The Secretary of Tourism and Environment, Daniel Scioli, was involved in a strong confrontation with INDEC after official figures were released that describe a negative outlook for tourism. Upset with the results, Scioli decided to withdraw the financing that his portfolio contributed to two central surveys for the sector and exposed an unprecedented tension between the political area and the technical body.
The decision implies that, as of January 2026, the Secretariat will stop financing the International Tourism Survey (ETI) and the Hotel Occupancy Survey (EOH), two key tools that for years served to measure the movement of tourists and occupancy throughout the country. Scioli’s entourage maintains that the numbers released “do not reflect the reality” they observe in the sector and that the methodology used underestimates the economic impact of the activity.
Given this scenario, INDEC will be forced to modify its work scheme. As reported, the organization will continue to produce statistics, but with a reduced survey, fewer samples and its own personnel, focused exclusively on guaranteeing the minimum data necessary for the calculation of the Gross Domestic Product.
Scioli’s anger was intensified after the publication of the latest reports, which showed a drop in incoming tourism and, in parallel, a strong increase in Argentines who traveled abroad. This imbalance, according to official data, led to a significant deficit in foreign exchange earnings from tourism, a particularly sensitive point for the Government.
The Secretariat also questions the self-declaration method used by INDEC to estimate the spending of foreign visitors, considering that it yields figures well below what the private sector records. For Scioli, this underestimation ends up building an excessively negative image of the activity.
The conflict opens a broader debate about the independence of INDEC, the validity of public statistics and the political weight that official numbers acquire in a delicate economic context. While the organization defends its methodology, the decision of the Secretary of Tourism reveals a dispute that goes beyond the technical and exposes internal tensions within the Government itself.
