Increasing Imports and Structural Dependence
During 2025, Argentina imported approximately 4.1 million tons of fertilizers, reaching the second-highest volume of the century and representing a 28% increase compared to the previous year, according to data from the Rosario Stock Exchange.
Beyond the magnitude of this figure, the data reflects a structural reality: Argentine agricultural production is becoming increasingly dependent on imported inputs in order to sustain its productivity levels. Nitrogen- and phosphate-based fertilizers, together with a significant portion of the agrochemicals used in the country, originate in international markets such as Russia, China, Morocco, the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
The war between Russia and Ukraine highlighted this dependence. Trade restrictions, logistical difficulties, and volatility in international prices demonstrated that geopolitical events can have a direct impact on local agricultural production.
However, the principal challenge is no longer merely economic.
The increased use of fertilizers and crop protection products is also accompanied by greater regulatory exposure, in a context in which national and provincial authorities have begun to strengthen enforcement and control mechanisms throughout the entire chain of commercialization and use of these products.
From the Product to Its Life Cycle: A New Regulatory Paradigm
For many years, the regulation of agrochemicals focused primarily on product authorization and the conditions governing their application.
Today, this approach is clearly insufficient.
Law No. 27,279 on the Comprehensive Management of Empty Phytosanitary Containers, enacted in 2016 and regulated by Decree No. 134/2018, introduced a paradigm shift by adopting the principle of extended producer responsibility, which is broadly recognized in modern environmental law.
Under this framework, legal obligations no longer fall exclusively upon the party that uses the product.
Manufacturers, importers, registrants, distributors, sellers, carriers, operators of temporary storage facilities, and applicators also assume specific responsibilities concerning the traceability, collection, transportation, and final disposal of empty containers.
The rationale behind the legislation is clear: the environmental risk associated with a phytosanitary product does not end with its commercialization or application, but extends throughout the product’s entire life cycle.
This shift means that regulatory compliance is no longer solely a matter for technical or production departments, but now also involves legal, compliance, logistics, and procurement functions.
The Case Study: Province of Buenos Aires
The practical implementation of this framework reached a turning point in the Province of Buenos Aires in 2021.
That year, the then Provincial Ministry of Environment initiated one of the most significant sanctioning proceedings since the enactment of Law No. 27,279. According to official information, 26 companies manufacturing and importing phytosanitary products were sanctioned, another 81 companies received formal warnings, and more than 260 companies were served with notices requiring compliance due to failures relating to the submission of management plans and sworn statements.
The figures underlying these proceedings are particularly illustrative.
While more than 13 million empty phytosanitary containers were commercialized in the Province of Buenos Aires during 2019, only approximately 8% were formally recovered through authorized systems during 2020.
Beyond the specific sanctions imposed, this precedent marked a change in enforcement policy. The obligations established under Law No. 27,279 ceased to be regarded merely as objectives subject to gradual implementation and became enforceable legal obligations.
The Trend Continues: Entre Ríos and Strengthened Enforcement
The developments observed in Buenos Aires are not an isolated occurrence.
During 2026, the Province of Entre Ríos imposed new administrative sanctions for the improper transportation and storage of empty phytosanitary containers, including fines exceeding ARS 38 million and ARS 36 million, respectively.
These precedents demonstrate that enforcement is no longer focused exclusively on the application of agrochemicals to crops. Current inspections cover a substantially broader range of matters, including operator registration, transportation, storage, container recovery, traceability, transaction records, and the final disposal of waste.
In other words, the subject matter of regulatory oversight has shifted from the product itself to the entire value chain.
Judicial Support
This trend is also supported by case law.
In Picorelli, Jorge Omar y otros c/ Municipalidad de General Pueyrredón s/ Inconstitucionalidad de Ordenanza N.º 21.296 (Supreme Court of Justice of the Province of Buenos Aires, Case No. I.72.669), the Supreme Court of Justice of the Province of Buenos Aires granted interim relief suspending a municipal ordinance that relaxed the restrictions applicable to the use of agrochemicals in areas located near urban settlements.
The relevance of this precedent lies not only in the interim decision itself, but also in the principles articulated by the Court.
The Court reaffirmed the full applicability of the preventive, precautionary, and progressive protection principles established under the General Environmental Law (Law No. 25,675), emphasizing that public policies should not result in an unjustified reduction of previously attained levels of environmental protection.
The message is clear: the regulatory and judicial trend appears to be moving toward more stringent requirements rather than a relaxation of controls. Accordingly, it is reasonable to expect that regulatory enforcement concerning agrochemicals, fertilizers, and related waste will continue to intensify in the coming years.
Legal and Regulatory Risks
This scenario presents legal challenges that are often not adequately identified by companies operating in the sector.
Potential liabilities are no longer limited to the possibility of an administrative fine. Depending on the circumstances, administrative, civil, environmental, and even criminal liabilities may coexist.
In addition, there are contractual risks arising from the inadequate allocation of responsibilities among manufacturers, importers, distributors, carriers, agricultural contractors, and producers, as well as potential reputational risks associated with non-compliance with environmental standards and ESG criteria.
Ultimately, regulatory risk is no longer confined to the application of the product, but extends throughout the entire operation.
What Does Proper Legal Structuring Mean in Practice?
The increasing complexity of the regulatory framework demonstrates that compliance with environmental regulations can no longer be addressed exclusively from an operational perspective.
