Is Argentina's citizenship by investment legal?

Argentina launched its Citizenship by Investment Programme in Paris on 2 October 2026. Three months earlier, one of the country’s national appeals courts had declared the decree behind it unconstitutional. Both facts are true at the same time, and an investor needs to understand how.

This page sets out the legal framework, the court decisions, the appeal and the possible outcomes. It is a neutral explainer. The scenarios below are analysis of possibilities, not predictions, and nothing here is legal advice.

The short answer

The programme has a legal basis in force today, according to the government. That basis is contested in the courts.

• The executive created the investment route by emergency decree, not by a law of Congress.
• A national appeals court has held that the decree is unconstitutional, because citizenship is tied to political rights, and the Constitution bars emergency decrees on electoral matters.
• The government has appealed and says the decree remains in effect while the ruling is not final.
• The Supreme Court has not ruled. Congress has not passed a citizenship-by-investment law.

Until one of those last two things happens, the legal position of the programme is open.

The legal building blocks

Three instruments matter. They are best read in order.

Ley 346: the starting point

For more than 150 years, naturalisation in Argentina has been a judicial process. The foreigner applies to a federal judge, who checks the residence requirement and other conditions. Ley 346 also contains special grounds, for example for people who establish a new industry in the country, but the general rule is residence first, then a court decision.

DNU 366/2025: the investment route

DNU 366/2025 changed two things that matter here. It gave the Dirección Nacional de Migraciones the power to grant citizenship by naturalisation, a power held by federal judges since 1869. And it added a new ground: a foreigner who makes a relevant investment can be naturalised regardless of time of residence. The Ministry of Economy defines what counts as relevant.

An emergency decree is a special instrument. Article 99(3) of the Constitution lets the President issue one only in exceptional circumstances, when the normal process for passing laws cannot be followed. It also lists subjects that are off limits, including electoral matters.

Reports also say the decree adds grounds to annul or lose naturalised citizenship, such as concealing facts or a conviction for trafficking or money laundering. We have not confirmed the exact wording, so treat this as reported rather than established.

Decreto 524/2025: the procedure

Decreto 524/2025, published in the Boletín Oficial on 31 July 2025, set the procedure for investment applications:

• The Agency is a decentralised body under the Ministry of Economy. It evaluates applications.
• It coordinates with Migraciones, the UIF (Financial Intelligence Unit), RENAPER (the national registry), SIDE (State Intelligence Secretariat), the Ministry of Justice and ARCA (the tax authority).
• Migraciones must decide within 30 days of receiving the Agency’s report.

The programme announced on 2 October 2026 follows this design. The Agency evaluates, several security and financial bodies take part, and Migraciones gives final approval. For the steps an applicant will go through, see how to apply.

The court rulings

Two appellate courts ruled against the decree in June 2026. Neither case was about an investor. Both were ordinary naturalisation cases in which a foreign resident challenged the new procedure.

18 June 2026: Federal Civil and Commercial Chamber

In Volosh, Yana s/ Solicitud de Carta de Ciudadanía, Chamber III of the Cámara Nacional de Apelaciones en lo Civil y Comercial Federal declared unconstitutional the provisions of DNU 366/2025 that took the power to grant citizenship away from federal judges. It found that the executive had not shown the exceptional circumstances that Article 99(3) requires, noting that Congress was in session when the decree was issued.

30 June 2026: Cámara Nacional Electoral

The more prominent ruling came from the Cámara Nacional Electoral, the national appeals court for electoral matters. The case was Yang, Liping s/ nacionalidad y ciudadanía, brought by a Chinese merchant who had lived in Oro Verde, Entre Ríos, for 11 years and whose application a federal court had rejected.

The Chamber’s reasoning, as reported by Perfil, Río Negro and other outlets:

• Citizenship is linked to political rights. Naturalisation gives a person the right to vote and to stand for office. That makes it an electoral matter.
• Article 99(3) bars emergency decrees on electoral matters. So the executive could not change the citizenship regime by DNU.
• The government’s reasons were not an emergency. Court backlogs and the need for more control were arguments of policy and convenience, suitable for an ordinary law, not the exceptional urgency the Constitution requires.

