The tour of the Minister of Economy, Sergio Massa, in the United States produced a positive balance, according to officials and economists who highlighted the meeting with the authorities of the International Monetary Fund, before whom the commitment to comply with the terms of the agreement was reiterated with a view to the second review that could unlock in the coming weeks the disbursement of US $ 4,100 million by the agency.
Behind the meeting held on Monday by Massa, with the agency’s managing director, Kristalina Georgievathe Argentine ambassador to the United States, Jorge Argüello, said he was optimistic about the results of the IMF’s reviews of compliance with the goals agreed upon with Argentina.
“The conversation focused basically on the so-called IMF reviews. We are optimistic about the second review that will take place at the end of September and the third that will take place at the end of December,” the official explained in dialogue with Futurok radio.
He recalled that both Massa and his predecessors in office, Martín Guzmán and Silvina Batakis; “They have always reiterated the commitment and willingness of the Argentine Government to comply with the terms of the agreementparticularly with the deficit target of 2.5%” of GDP.
“New channels of dialogue have been opened and we have found interlocutors who are very attentive to what is happening in Argentina”Jorge Arguello
In turn, he remarked that in the IMF statement after the meeting, Georgieva highlighted the commitment of the minister “to achieve the goals” of the program.
In general, “the balance that we make from the Argentine Embassy in Washington in the United States is very positive”, since it was a visit by the Minister of Economy “extremely intense” with official contacts with officials, international organizations and with “dozens of American companies who invest or who are thinking of investing in Argentina”.
“New channels of dialogue have been opened and we have found interlocutors who are very attentive to what is happening in Argentina,” Argüello stressed.
In that sense, he considered Massa’s meeting with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen a “significant piece of information”, which was not scheduled on the minister’s initial agenda, because it is the “first time that Yellen has met with the Economy Minister of la Argentina” since he took office in January 2021.
He also pointed out as important the agreement of exchange of information between the AFIP and its counterpart in the United Statesthe Internal Revenue Service (IRS), given that “we have the presumption that we are talking about a very important mass of money. People who have dollars that they deposit abroad or buy properties abroad and do not declare it in Argentina,” he said. .
The current agreement – product of an understanding reached in 2016 – allows the request of data on people to investigate situations of tax evasion, and now “the automatic exchange of information on all taxes administered by the two agencies” is sought.
“We are going to continue working in this direction; it is a priority of the Argentine Government”, emphasized Argüello.
Along similar lines, the economist Claudio Loser expressed himself, who described the Minister’s visit to the United States as “successful” and considered probable that “the (International Monetary) Fund will disburse in the coming weeks” some 4,100 million dollars for Argentina.
In statements to Télam Radio, the former director of the Western Hemisphere Department of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said that “in very synthetic terms, I believe that (Massa’s visit), of the recent visits by economy ministers, has been the most successful”.
He considered that “Argentina is in a difficult situation, things have not been fixed, but Massa with political power and a good team has come here, he has said we are going to continue doing what has to be done, which is very good and it seems that it has allowed us to make a lot of progress here in Washington“.
“Clearly this team has the capacity to act” and the international organizations “will have received signs that the Argentina team is serious about working“, he highlighted.
He argued that “it is most likely that the Fund will disburse the next amount in the coming weeks, it is something important, and the IDB and also him world Bank I think they are very prepared to give more money but there is a lot of work to be done”.
“It is most likely that the Fund will disburse the next amount in the coming weeks, it is something important, and the IDB and also the World Bank I think are very prepared to give more money but there is a lot of work to be done”Claudio Loser
Loser analyzed that “between the lines, Mrs. (Kristalina) Georgieva’s statement says that the soybean dollar is fine but that more needs to be done.”
“Must move the exchange ratedo something on that side because that is a very important element,” he concluded.
For his part, Javier Timerman, Wall Street financier and founder of Ad CapSecurities and Banza, affirmed that Massa’s tour had a productive balance because “a dialogue that was totally broken” between Argentina and the International Monetary Fund was put on track since the resignation of Martin Guzman.
“It was a good trip because a dialogue was put on track that was totally broken with the Fund and the technical staff since the day (Martín) Guzmán resigned,” Timerman remarked in statements to Radio Con Vos.
“There was very little dialogue at the Guzmán level with other important actors in Washington, such as the presidents of the multilaterals, the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the White House, the Treasury Department,” he added.
“There was very little dialogue at the Guzmán level with other important actors in Washington, such as the presidents of the multilaterals, the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the White House, the Treasury Department”Javier Timerman
In this sense, the financial market executive highlighted that “as the dialogue is better, things are unlocked”like the IDB credit, announced by Massa himself last week.
“This led to the belief that the goals are going to be agreed upon, that there is going to be an approval by the Fund and the Board of Directors of the Fund on the agreed goals,” he pointed out.
In any case, for Timerman there was “something that was very important and that went more or less unnoticed here, which is that Massa did not ask for the goals to be changed either.”
Finally, the economist at the Center for Argentine Political Economy (CEPA), Eva Sacco, said that the efforts in the US led by the Minister of Economy “were successful”, and that the approval of the second revision of the agreement with the International Monetary Fund ( IMF) is used to “buy time to consolidate the, for now, precarious stability achieved“.
Sacco considered in statements to Télam that the achievements obtained by Massa “make the fulfillment of the goals by the end of the year much more possible than it was just a month ago”, while questioning his predecessor, Martin Guzman.
“We could ask ourselves why a situation of such instability and vulnerability was reached, that has a lot to do with the previous Guzmán administration”eve sacco
“We could ask ourselves why a situation of such instability and vulnerability was reached, that has a lot to do with the previous administration of Guzmán,” he assured.
On the contrary, he positively evaluated “Massa’s few weeks” at the head of the Palacio de Hacienda, in which “There are already two successes: macro stabilization and good international management”.
“The negotiations were successful, a disbursement of US$4.1 billion was unlocked and the second review with the Fund was approved, which will allow it to face devaluation pressures and in turn face the next payment with the agency,” he said.
Sacco assessed that “the approval of the second revision allows us to buy time, to consolidate the, for now, precarious stability achieved”.
“If at the same time it is possible to swell the reserves and stabilize the dollar gap, we will go in that direction,” he added, to emphasize that “The leg that is still missing is the productive one, because stabilizing the exchange rate was done at the cost of two measures that in the medium term could be harmful”.
Those measures pointed out by Sacco are those of “on the one hand, enormously increasing the interest rate, and on the other, establishing a differential exchange rate for soybeans that is extremely unfair with the rest of the exporters and discourages any other export.”
