{"id":130316,"date":"2026-03-10T13:13:39","date_gmt":"2026-03-10T13:13:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=130316"},"modified":"2026-03-10T13:43:06","modified_gmt":"2026-03-10T13:43:06","slug":"argentina-fintech","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/argentina-fintech\/","title":{"rendered":"Argentina: Fintech"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-130316","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-fintech","jurisdictions-argentina"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Salaberren &amp; Lopez Sanson (SyLS)<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/09\/Logo-SyLS.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Salaberren &amp; Lopez Sanson (SyLS)<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2025\/09\/Logo-SyLS.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of Fintech laws and regulations applicable in Argentina<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Who are the primary regulators overseeing fintechs in your jurisdiction, and how are regulatory boundaries evolving as innovation crosses traditional lines between payments, lending, wealth, and digital assets?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Fintech regulation in Argentina is shared primarily among three authorities. The National Securities Commission (CNV) acts as the capital markets regulator and, since recent legislative and regulatory reforms, also exercises direct supervisory authority over virtual asset services providers (PSAV) and the applicable PSAV Registry. The Central Bank (BCRA) regulates payment systems, payment service providers (PSP) and payment service providers that provide payment accounts (PSPCP), and has been designated as the implementing authority for the Open Finance framework. The Financial Information Unit (UIF) serves as the enforcement authority for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML\/CFT) supervision across fintech sectors.<\/p>\n<p>Regulatory boundaries are evolving rapidly through a functional approach, where rules apply to any entity performing a regulated function regardless of its status as a bank or a fintech firm. Activities that previously fell outside formal oversight\u2014such as crypto custody, digital asset brokerage, or data-driven financial services\u2014are now subject to detailed, activity-specific regulation. The CNV\u2019s assumption of direct authority over PSAV and over tokenised securities has created a convergence between capital markets regulation and crypto regulation, while the BCRA\u2019s role in open finance expands its influence beyond traditional banking and payments. As a result, fintechs increasingly face multi-regulator oversight, particularly where payment, digital asset and capital markets functions are combined within a single business model.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">As regulators adopt different rules for digital assets, AI, and consumer protection, what key regulatory and operational challenges could slow fintech innovation and growth in your jurisdiction over the next 12 months?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The main challenge for fintech innovation in Argentina over the next 12 months lies not in regulatory hostility, but in regulatory fragmentation. The rapid succession of new rules governing PSAV, tokenisation, payment services and open finance has significantly raised compliance costs, particularly for early-stage companies. Fintechs must navigate overlapping requirements imposed by the CNV, BCRA and UIF, often without the benefit of consolidated guidance or a single supervisory interlocutor.<\/p>\n<p>Operationally, the increasing focus on cybersecurity, operational resilience and AML\/CFT compliance presents additional barriers to entry. Regulators expect fintechs to implement systems and controls comparable, in certain respects, to those of traditional financial institutions. For smaller firms, the cost and complexity of meeting these expectations may delay product launches or discourage experimentation. In parallel, while consumer protection standards and disclosure obligations strengthen market integrity, they increase legal risk and time-to-market and may slow innovation if not accompanied by further regulatory coordination or proportionality.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are fintechs generally required to obtain licenses or registrations to operate in your jurisdiction, and if so, which activities typically trigger those requirements (e.g., lending, payments, digital assets custody)?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Fintechs are generally required to obtain licences or registrations in Argentina when they engage in regulated financial activities. There is no general fintech licence; instead, authorisation requirements are activity-based:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>PSP and PSPCP, non-financial credit providers (PNFC) that exceed specific lending thresholds, providers of credit services between individuals through platforms (PSCPP), as well as firms that carry out payment initiation, acquiring, and aggregation, trigger mandatory registration with the BCRA.<\/li>\n<li>PSAVs must register with the CNV under the PSAV Registry when they offer services such as exchange, transfer, custody or administration of virtual assets and participation and provision of financial services related to the issuance and sale of virtual assets.<\/li>\n<li>In the capital markets sphere, the issuance, placement, trading or custody of publicly offered securities as well as crowdfunding platforms require CNV authorisation. This requirement extends to securities represented digitally under the current tokenisation regime.