The Chamber declared DNU 366/2025 unconstitutional and ordered citizenship cases to go before federal judges with electoral jurisdiction under Ley 346. It told the Ministry of Security to instruct Migraciones on the scope of the ruling, and it sent the decision to every federal judge with electoral jurisdiction to unify criteria across the country.

What the rulings did not decide

Both cases concerned ordinary naturalisation, and the reports we reviewed focus on the transfer of power to Migraciones. They do not discuss the investment route directly. But the investment route was created by the same decree, and the programme gives final approval to the same body, Migraciones. How far the reasoning reaches the investment route is the central open question. Only the Supreme Court, or Congress, can settle it.

The appeal to the Supreme Court

On 1 July 2026, La Nación reported that the government would take the Cámara Nacional Electoral’s ruling to the Supreme Court. The appeal was to be filed by the legal department of the Ministry of Security.

The government’s position, as reported:

• The ruling is not final, because the time to appeal had not expired.
• The decree therefore remains in force in the meantime.
• The government would continue to develop the regulations regardless of the outcome in that court.

La Nación also reported that the government was expected to file an extraordinary appeal (recurso extraordinario), which the Chamber must first admit before the case reaches the Supreme Court. The newspaper reported that the court’s own view was that its ruling applies now. The two sides read the ruling’s immediate effect differently.

What has happened since July

We have checked for developments between 1 July and 2 October 2026.

• Supreme Court: we have found no Supreme Court ruling on DNU 366/2025, and no public timetable for one.
• New decree: we have not found a new decree or Ministry of Economy resolution published for the 2 October launch. The official announcement describes the programme but does not cite a new legal instrument.
• The launch itself: the government launched the programme in Paris on 2 October 2026 while the appeal was pending. The official release does not mention the court case.
• Congress: Congress has not passed a citizenship-by-investment law. On 2 October 2026 opposition deputy Agustín Rossi said he will present a bill to ban the programme.

We track each development on our live news page.

Three scenarios

The outcome could take several forms. The table below sets out three broad scenarios and what each could mean for applicants. This is analysis, not prediction. We do not know which scenario will occur or when, and the real outcome could combine elements of more than one.

Scenario A: the Court upholds the government

If the Supreme Court reverses the Chamber, the decree stands. The Agency and Migraciones would continue to process applications as designed, and grants would rest on a decree the highest court has approved.

Risk would not disappear. An emergency decree is easier to change than a law. A future government could amend or repeal it, and opponents could keep pressing for a ban in Congress.

Scenario B: the Court confirms the ruling

If the Supreme Court agrees with the Chamber, the key question becomes scope.

• If the Court strikes down only the transfer of power to Migraciones, naturalisation would return to federal judges. Investment applicants might have to go through a court process. That could be slower and less predictable than a 30-day administrative decision.
• If the Court’s reasoning reaches the whole decree, the “relevant investment” ground itself could fall. The programme would then need a new legal basis, most likely a law of Congress.

In either case, there is a further uncertainty: the position of anyone granted citizenship by Migraciones while the appeal was pending. We have found no official statement on how such grants would be treated.

Scenario C: Congress legislates

Congress can regulate citizenship by law. A statute on citizenship by investment would not face the objection that an emergency decree cannot touch electoral matters. That could give the programme a firmer base than it has today.

But a law is also an opportunity to change the programme. Congress could alter the amounts, add residence or other conditions, keep the judicial role, or refuse to authorise it at all. The bill announced by Agustín Rossi points in the last direction.

Timing

There is no published timetable for a Supreme Court decision. Applications are due to open in Q4 2026. It is possible that applications will open, and funds will move, before the legal question is resolved. Investors should plan on that basis.

What this means for applicants today

The practical effect is simple to state: anyone who applies early takes on legal risk that later applicants may not face.

