In an attempt to reverse the new version of the wealth tax, business entities yesterday expressed their rejection. Of course, with nuances. Deputies are discussing today the so-called “Solidarity and extraordinary contribution to help mitigate the effects of the pandemic.”

The Business Convergence Forum was categorical, which defined it as confiscatory. The Forum, which groups together almost all the chambers, considers that it is a blow to investment. The Industrial Union chose to release a very detailed study on the negative effect of its scope.

On repeated occasions, the UIA approached that study to President Alberto Fernández and the parents of the initiative, the deputies Máximo Kirchner and Carlos Heller. Carolina Castro, one of its directors and a shareholder of her family’s auto part company Guidi, pointed out that if it is approved and Congress does not yield to the proposed changes, those who must pay for it can use it as a productive investment in their companies.

Thus, the UIA questions the bias with which this project has been designed that “decapitalizes companies that invest, produce and sustain employment in a context of social, health and economic emergency.” It maintains that the project does not differentiate between assets made up of productive capital (companies, machines and technological assets in the country) and those made up of financial or real estate assets. “As a result of this measure, companies must allocate resources assigned to production to pay this contribution,” he said.

In the document she traces a stark reality: for 4 years there have been 40,300 fewer firms and 290,000 fewer industrial employees than a year ago. “This project taxes those resources that must be used for investment, essential to recover growth,” they insist.

Castro reproaches that it falls on investors in company shares or on the owners of companies that obviously have shares in those firms. Also, that it reaches the holders of debt securities. That is, to punish those who have trusted in the sovereign debt of Argentina. Another not minor criticism is on the tax base since whoever reaches $ 199 million is exempt and whoever has $ 201 million falls all the weight.

In this way, the UIA document states that shares or participations in productive assets should be excluded from the tax base, allow compliance with an equivalent amount in productive investments within a year, incorporate the same exemptions as those presented by the personal property tax, adding the exemption to Negotiable Obligations of Argentine companies so as not to affect savings in national currency and in public instruments, in addition to correcting the aliquots to avoid unequal treatment.

There is another fact that Castro does not miss. “They received us and listened to us in a personal capacity, we did not have an instance of participation as an actor to be able to give an opinion and discuss this tax within the framework of Congress,” he complained.

The Forum in turn shot: “It is surprising that, at a time when it is necessary to promote private investment to recover economic activity and generate genuine employment, the Chamber of Deputies promotes a bill that, clearly, will generate an effect inverse, and that, when it is necessary for all of us to use our energy towards the same goal, a discussion is introduced that once again divides the Argentines. The absurdity of this tax is so evident that its mere discussion is surprising ”. And he added: “It is an initiative that is confiscatory, once again taxing assets that are already subject to other taxes and ignores the economic reality.”