The discussion about the distribution of federal taxes comes up every time the national collection figures and the way they are distributed among the provinces are examined. Behind a regime that gained constitutional status in 1994 but is still governed by a law passed in 1988, the Province of Buenos Aires (PBA) presents a historic imbalance: it donates more than it receives and suffers from a system that neither reflects its economic weight nor its population. The gap is disclosed in every technical report and comparison table.
According to a report by the Federal Tax Sharing Commission, which depends on the nation’s Senate chaired by the radical Chaco Víctor Zimmermann and several former governors, the national average per capita was $119,521 when dividing the amount transferred in October of this year by the population of the last census. However, the province only received $71,185 per person. Only the city of Buenos Aires is lower at $38,447. At the other end are Tierra del Fuego with $342,511 and Catamarca with $324,886 per resident. Per capita, the difference between Buenos Aires and the most advantaged provinces is more than 350%. The scheme therefore shows a distribution that is not related to the number of inhabitants or the effective demand for services.
The contrast is heightened when the distribution is measured based on the minimum wage, living wage and mobile wage (SMVM). Due to its enormous population, the district now governed by Axel Kicillof leads the table with 3,874,055 units, followed by Santa Fe with 1,458,647 and Córdoba with 1,420,485. But absolute volume does not reflect equity: More residents force local governments to support more schools, more hospitals, more routes, and more basic services.
Tierra del Fuego, Santa Cruz and Chubut, which receive 197,563, 255,940 and 260,096 SMVM respectively, have very low population densities but receive significantly higher transfers per capita.
An analysis of remittances for the month shows that the Buenos Aires area received 22.74% of the total (due to the inclusion of other taxes, such as withholding taxes, on the original 19.93%), almost three times what Santa Fe (8.56%) and Córdoba (8.34%) received. However, it is still far from a level that compensates for the size of its population, which accounts for almost 38% of the country’s total population. The jurisdictions with the smallest demographic size appear at the bottom of the table: Santa Cruz at 1.5% and Tierra del Fuego at 1.16%.
The residents of the province of Buenos Aires contribute about 33% of the resources that make up the shareable mass. The nation appropriates 43% of the communicable mass and the provinces as a whole the remaining 57%. For this reason, the state only receives 13% of the total co-participation amount. These data show that the Province of Buenos Aires receives only 1 out of every 3 pesos that it contributes to the co-participation pool.
Law 23,548, the basis of the current system, is an “agreement law” and can only be amended by an agreement of the same category, which must be approved by an absolute majority of both houses and ratified by the provincial legislature. The constitutional reform of 1994 attempted to give the system a horizon of stability and to establish distribution criteria based on the principles of justice and solidarity. It also introduced the obligation to adopt a new law that would replace the transitional regime that had been consolidated since 1934. This order has not yet been fulfilled. Three decades later, co-participation continues to be based on coefficients that were established almost forty years ago.
In practice, national funding is essential for most provinces. In 2024 they accounted for 52% of current income, up from 50.4% the previous year. But the dependency is very uneven. Formosa is at the top of the list: 91.9% of its income depends on these transfers. This is followed by Santiago del Estero with 88.8%, La Rioja with 86.6%, Chaco with 84.3%, Catamarca with 81.2% and Corrientes with another 81.2%.
At the opposite extreme are CABA with 9.7%, Neuquén with 18.3% and the province of Buenos Aires with 46%, which is significantly higher but still among the least dependent.
This figure highlights Buenos Aires’ own collection capacity, but also the burden associated with financing services and works for a population of more than 17.5 million inhabitants.
The sixth transitional clause expresses the will to abandon the exceptional regime and move towards a new map of financial relations. The promise never came true. Without a comprehensive update and without a federal agreement that takes into account objective parameters based on population, basic needs and collection capacity, the structure continues to introduce profound distortions.
For the province of Buenos Aires, the implications are clear: it donates much more than it receives, it supports services for the country’s largest population with a share of resources that does not correspond to this scale, it offsets with its own collection what does not come from the nation, and faces constant budget tensions. Co-participation acts as a structural cap that determines infrastructure, investments and the expansion of public policies.
The debate keeps coming back because the inequality is obvious. The numbers show it clearly: while some small jurisdictions receive more than four times what a resident of Buenos Aires receives per capita, the country’s most populous province remains tied to a distribution defined in a different political, economic and demographic context. The system waits for an update that never arrives, reproducing the same differences year after year.
The residents of Buenos Aires Province contribute about 33% of the resources
The difference between Buenos Aires and the most benefited provinces is over 350 percent
About The Author