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there emerging cross-functional or omnibus licensing regimes, such as those inspired by the U.S. GENIUS Act, the EU MiCA\/DORA frameworks, or similar integrated models, that allow a single license to cover multiple fintech activities?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Argentina has not adopted an omnibus or cross-functional fintech licensing regime comparable to MiCA, DORA or proposals such as the U.S. GENIUS Act. The regulatory model remains firmly activity-based, with separate registrations and compliance frameworks applying to payments, virtual assets, capital markets and data-sharing services. Although recent reforms have expanded the scope of certain regimes\u2014most notably the PSAV framework and the tokenisation rules\u2014these expansions have not resulted in a unified licence covering multiple activities. This functional regulatory model provides that a single legal entity can register for multiple activities where applicable.<\/p>\n<p>That said, the breadth of the PSAV regime and the central role assigned to PSAV in tokenised securities offerings signal a trend toward greater functional integration under CNV supervision. Similarly, the Open Finance framework may, over time, create a more cohesive regulatory perimeter for data-driven financial services. For now, however, fintechs must manage multiple licences or registrations where they operate across sectors.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How have regulatory sandboxes, innovation offices, or digital-testing frameworks matured in 2025, and what measurable impact have they had on time-to-market or capital formation for fintech start-ups?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Argentina has not adopted a formal, cross-sector fintech sandbox. Instead, sandbox-style mechanisms have been embedded within specific regulatory initiatives. The most prominent example is the tokenisation regime introduced by the CNV \u2013through Resolutions 1069\/2025 (Phase 1), 1081\/2025 (Phase 2) and 1087\/2025 (Phase 3)\u2013, which operates under a defined sandbox framework scheduled to run until August 2026. This regime allows issuers and intermediaries to test digital representation of securities within a controlled environment, subject to enhanced disclosure and supervisory oversight.<\/p>\n<p>This framework has had a significant impact by allowing the digital representation of shares, corporate bonds, investment funds, participations in trusts, and Argentine Depositary Receipts (CEDEARs) in a controlled environment. It enables issuers to request tokenisation authorisation simultaneously with their public offering request, reducing the administrative lag for new products (particularly following Phase 3 reforms). This &#8216;learning by doing&#8217; approach has fostered public-private dialogue, exemplified by the Argentine Fintech Chamber\u2019s proposal for tokenising real-world assets.<\/p>\n<p>Similarly, the phased implementation of open finance can be seen as a form of controlled testing, allowing the BCRA to refine standards before full-scale deployment. These mechanisms have helped mitigate regulatory uncertainty, even if they have not dramatically shortened approval timelines.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are regulators adapting their supervisory approaches (e.g., RegTech-enabled supervision, API-based reporting) to oversee fintechs operating across jurisdictions or with embedded finance models?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Argentine regulators are increasingly adopting more proactive supervisory approaches, although supervision remains at an early stage. The CNV and BCRA have expanded reporting obligations for fintechs and have shown greater willingness to conduct targeted inspections and information requests, particularly in relation to AML\/CFT, cybersecurity and operational resilience.<\/p>\n<p>The BCRA has pioneered API-based reporting by making available interfaces for developers to access data on debtors&#8217; registries, exchange market statistics, and monetary variables. This shift allows for more efficient, real-time access to information.<\/p>\n<p>In the PSAV sector, the CNV requires PSAVs to operate through the Financial Information Highway (AIF) for all reporting and compliance filings. PSAVs are also mandated to implement information security policies and undergo annual systems audits. For cross-border supervision, the UIF (through Resolution 49\/2024) requires PSAVs to identify and mitigate risks associated by international flows, aligning local supervision with FATF standards.<\/p>\n<p>In embedded finance models, where fintech services are integrated into non-financial platforms, regulators focus on functional responsibility and accountability rather than corporate form. While API-based regulatory reporting is not yet standardised, the Open Finance framework is likely to accelerate the adoption of more technology-enabled supervisory tools over time.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How do your jurisdiction\u2019s securities, commodities, and banking regulators interpret tokenization, DeFi, and stablecoin products under the current legal landscape, particularly in light of the U.S. state-level stablecoin acts and MiCA implementation in the EU?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Argentine regulators distinguish clearly between tokenisation of regulated financial instruments and decentralised finance (DeFi). Tokenisation, as regulated by the CNV, is interpreted as the digital representation of traditional securities within the existing capital markets legal framework. It does not create a new and distinct asset class and does not displace the application of securities law. Under the current regime, shares, corporate bonds, and CEDEARs can be tokenised, provided they maintain functional equivalence with their traditional counterparts.