights (from 33% to 26.5% in the case of soybeans, the one that most taxed) had a political opportunity component for a sector that requires the disappearance of withholdings, but also a more difficult reality to admit: the projected scarcity of currencies.
During the first semester, the agroindustrial complex liquidated exports for more than US $ 15.4 billion and the projection for this year carried out by the Rosario Stock Exchange (BCR) will end up representing 73% of all exports. However, in the longest, the appearance of other export nuclei (basically energy, mining and on a smaller scale, services) will make them the main currency suppliers in four years and in eight years, the net balance of the international trade of these sectors would double this year: US $ 89,000 million compared to US $ 48,000 million projected by 2025. Of course, it should be confirmed by this. (especially those announced in the Rigi regime) given the necessary scale for the sectors involved. It is not crazy because currently, Argentina exports only 10% of everything Chile sells, which shares the same geological formation.
The reservation level is the variable in yellow alert since the beginning of the year. As of April, with the injection of funds completed by the International Monetary Fund (in reality compensation not to pay debt services) brought relief to this karma of the economic policy of the last decade, but not a definitive solution. Everything indicates that the IMF directory will also endorse the disbursement that will allow the Government to supply US $ 2,000 million to the Central Bank. But it remains to know the detail of the technical review and the recommendations, although it is discounted that one of them will be to not give in the commitment to accumulate reservations, so they would subtract approximately US $ 5,000 million to specify the established goal. This will probably accelerate the little activity in the purchase of reservations, although Minister Caputo announced that in the last five weeks US $ 1.5 billion had been acquired. These variables are those that, in short, in the upward expectations of the dollar by the end of October, even considering a result favorable to the ruling party and without the appearance of any black swan.
The plateau
The recent seizure in the financial market is also associated, the decision of the Central Bank to correct the consequences caused by the disarmament of the Lefis (which flooded the square with $ 15 billion), its impact on the volatility of the rates and on the financial program of the Treasury. Doubts arise if, after October, the option of a deflationist policy will follow at the risk of bothering the macro situation two years later or if, on the other hand, it will seek to recalibrate re -adapting the scheme of exchange bands giving a clear signal of accumulation of reserves to a higher exchange rate.
The numbers give a stability platform to two other key variables in an electoral year: confidence in the government and the level of activity. For June, the Government Confidence Index prepared by Torcuato Di Tella was 2.45 points, 4.9% more compared to June; 9.6% higher than July 2017, during the Government of Mauricio Macri and 44.3% higher than July 2021, during the management of Alberto Fernández. On the other hand, INDEC announced the monthly estimator of Economic Activity (EMAE) corresponding to May, with a slight fall of 0.1% compared to April, an interannual 5% growth and a growth of 6.1% of the first five months of the year. “The recovery initiated in mid -2024 was interrupted in February of this year; as of March -me prior to the partial departure of the exchange exchange -, the Argentine economy began to show signs of stagnation, with a slowdown in the growth rate,” analyzes in its latest weekly report the Invecq consultant.
In this context, the decision to reduce retentions also obeys a way of acquiring more reservations without the need to sacrifice the descending path of inflation or upload both the interest rate that aborts any indication of reactivation.
Fiscal radiography
For the chief economist of Invecq Matías Surt, the announcement of low export rights generated a discussion about the Argentine tax structure. “The reduction of public spending, which was mostly outcast, already gave almost everything you could give. There are surely places where it can be adjusted and has not yet been done, but it will not be significant. And there are also places where it was adjusted and should improve,” he analyzes.
For the economist Dante Romano, professor and researcher at the School of Agribusiness of the Universidad Austral, the trend towards a permanent decline of the withholdings would make the area planted from the soy be very strong to the detriment of corn, but would add marginal areas that could be profitable with a better price. “Perhaps the grains would steal other activities in the long term and, in addition, with those prices it would be fertilized much more, as an activity indicator,” he explains.
Instead, other economists see the step taken as necessary, but insufficient. For Jorge Colina, president of IDESA, export rights are a very bad tax because it discourages production and as an example, he points out that at the beginning of the century Argentina had a grain production similar to that of Brazil, while at present it is less than half. One of the main explanations is that Brazil, like most countries, do not apply taxes on their agricultural exports. “But the problem is not only the withholdings, but, together with them, the State appeals to other distortive taxes that also damage the competitiveness of national production,” he emphasizes. For example, according to the Ministry of Economy last year it was observed that 2024, it is observed that the National State applies export rights for 1.0% of GDP and the check tax for 1.6% of GDP. In addition, the provinces apply the Gross Income Tax and the Tax on the stamps with which approximately 3.9% and 0.4% of GDP, respectively. Finally, the municipalities apply rates to sales with which they would be raising no less than 0.5% of GDP. In other words, taxes that most damage competitiveness represent approximately 7.4% of GDP ($ 1 out of $ 4 collected in total). In this perspective, the partial reduction of export rights (0.2% of GDP) is a marginal relief for production, but a great fiscal effort for the State since it represents two thirds of the financial surplus. Because agricultural production also faces fat -fat costs and lack of competitiveness in supplies. “It is very contradictory that a faint relief for production and only for the agro -export sector is such a large stumbling block for national public finances,” he concludes. The electoral year does not generate imbalances, but it nakes them and strengthens the intensity of the demands. Because as long as the economy does not grow, the blanket will always be shorter than what is needed.
You may also interest you
