The Second Chamber of the Federal Social Security Court has declared the retirement mobility law enacted during the administration of Alberto Fernández to be unconstitutional.
In a ruling concerning the case Galletta, Carmen c/ Anses s/ Reajustes varios, judges Juan Fantini and Nora Dorado ordered the National Social Security Administration (ANSES) to recalculate the plaintiff’s pension benefits for the period between January 2021 and June 2024.
The court determined that the formula established by Law 27.609, which was in effect during those years, failed to protect retirees against the erosion of their purchasing power. Instead, the ruling mandates the application of the mobility mechanism set forth in Law 27.426, which was passed in December 2017 during the presidency of Mauricio Macri.
That previous law, often referred to in local media as the “14 tons of stones law” due to the violent protests that accompanied its legislative debate, utilized a calculation based on a mix of inflation and wage variation.
The decision marks a significant development in the ongoing legal debate over pension adjustments in Argentina. According to the ruling, the formula used under the Fernández administration “lacked the necessary predictability for scenarios of crisis and high inflation.”
By contrast, the court said that both the preceding law and the current Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) 274, which replaced the previous mechanism in March 2024, include the Consumer Price Index (IPC) in their calculations.
Some previsional lawyers estimate that applying the older formula could lead to an increase of approximately 67% in benefits for the affected period. However, professionals caution that the final outcome remains subject to complex technical liquidations.
The debate over which index best reflects the reality of high inflation remains central to these judicial challenges. Adrián Tróccoli, a lawyer specializing in social security, said transitioning between different systems presents challenges.
“My interpretation is that it should be applied until the adjustment payable in June 2024 and, from there, the rule of DNU 274, which is to follow the Consumer Price Index with a two-month lag,” Trócccoli said.
The court’s ruling also highlights the contrast between the criticized formula and the current system. Under the previous law, the adjustment was based on wage growth and tax revenues, some of which were not publicly accessible. In contrast, the current DNU 274 mandates monthly adjustments based on the inflation data from two months prior.
The judiciary has seen a wave of similar challenges across the country. Courts in Mendoza, Mar del Plata, Salta, Córdoba, Bahía Blanca, and Tucumán have issued rulings favoring retirees, with some findings suggesting that purchasing power declined by as much as 50% under the now-challenged law.
Furthermore, just last week, Sala 3 of the Federal Social Security Court issued a separate ruling in the Aguirre, Jorge Alberto c/ Anses case, which also declared the law unconstitutional but limited the recalculation period to between October 2023 and June 2024.
The ultimate resolution of this conflict rests with the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, which is expected to provide a final ruling on the constitutionality of Law 27.609. Until that final decision is reached, the legal landscape for pension adjustments remains in flux, with courts continuing to address individual claims against the state’s previous mobility framework.
This article provides informational content regarding legal developments and does not constitute professional financial or legal advice.