<\/p>\n<p>By contrast, DeFi arrangements that lack identifiable intermediaries or issuers are not expressly and specifically regulated under current Argentine law, although activities performed by identifiable service providers may trigger PSAV obligations.<\/p>\n<p>In regard to stablecoins \u2013which are frequently used by residents as a store of value due to inflation and exchange controls\u2013, they are not subject to a dedicated prudential regime; however, entities involved in their custody, transfer or exchange may fall within the PSAV framework and be subject to AML\/CFT and consumer protection rules. Argentina has not imposed specific reserve or issuance requirements for stablecoins. The BCRA has taken a cautious stance, previously prohibiting financial institutions and PSPCPs from facilitating crypto-asset transactions, although it is expected that this position will be flexibilized during this year. However, the tokenisation regime allows for the potential use of stablecoins for the settlement of tokenised securities, subject to the investor&#8217;s express instruction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the AML\/CFT and travel-rule obligations for virtual asset service providers currently, and how do they apply to \u201cnon-custodial\u201d or \u201cself-hosted wallet\u201d models?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>PSAVs must register with the UIF, performing customer due diligence, implementing transaction monitoring and risk assessments with a RBA, and reporting of suspicious transactions (ROS). These obligations outlined in UIF Resolution 49\/2024 are aligned with FATF standards and apply regardless of the technology used. PSAVs must also implement the travel rule, although regulators have been in a transitional compliance phase during the past year.<\/p>\n<p>Regarding non-custodial or self-hosted wallet models and decentralised protocols without an identifiable provider, they are excluded from the PSAV registration regime. However, registered PSAVs must still verify the source of funds when interacting with such wallets as part of their due diligence. The UIF may consider some transactions related to self-custodial wallets as \u2018High-Risk\u2019, in which case the PSAV must decide, based on their internal risk matrix, whether to report the transaction on a case-by-case basis.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What new prudential or reserve requirements are being imposed on stablecoin issuers or custodians?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Argentine regulatory framework has not created a dedicated stablecoin issuer or custodial prudential regime. Nonetheless, PSAVs acting as custodians (Category 4) must comply with minimum net worth requirements of USD 150,000; if the volume of traded assets under custody is less than USD 2,500,000 in the previous 12 months, the minimum net worth required may be reduced by 50%. Additionally, clients\u2019 assets must be held in a way that is strictly segregated from the PSAV\u2019s own assets.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How focused are regulators in your jurisdiction on data privacy, cybersecurity, and operational resilience for fintechs, and what enforcement or inquiry trends are emerging?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Data privacy, cybersecurity and operational resilience are core regulatory priorities for regulators in Argentina. The Agency of Access to Public Information (AAIP) enforces data privacy under the Personal Data Protection Law 25,326, while the BCRA and CNV have established specific cybersecurity standards. CNV Resolution 1058\/2025 mandates that PSAVs implement management policies for cybersecurity risks, including prevention, detection, and recovery procedures. Accordingly, PSPs must comply with BCRA standards on system security and incident management, and they have been included within the scope of compliance obligations the BCRA\u2019s cybersecurity standards as per recently issued Communication \u201cA\u201d 8398 The Open Finance System, instituted by Decree No. 353\/2025 and overseen by the BCRA, will probably elevate these concerns by requiring secure data-sharing mechanisms and robust consent management.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What practical steps should cryptocurrency and blockchain companies take to detect and prevent fraudulent transactions, and how can they prepare for regulatory audits, inquiries, and enforcement actions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Cryptocurrency and blockchain companies operating in Argentina should prioritise the implementation of robust AML\/CFT systems tailored to the specific risks of virtual assets. This includes enhanced transaction monitoring, clear customer risk profiling and documented procedures for identifying suspicious activity, utilisation of blockchain analytics to trace the origin of assets and screen against local and global sanctions lists, maintenance of documented manuals for risk management and incident response. Firms should also invest in cybersecurity measures and maintain detailed records to support auditability.<\/p>\n<p>Preparation for regulatory audits requires clear governance structures, up-to-date policies and procedures, and the ability to demonstrate compliance in practice. Specifically, PSAVs must ensure that all KYC records and transaction data are preserved for at least 10 years, appoint a Compliance Officer and a Public Relations Officer, and keep a Register of Unusual Operations that tracks the resolution of every alert, to demonstrate the effectiveness of AML\/CFT systems. Given the CNV\u2019s expanded supervisory powers over PSAV, proactive engagement with regulators and periodic internal reviews can help mitigate enforcement risk.