One of the most publicized instruments by the coalition government in the toughest months of the pandemic were the so-called ICO credits (Official Credit Institute) that were given to companies and freelancers to deal with those unsold during those months. These credits were processed by the banks, but they had the guarantee of the State of up to 80% of the total value. A total of 140,737 million euros were granted, of which 107,187 were guaranteed. You don’t have to be a financial analyst to understand that most were high-risk loans because they were dedicated to paying current expenses that could only be recovered by a subsequent increase in sales and margins that was doubtful that it would occur. The smaller the beneficiary, the more difficult the recovery was supposed to be. A large hotel that paid for electricity or mortgage payments with ICO credits during confinement could hope that, once the pandemic ended, the hotel would fill up due to people’s desire to leave as has happened. But a hairdresser that was closed or at half gas for weeks had no chance that, once the confinement ended, its clients would comb their hair three times a week. Those 100,000 million guaranteed by the State are, therefore, a time bomb of 10% of GDP that lurks around the public accounts six months after the fiscal rules are in force again.pablo allendesalazar advances this morning the data that the ICO is going to make public and, for the moment, delinquency only affects 1.67% of what is guaranteed. But be careful, what data is opaque because only the amounts referring to the corresponding amount of unpaid installments are being paid, not the total principal. That is, if someone owed 1,000 euros and had to repay it in 20 installments and has stopped paying 5, Only 250 euros are counted in delinquency. Waiting for companies to continue paying what is missing. It must be taken into account that most of these credits had a grace period until June of last year, so it is the balance of nine months and not three years. The trend may be progressive. We will not tire of repeating that the supporters of fiscal stimuli must be the most interested in the rigor in their execution. Leaving pufos under the rugs will only make it easier for supporters to reduce the weight of the public arguments in favor of their theses.