In brief
In July 2026, the Argentine Antitrust Court, following the recommendation of the Secretariat of Economic Mergers, imposed three fines for late notification of economic merger transactions.
The most notable case—and the one with the greatest practical impact—involves a company that was fined for notifying the authority just one day late of a merger that was ultimately approved without conditions. The decision sends an unequivocal signal to the market: the National Antitrust Authority enforces the merger control regime with the utmost procedural rigor.
In focus
The Merger Control Regime Under Law 27,442
Law No. 27,442 on the Defense of Competition (LDC, for its acronym in Spanish) establishes a regime for the control of economic mergers that requires mandatory notification to the National Antitrust Authority (ANC, for its acronym in Spanish) of transactions falling under Articles 7 and 9 of the LDC.
The LDC provides that a notifiable transaction must be reported for authorization either before or up to one week after the agreement establishing it is finalized, and that the enforcement authority may impose fines on companies that fail to notify or delay notification of a merger.
As a general rule, in the case of acquisitions, it is the acquiring party—the party that acquires control of the target company—that must notify the economic merger; therefore, in the event of noncompliance, it is the acquiring company that is subject to the penalty.
In one case, the ANC imposed a penalty for the late notification of a real estate transaction that had been approved without conditions. The violation was not related to substantive aspects of the transaction, but exclusively to the failure to meet the legal deadline for notification. The delay amounted to 795 administrative business days, which led to the imposition of a fine of 78,863.09 mobile units, reflecting the ANC’s stance that late filing is considered particularly serious when the delay extends over a prolonged period.
In a second case, the ANC sanctioned the acquisition of exclusive control of a company in the energy sector, the notification for which was filed just one administrative business day late. Despite the minor nature of the delay and the fact that the transaction was also approved without conditions, the ANC nonetheless imposed a fine of 3,784 mobile units, demonstrating that failure to meet notification deadlines constitutes an objective violation, even when the delay is minimal and does not affect the substantive analysis of the transaction.
Finally, in a third case, the penalty was imposed on an international transaction involving the acquisition of control over certain aeronautical assets. The notification was filed 40 administrative business days late, resulting in a fine of 20,000 mobile units. As in the other cases, the transaction was authorized without objections from a competition standpoint, but the ANC emphasized the obligation to strictly comply with the statutory notification deadlines, reaffirming its policy of penalizing procedural violations even when the transactions are ultimately found to be compatible with competition law.
Criteria for Determining the Fine
To determine the fine, the LDC stipulates that the enforcement authority must consider, among other factors, the severity of the violation, the harm caused, the size of the affected market, and the offender’s history of repeat offenses or prior record, as well as their financial capacity. The law also provides that the level of cooperation provided by the offender may be considered a mitigating factor in determining the penalty.
The law stipulates that the amount of the fine is expressed in “mobile units,” the value of which is updated annually by the Antitrust Court.
Practical Conclusion
The penalties imposed in July 2026 send a crystal-clear regulatory message to companies engaged in M&A transactions, restructurings, or asset acquisitions in Argentina. This message is consistent with the traditional case law of the former Argentine Antitrust Commission, which consistently imposed fines for late notifications. Some key takeaways to keep in mind:
- The notification deadline is absolute. There is no tolerance for even minimal delays. A single day’s delay is sufficient for the Court to impose a fine. Monitoring deadlines must be integrated as a critical process in the closing of transactions.
- Unconditional approval does not prevent a fine for late notification. The three cases that resulted in fines were approved on their merits without conditions, confirming that the obligation to notify in a timely and proper manner is independent of the outcome of the competition analysis.
- Cooperation is a significant mitigating factor. Companies that detect a late filing should consider voluntary and cooperative disclosure as a means to reduce the penalty, as expressly provided for in the LDC.
Download the Spanish version of Argentina: Economic Mergers — The Argentine Antitrust Court Imposed Three Fines for Late Notification.