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are fintechs adapting to changing immigration frameworks, such as revisions to U.S. H-1B and digital nomad visas in the EU and Asia, to attract tech and compliance talent globally?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>While Argentina does not have a dedicated \u2018Tech Visa\u2019 like some jurisdictions, fintechs operating in Argentina can rely on general immigration and labour laws when recruiting foreign talent. For this, they can leverage two existing categories under the Migration Law 25,871: (a) the Temporary Residency for Migrant Workers, or (b) the Specialized Personnel &amp; Scientists permit. Both temporary residencies are granted for an initial term of one year, renewable up to three years. This strategy serves as an effective pathway for retention because it offers a path to long-term stability: after three years of continuous residence (or two years for Mercosur nationals), the temporary residents become eligible for Permanent Residency based on permanence in Argentina.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What new geopolitical or sanctions-related risks (e.g., digital asset restrictions, AML screening mandates) have emerged that affect fintech operations in cross-border markets?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The primary risk for Argentine fintechs in 2026 is the heightened scrutiny on opaque payment chains involving crypto-assets. Following the FATF Mutual Evaluation Report published in December 2024, Argentina tightened its AML controls through the UIF Resolution 49\/2024 and the CNV Resolution N\u00b0 1058\/2025. Local fintechs processing cross-border payments must now screen against the local Public Registry of Persons and Entities Related to Terrorism and its Financing (RePET) and against the Politically Exposed Persons (PEP) list. Failure to comply risks effective exclusion from the local PSAV Registry and the U.S. correspondent banking network, as global partners increasingly de-risk jurisdictions with perceived gaps in crypto-asset oversight.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How do immigration and workforce-mobility policies\u2014like work visas, remote-work permits, and intra-company transfers\u2014affect fintechs\u2019 ability to move key staff into new markets, and what practical steps can companies take to avoid talent shortages or delays?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\">In Argentina, the ability to move key staff depends on navigating a system that lacks a \u2018fast-track\u2019 tech visa but offers stable long-term alternatives. For intra-company transfers of executive or highly technical staff, fintechs can rely on the two temporary residency regimes previously described: (a) the Temporary Residency for Migrant Workers, or (b) the Specialized Personnel &amp; Scientists permit. It is recommended that legal teams initiate the extension of the initial 1-year permit well in advance, as the law allows for extensions up to a total of 3 years before requiring the transition to permanent status. The most critical step for any fintech entering the Argentine market and planning to hire foreign staff is to ensure their local entity is registered with the National Registry of Foreign Applicants (RENURE). Without this, the company cannot legally sponsor foreign personnel.<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How do immigration rules and visa limitations influence the speed and strategy of fintech market entry, particularly when launching operations in multiple jurisdictions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Argentine framework requires a localized corporate structure before any talent can be legally moved to the country. Thus, the primary influence on speed is the mandatory registration with the chosen jurisdiction\u2019s Public Registry of Commerce, followed by registration with RENURE. This often means that \u2018soft launching\u2019 with foreign staff on tourist visas is legally risky, as local regulation strictly prohibits paid work for those in such status. However, while initial entry may be slow due to administrative requirements, the Argentine regime encourages the possibility of permanent residence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How can fintechs protect their proprietary algorithms and smart-contract code, balancing open-source use with trade-secret protections and any AI-related disclosure rules?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Fintechs in Argentina balance protection through three primary legal mechanisms. Firstly, under Intellectual Property Law 11,723, software is protected under copyright laws from the moment of creation. Formal registration with the National Office of Copyright (DNDA) may also be used for evidentiary purposes. Secondly, under the Confidentiality Law 24,766, algorithms and functional logic that cannot be copyrighted are protected as Trade Secret, that is, when algorithms do not meet the originality threshold for copyright but have commercial value. To maintain this protection, fintechs must implement reasonable measures to ensure secrecy, such as encryption, strict access controls, and non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). Thirdly, while there is no specific AI Act in Argentina, fintechs are recommended to comply with the Agency for Access to Public Information (AAIP) Resolution 161\/2023 and the complementary Guide for Responsible AI Use (issued in September, 2024), which provides guidelines for transparent and explainable AI. This requires balancing Trade Secret with the obligation to provide meaningful information to users about automated decision-making logic.