On 2 July, Chamber B of the Federal Court of Appeals of Mendoza declared admissible the extraordinary federal appeal filed by the National Government in the case COLGATE PALMOLIVE ARGENTINA S.A. v. National Customs Directorate (Dirección General de Aduanas – DGA) s/ Declaratory Action Seeking a Declaration of Unconstitutionality, challenging the judgment that had declared Sections 1 and 2 of Decree No. 332/2019 unconstitutional. That decree had increased the Statistical Tax rate applicable to imports from 0.5% to 2.5%. The case has now been referred to the Argentine Supreme Court of Justice, which will decide the merits of the dispute.
The National Treasury argued that the decree is legally grounded in the delegation of authority set forth in Sections 762 through 766 of the Customs Code, which empower the Executive Branch to establish and amend the applicable Statistical Tax rate. It further challenged the lower court’s decision as arbitrary and asserted that it seriously undermines public revenue, thereby giving rise to an issue of institutional significance. In addition, the Treasury maintained that the doctrine established by the Supreme Court in Camaronera Patagónica is inapplicable to the present case.
It should be recalled that, following the enactment of Decree No. 332/2019, Law No. 27,541 extended the Statistical Tax through 31 December 2020, and Law No. 27,591 further extended its application through 31 December 2021, both establishing a 3% rate. Thereafter, Congress enacted no further extensions, and the tax expired. Nevertheless, the Executive Branch reinstated the Statistical Tax through Decree No. 901/2021 (effective until 31 December 2024) and subsequently through Decree No. 1140/2024 (effective until 31 December 2027).
For its part, the plaintiff argued that no genuine federal question exists, contending that the National Government merely disagrees with the Court of Appeals’ interpretation of the applicable legal provisions. It further maintained that the 500% increase in the Statistical Tax rate bears no reasonable relationship to the actual cost of the statistical services provided, that the delegation of authority under Section 764 of the Customs Code fails to establish a sufficiently clear legislative policy, and that the Statistical Tax is inconsistent with Article VIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).
In granting the extraordinary appeal, the Court of Appeals held that the challenged judgment constitutes a final decision and that the case raises a federal question within the meaning of Section 14(3) of Law No. 48, given that it involves the interpretation of the Customs Code and Decree No. 332/2019, as well as the significant legal and economic implications of the matter.
This case adds to a recent line of judicial decisions—including Dass Argentina and DAK Americas, among others—holding the increase in the Statistical Tax unconstitutional due to the absence of a valid legislative delegation. The issue carries substantial economic significance: in 2025 alone, the Statistical Tax generated approximately ARS 1.07 trillion in revenue, making it the third most significant source of customs revenue.
The Supreme Court’s decision will be critical not only for importers seeking refunds of amounts allegedly overpaid but also because it will provide the Court with an opportunity to establish a uniform standard regarding the constitutional limits of legislative delegation in tax matters.