They chose politics over the target.
Una misión del Fondo Monetario Internacional aterrizó en Buenos Aires para evaluar si Argentina cumplió con las metas de su programa económico, en particular la acumulación de reservas internacionales netas que el gobierno no logró alcanzar al cierre de 2025. El incumplimiento, atribuido en parte a las restricciones cambiarias previas a las elecciones legislativas, complica pero no bloquea el desembolso de aproximadamente mil millones de dólares. En la historia larga de las relaciones entre Argentina y el Fondo, este momento se parece menos a una ruptura que a una renegociación: dos partes que ajustan sus expectativas a la realidad sin abandonar el camino.
- Argentina no cumplió su meta de reservas netas del cuarto trimestre de 2025, ni siquiera en su versión ya relajada de USD 2.600 millones negativos, lo que pone en juego un desembolso de cerca de mil millones de dólares.
- El gobierno reconoce el desvío pero lo enmarca como consecuencia de decisiones políticas deliberadas: en año electoral, se priorizó la estabilidad del peso sobre la compra de divisas.
- La señal más poderosa llegó desde Davos, donde la directora gerente del FMI publicó una foto junto al ministro Caputo elogiando el desempeño argentino, un gesto que los analistas leen como luz verde implícita.
- En los primeros 23 días de enero de 2026, el Banco Central compró USD 1.297 millones, una cifra que el gobierno exhibe como prueba de que el programa retomó su rumbo.
- El FMI ya ajustó sus propias metas de reservas para 2026 en magnitudes considerables, reconociendo que la arquitectura original del programa no contempló la volatilidad de un año electoral.
- El objetivo fiscal del 2% del PBI para 2026 genera escepticismo entre economistas, que anticipan una nueva negociación ante los compromisos de gasto ya asumidos en el Congreso.
El equipo de revisión del FMI llegó el jueves a Buenos Aires con una tarea concreta: determinar si Argentina cumplió sus compromisos y si corresponde liberar un nuevo desembolso de aproximadamente mil millones de dólares. Luis Cubeddu y Bikas Joshi encabezan la misión, que se concentra sobre todo en las metas de reservas internacionales netas.
El problema es conocido: Argentina no alcanzó la meta del cuarto trimestre de 2025, incluso después de que el Fondo la relajara de USD 2.400 millones positivos a USD 2.600 millones negativos tras la primera revisión. La explicación oficial apunta al calendario político: antes de las elecciones legislativas, el gobierno prefirió contener la depreciación del peso antes que acumular divisas, una decisión que dejó las planillas del Fondo en rojo.
Sin embargo, el clima no es de crisis. El gobierno llega a la negociación con datos recientes a su favor: en los primeros 23 días de enero acumuló USD 1.297 millones en compras, y las reservas brutas superan los USD 45.000 millones. El propio FMI ya revisó sus metas para 2026 a la baja en cifras significativas, reconociendo implícitamente que los objetivos originales eran demasiado exigentes para un año electoral.
El respaldo político también es visible. En Davos, la directora gerente Kristalina Georgieva se fotografió con el ministro Caputo y elogió públicamente el desempeño argentino. Los analistas interpretan esa señal como una indicación de que la dispensa formal por el incumplimiento —el llamado waiver— es prácticamente un trámite.
Lo que queda abierto es la discusión fiscal. La meta de déficit primario del 2% del PBI para 2026 ya genera dudas entre economistas como Claudio Caprarulo, de Analytica, quien la califica de "muy ambiciosa" a la luz de los compromisos de gasto asumidos en el Congreso. Es probable que esa cifra también se renegocie. El desembolso parece asegurado; la pregunta más difícil es qué forma tendrá el programa cuando finalmente llegue.
The International Monetary Fund's review team touched down in Buenos Aires on Thursday with a straightforward mandate: assess whether Argentina has kept its promises. Luis Cubeddu and Bikas Joshi, the Fund's emissaries, arrived to conduct the second review of the country's extended arrangement, a process that will determine whether the government unlocks roughly a billion dollars in fresh disbursements and, more importantly, whether it can move forward without the embarrassment of another waiver—a formal admission that it missed a target.