That risk can be acceptable. Early applicants to new programmes sometimes benefit from lower demand and closer attention. But it should be a deliberate choice, made with clear information about what happens to your money if the programme is suspended or its legal basis changes.

Two points deserve particular attention:

• The contribution route is non-refundable. The official release describes the US$350,000 payment as non-refundable. Whether any refund applies if an application is rejected, or if the programme is suspended, has not been published as of 2 October 2026.
• The bond route returns capital only on its terms. Bond maturity and redemption mechanics are also unpublished. See our guide to costs for what is known.

How to protect yourself

1. Ask about refund and escrow terms when they are published. Find out whether funds are held in escrow until approval, and what happens if the programme is suspended, a court annuls the route, or your application is refused.
2. Separate the stages. Prefer a process in which due diligence is completed, or at least well advanced, before the main investment leaves your account.
3. Keep your documents current. Passports, police certificates, bank references and source-of-funds evidence expire or go stale. If the timetable slips, you will need to refresh them.
4. Take independent legal advice in Argentina. Ask a lawyer with no commission interest in your application for a written view on the court case and your position under each scenario.
5. Check your home country’s rules. A legal problem can arise at home too, for example if your country restricts dual citizenship. Our FAQ covers the common questions.
6. Watch the official sources. The Boletín Oficial, the Supreme Court and the Ministry of Economy will publish the decisive documents. Treat secondary reports, including ours, as a guide to those sources.

If you want an independent read of your position before you commit, you can request a private briefing.

Sources

• Government of Argentina, official programme announcement (2 October 2026): https://www.argentina.gob.ar/noticias/luis-caputo-anuncio-la-puesta-en-marcha-del-programa-de-ciudadania-por-inversion-de
• Ley 346, official text: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/normativa/nacional/ley-346-48854/texto
• Constitution of Argentina, official text (Art. 99): https://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/0-4999/804/norma.htm
• Abogados.com.ar, DNU 366/2025 and “relevant investments”: https://abogados.com.ar/ciudadania-argentina-por-realizacion-de-inversiones-relevantes/37304
• Palabras del Derecho, Decreto 524/2025 procedure: https://www.palabrasdelderecho.com.ar/articulo/6125/El-Gobierno-reglamento-el-acceso-a-la-ciudadania-de-extranjeros-que-realicen-grandes-inversiones
• Boletín Oficial, Decreto 524/2025 (31 July 2025): https://www.boletinoficial.gob.ar/detalleAviso/primera/329061/20250731
• Palabras del Derecho, Sala III ruling in the Volosh case: https://www.palabrasdelderecho.com.ar/articulo/6830/Declararon-la-inconstitucionalidad-de-los-articulos-del-DNU-que-trasladaron-a-Migraciones-el-tramite-de-ciudadania-
• Perfil, Cámara Nacional Electoral ruling: https://www.perfil.com/noticias/judiciales/la-camara-nacional-electoral-anulo-el-dnu-de-milei-sobre-ciudadania-y-migraciones-el-fallo-considero-la-medida-inconstitucional.phtml
• Río Negro, Cámara Nacional Electoral ruling: https://www.rionegro.com.ar/politica/la-camara-nacional-electoral-anulo-el-dnu-de-milei-que-otorgaba-a-migraciones-la-facultad-de-conceder-la-ciudadania-argentina-4631360/
• iProfesional, scope of the Cámara Nacional Electoral ruling: https://www.iprofesional.com/legales/458964-justicia-electoral-anulo-dnu-milei-cambiaba-ciudadania-genero-revuelo
• La Nación, government appeal to the Supreme Court (1 July 2026): https://www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/el-gobierno-ira-a-la-corte-en-un-intento-por-mantener-en-manos-de-migraciones-la-entrega-de-las-nid01072026/
• Urgente24, Agustín Rossi’s proposed bill: https://urgente24.com/actualidad/ciudadania-venta-la-alternativa-milei-para-la-extranjerizacion-tierras-n633976