Argentina Court Revives 15% Foreign Farmland Cap
COURTS · ARGENTINA
Key Facts
- —The country Argentina, a major farm exporter, has argued for years over how much of its rural land foreigners may own.
- —Why it matters US investors face new legal uncertainty: the rules on buying Argentine rural land have flipped twice in ten days.
- —Why now The government is reshaping its congressional strategy, and the opposition still wants a vote on Thursday, 15 October.
- —What happened On Friday, 9 October, the Supreme Court voted 4 to 1 to suspend the decree article that scrapped the 2011 Rural Land Law.
- —The numbers 15% national cap on foreign-owned rural land, 30% of that per nationality, 1,000 hectares per foreign owner in the core farm zone.
- —What it means for you Foreign land purchases fall under the old limits again until a federal judge in Bariloche rules.
- —Still open No court has ruled on whether the repeal decree is constitutional, and no date is set for the Bariloche decision.
Argentina’s foreign farmland cap is back in force, at least for now. On Friday, 9 October, the Supreme Court in Buenos Aires provisionally suspended the decree that had scrapped it, ten days after a ruling that had left foreign buyers free of limits.
For American investors, funds and private buyers, the message is simple. Rural land deals in Argentina again face the ownership limits of the 2011 Rural Land Law, and the final answer is still months of litigation away.
Over the weekend the fight moved to politics. President Javier Milei’s government, which scrapped the cap by emergency decree in December 2023 as part of its deregulation drive, is now rethinking its plans in Congress, the Buenos Aires daily Ámbito reported on Sunday in a story republished by Agencia Comunas.
What the Supreme Court Decided
The court issued what it called an interim injunction. It suspends Article 154 of Decree 70/2023, the clause that repealed Law 26.737 on rural land, until the competent judge rules.
That judge sits in the federal court of San Carlos de Bariloche, in Río Negro province, where the case began. The judge must first decide whether the plaintiffs have standing to sue, and then examine their request for an injunction.
The plaintiffs are the environmental group Asociación Civil Árbol de Pie, chaired by Río Negro politician Magdalena Odarda, and two indigenous communities, Lafkenche and Lof FVTA Anecon, Infobae reported. They argue the repeal threatens the right to a healthy environment in Article 41 of the Constitution.
The majority was signed by justices Horacio Rosatti and Ricardo Lorenzetti and by two stand-in judges, Diego Barroetaveña and Juan Ignacio Pérez Curci. The stand-ins were called in to form a majority because Rosenkrantz dissented, Chequeado reported.
The ruling does not decide whether the decree is constitutional. Chequeado, the Argentine fact-checking outlet, stressed that point, and so did the court itself.
Why the Court Changed Course in Ten Days
On Tuesday, 29 September, the same court threw out an earlier challenge brought by CECIM, a Falklands War veterans’ centre in La Plata. It found the veterans lacked standing, and that left the repeal in force and foreign buyers without limits.
That decision drew heavy criticism, an unusual public clarification from the court and a threat from the opposition to strike down the whole decree in Congress, La Nación reported.
The majority now says the two cases differ. CECIM argued on national sovereignty; Árbol de Pie argues on environmental and indigenous rights. The new decision “in no way” departs from the earlier one, the ruling says.
Justice Carlos Rosenkrantz, the court’s vice-president, dissented on the suspension. He wrote that “the mere generic reference to the environment cannot become an alibi” for judges to order injunctions. Public discontent with the earlier ruling, he added, does not justify decisions the Constitution does not allow.
Lorenzetti defended the ruling in an interview with the A24 news channel. He said that, whatever the criticism on social media, “we do not accept any pressure of that kind,” and noted that Congress had not dealt with the issue since a Senate debate in March 2024, Clarín reported.
What It Means for You
If you are a foreign individual or company, Law 26.737 and its foreign farmland cap apply again. Foreigners may hold no more than 15% of rural land nationally, and the same ceiling applies at provincial and municipal level.
No single nationality may hold more than 30% of that foreign share. One foreign owner may hold at most 1,000 hectares in the core farm zone, or an equivalent area elsewhere, Ámbito reported. Purchases of land with certain bodies of water and in border security zones are barred.
For US buyers, that means extra due diligence before signing. Lawyers will want to check whether a deal falls inside the caps, and whether any purchase agreed during the ten-day gap could be questioned later.
The stabiliser is that the restored rules are familiar. Argentina applied those limits for more than a decade after 2011, and foreign investors bought and held land throughout that period.
The earlier phase of this fight is covered in Argentina Court Speeds Case on 15% Foreign Farmland Cap and Argentina State Workers Strike Tuesday Over Land Ruling.
The Fight Moves to Congress
Opposition deputies still want a special session on Thursday, 15 October, to repeal all of Decree 70/2023, Fuego24 reported. The request is backed by Unión por la Patria, the main Peronist bloc, by parts of Provincias Unidas, by the left-wing Frente de Izquierda and by Argentina Federal lawmakers.
Inside the Casa Rosada, officials believe the ruling may cost that session its quorum, Ámbito reported. Their bet is that deputies who mainly wanted the land limits back now have less reason to attend.
The same report said the government had considered putting land rules into its bill on the inviolability of private property, drafted by the Deregulation Ministry led by Federico Sturzenegger. The option gaining ground is to postpone that debate while the court case runs.
What Is Not Known
It is not known when the Bariloche judge will rule on standing or on the injunction request. The Supreme Court set no deadline.
It is not clear how land sales signed between 29 September and 9 October will be treated, or whether any took place.
It is also unknown whether the opposition will reach a quorum on 15 October. Even if the decree fell in the lower house, it would also need to be rejected by the Senate.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can Americans buy farmland in Argentina right now?
Yes, but within the limits of the 2011 Rural Land Law, which applies again after the Supreme Court ruling of 9 October. That includes the 15% national cap and 1,000 hectares per foreign owner in the core farm zone.
Did the Supreme Court say Milei’s decree is unconstitutional?
No. The court only suspended the article that repealed the land law until a federal judge in Bariloche rules on the plaintiffs’ standing and their injunction request. The constitutional question remains open.
What happens next?
The case returns to the federal court in Bariloche. In parallel, opposition deputies want a session on 15 October to repeal the whole decree, though it is unclear whether they will reach a quorum.
Sources: Chequeado; Infobae; La Nación; Ámbito; Clarín; Agencia Comunas; Fuego24.
Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Editor-in-Chief · Editorial standards · Report an error