The central question hanging over the talks is one of foreign currency. Argentina committed to accumulating a specific level of net international reserves by the end of 2025. The target had already been loosened once, adjusted downward from a positive 2.4 billion dollars to a negative 2.6 billion dollars after the first review. Even that revised goal proved out of reach. The government fell short, and the reasons are not mysterious: in the months before last year's legislative elections, policymakers prioritized keeping the peso stable over building reserves. They held back on dollar purchases to prevent the currency from weakening, a choice that made political sense but left the Fund's spreadsheets in the red.
Economists watching the process are not panicked. Camilo Tiscornia, who directs an economic advisory firm, expects the Fund to grant the waiver—a formality at this point—but notes that what happens next matters enormously. The government will point to its recent performance: in the first 23 days of this year alone, the central bank purchased 1.297 billion dollars, and gross international reserves now sit at 45.417 billion dollars. This is the opening move of phase four of the economic program, a new stage in which the central bank adjusts its currency bands for inflation and buys dollars based on actual demand for money rather than arbitrary targets.
The Fund's own numbers tell a story of recalibration. For the first quarter of 2026, it is now demanding net reserves of negative 3.1 billion dollars—a swing of four billion dollars from its earlier requirement of positive 900 million. For the fourth quarter, the target is 8.4 billion dollars, down from 10.4 billion. These are not small adjustments. They reflect a recognition that the program's original architecture did not account for the political constraints of an election year or the volatility that comes with it.
What gives the government confidence is not just the numbers but the signals from the top. In Davos last month, Economy Minister Luis Caputo sat down with IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva. She posted a photograph of the two of them on social media, praising Argentina's economic performance and specifically highlighting the recent reserve purchases. Caputo responded within hours, thanking her and pledging to keep working to restore Argentina's greatness. These are not the words of an institution preparing to crack down; they are the words of a relationship that, despite friction, remains intact.
But the review will not be confined to reserves alone. The government also faces questions about its fiscal target for 2026: a primary budget deficit of just two percent of GDP. Economists are skeptical. The government has made concessions in Congress—spending commitments it cannot easily reverse—and it is pushing for approval of its own bills during the extraordinary sessions that begin soon. These political realities may force another adjustment. Claudio Caprarulo, an economist at Analytica, calls the two percent target "very ambitious" given what has already been promised. The Fund will likely agree, and the two sides will negotiate a new number that reflects what is actually achievable rather than what looks good on paper.
The mood in Buenos Aires is one of cautious optimism. There is no sense of crisis, no fear that the program is unraveling. The government missed one target badly, but it is performing better now, and the Fund's leadership has already signaled that it sees progress worth supporting. What remains to be seen is whether the adjustments to come—to reserve targets, to fiscal goals, to the entire architecture of the program—can hold long enough for Argentina to reach the finish line. The billion-dollar disbursement is almost certainly coming. The harder question is what the program will look like when it does.
Notable Quotes
The focus will be on international reserve accumulation, which is what the government failed to meet by the largest margin. We'll see how they review it; I imagine they'll grant the waiver, but what happens matters because the USD 1 billion disbursement depends on it.— Camilo Tiscornia, director of C&T Asesores Económicos
It was a pleasure to have a brief exchange with Luis Caputo in Davos. I praised Argentina's solid economic performance and progress in reserve accumulation.— Kristalina Georgieva, IMF Managing Director
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the government miss the reserve target so badly in the fourth quarter?
They were caught between two imperatives. Building reserves requires selling pesos and buying dollars, which weakens the currency. But before elections, they needed the peso to look stable. So they chose politics over the target.
And the Fund accepted this explanation?
Not without some friction, but yes. The managing director herself posted about it positively. The Fund understands that election years create constraints. What matters now is whether the government can hit the new, lower targets.
So they just lowered the targets instead of holding Argentina accountable?
It's more nuanced. They adjusted them to reflect reality. The original targets were set before anyone fully grasped how volatile an election year would be. The Fund is pragmatic—it would rather have a program that works than one that looks perfect on paper but fails.
What about the fiscal target? Two percent of GDP sounds reasonable.
It does on the surface, but the government has already made spending commitments in Congress that make it nearly impossible. Economists are saying it will need to be revised upward—meaning a larger deficit than planned.
Is there any real risk the program falls apart?
Not at this moment. The government is performing better now, and the Fund's leadership is clearly supportive. But the program is fragile. It depends on continued political discipline and on the government's ability to navigate Congress without making promises it can't keep.
What happens if they miss again?
Then the conversation becomes much harder. Right now there is goodwill. That goodwill has limits.