In many cases, contingencies do not arise because a company has deliberately acted outside the law, but because it lacks a legal and documentary framework enabling it to demonstrate compliance with its obligations or properly allocate responsibilities among the various participants in the supply chain.
Against this backdrop, proper legal structuring requires a comprehensive review of the operation rather than merely an analysis of the applicable regulations.
From this perspective, at least six areas should be assessed.
A. Review the Contractual Allocation of Responsibilities
A significant portion of transactions involving agrochemicals and fertilizers involves multiple participants, including importers, manufacturers, distributors, carriers, agricultural contractors, applicators, and producers.
Nevertheless, contracts frequently allocate commercial risks appropriately while failing to regulate with sufficient precision the environmental and regulatory obligations of each party.
Proper contractual structuring should define, among other matters:
- who assumes the obligations arising under Law No. 27,279;
- who is responsible for the management and recovery of empty containers;
- the information and cooperation obligations applicable to each participant;
- the indemnification mechanisms applicable in the event of regulatory breaches; and
- how liability will be allocated in connection with potential administrative sanctions or third-party claims.
Proper contractual allocation does not eliminate risk, but it does help reduce disputes and strengthen the legal position of the parties.
B. Strengthen Traceability and Document Management
Recent enforcement activity demonstrates that environmental inspections do not focus exclusively on verifying substantive compliance with applicable obligations, but also examine whether a company is able to adequately document such compliance.
Accordingly, companies should consider implementing internal procedures that ensure the preservation of sufficient evidence concerning the acquisition of products, their transportation, delivery to the various operators, the recovery and return of empty containers, the use of duly authorized operators, and compliance with management plans required under applicable regulations.
In environmental matters, the difference between an adequate defense and a significant sanction often lies in the quality of the documentation available.
C. Incorporate Environmental Compliance into the Compliance Framework
Traditionally, corporate compliance programs have focused primarily on the prevention of economic crimes, corruption, and money laundering. However, regulatory developments demonstrate that environmental compliance is assuming an increasingly significant role within comprehensive corporate risk management.
Accordingly, companies should consider incorporating specific procedures relating to storage, transportation, waste management, internal controls, periodic audits, employee training, and the ongoing review of regulatory compliance.
This approach makes it possible to identify potential breaches at an early stage and reduce the company’s exposure in the event of administrative inspections.
D. Audit Critical Third Parties
One of the most sensitive aspects of Law No. 27,279 is that liability may involve multiple participants throughout the supply chain.
Therefore, an adequate risk-management policy should not be limited to internal compliance.
It is also advisable to periodically verify that distributors, carriers, logistics operators, and contractors hold all permits, registrations, and procedures required under applicable regulations.
Proper selection and oversight of third parties has become a relevant tool for reducing regulatory contingencies.
E. Review Insurance Coverage and Response Protocols
Administrative sanctions do not always represent the principal economic risk. Depending on the circumstances, civil claims, environmental damage, injunctive measures, suspension of operations, or reputational harm may also arise.
Accordingly, companies should periodically review their environmental insurance coverage, internal incident-response protocols, procedures for responding to inspections, and the allocation of responsibilities within the organization.
F. Train Personnel and Foster a Culture of Compliance
Finally, no legal framework will be sufficient if those involved in day-to-day operations are unaware of the applicable regulatory obligations.
Periodic training for employees and contractors is an essential tool for reducing operational errors and strengthening a culture of compliance.
In a context of increasing regulatory enforcement, prevention remains the most effective tool for minimizing contingencies.
Conclusion: From Regulatory Compliance to Strategic Risk Management
Regulatory developments, recent enforcement precedents, and the case law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Province of Buenos Aires indicate a clear trend: regulatory risk associated with agrochemicals and fertilizers is likely to continue increasing.
The challenge for companies is no longer limited to complying with the applicable regulations.
Today, it is equally important to have a legal framework capable of properly structuring operations, allocating responsibilities, documenting compliance, and demonstrating to the competent authorities that the procedures required by law have actually been implemented.
In this context, early involvement of legal counsel is no longer merely reactive, but has assumed a preventive and strategic role. Reviewing contracts, implementing environmental compliance policies, strengthening traceability, and maintaining adequate documentation not only help reduce exposure to administrative sanctions, but also strengthen a company’s position in the event of civil claims, environmental investigations, and audit processes.
Ultimately, the growing use of imported fertilizers and agrochemicals, combined with strengthened administrative enforcement and the development of increasingly stringent environmental case law, confirms that the legal management of these operations has become an essential component of business strategy and the long-term sustainability of agribusiness operations.
Sources
- Rosario Stock Exchange, Weekly Report (2025).
- National Constitution, Article 41.
- Law No. 25,675 (General Environmental Law).
- Law No. 27,279 on the Comprehensive Management of Empty Phytosanitary Containers.
- Decree No. 134/2018.
- Communications issued by the Ministry of Environment of the Province of Buenos Aires concerning the implementation of Law No. 27,279.
- Government of Entre Ríos, communications concerning sanctions for the improper transportation and storage of empty phytosanitary containers (2026).
- Supreme Court of Justice of the Province of Buenos Aires, Picorelli, Jorge Omar y otros c/ Municipalidad de General Pueyrredón s/ Inconstitucionalidad de Ordenanza N.º 21.296, Case No. I.72.669.
Author: Camila Cairatti – Abeledo Gottheil Abogados