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What strategies are most effective for safeguarding trademarks and digital brands in an era of AI-generated impersonation, deepfakes, and synthetic media fraud?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Effective strategies in Argentina for safeguarding trademarks and digital brands in an AI-drive era include: registering brands across multiple classes at the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI), therefore providing the legal basis to take down fraudulent apps or sites; proactive monitoring for trademark look-alikes or phonetically similar brands to prevent consumer confusion caused by AI-generated fraud; and complying with Consumer Protection Law 24,240 to act against deepfakes or impersonation that mislead financial consumers, as regulators prioritize transparency and equitability in digital transactions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">When fintechs collaborate with outside developers, partners, or open-source communities, how can they make sure they retain ownership of their technology and avoid disputes?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>To ensure ownership and avoid disputes, Argentine fintechs should include clear assignment of intellectual property clauses in all contracts with outside developers, partners or open-source communities, as under Argentine law, the default ownership of software created by independent contractors may otherwise remain with the author. Additionally, fintechs should ensure that all external partners sign Non-Disclosure Agreements agreements before accessing any proprietary algorithmic logic or databases.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What steps should fintechs take to detect, prevent, and respond to competitors or third parties who might copy or misuse their technology, algorithms, or branding, and how do enforcement strategies differ across jurisdictions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>For detection, fintechs should conduct regular audits of the market and app stores for similar functional logic or branding. Fintechs should additionally implement technical \u2018lock\u2019 measures and legal \u2018certain date\u2019 protocols, such as digital signatures on development contracts, to prove priority of creation in eventual court proceedings. Finally, regarding general enforcement, it often involves administrative actions through the INPI (for trademarks) or civil litigation for IP infringement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How should fintechs approach IP protection when licensing or selling software, smart contracts, or AI models to ensure ongoing control and compliance with different countries\u2019 laws?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>When licensing technology internationally, fintechs should use License Agreements that strictly limit the right to decompile or reverse-engineer the software, as well as ensure that the licensed technology complies with local financial regulations and that any AI model or software that processes personal data complies with applicable data protection laws, particularly regarding the international transfer of data when licensing to other countries.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Under emerging AI-governance frameworks, such as the EU AI Act and U.S. GENIUS Act, what legal obligations apply to fintechs using AI in underwriting, robo-advisory, and fraud protection?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>While Argentina has not adopted a comprehensive AI Act, fintechs are subject to existing general regulations. Under local consumer protection regulation, firms must provide clear, non-misleading information to consumers, including information regarding AI. In the capital markets context, although robo-advisory is not regulated as a standalone activity, CNV Resolution No. 1048\/2025 establishes the regulatory infrastructure that enables its lawful operation within the structure of an authorized agent. The resolution expressly permits digital order capture through platforms, apps, APIs, and third-party systems, while imposing strict requirements on client identification, traceability, data integrity, contingency planning, and mandatory external system audits. Importantly, regulated agents remain fully liable for technological contingencies and third-party tools, reinforcing professional conduct duties, investor protection, and alignment with BCRA security standards for fintech-related services.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How can fintechs evidence algorithmic fairness, explainability, and bias mitigation in compliance with new supervisory expectations for automated credit and AML decisioning systems?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Fintechs can evidence compliance with supervisory expectations by following the AAIP\u2019s Guide for Responsible AI Use which emphasizes \u2018explainability\u2019, recommending companies to provide meaningful information about the logic behind automated decisions, such as credit denials, without necessarily disclosing proprietary source code. To mitigate bias in AML systems, firms are expected to implement periodic algorithmic audits and maintain documentation that demonstrates the fairness and neutrality of the data sets used in training.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the IP and data-protection considerations around training proprietary AI models on financial data, and how can fintechs structure data-sharing agreements to minimize risk?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Training proprietary AI on financial data in Argentina requires strict compliance with Personal Data Protection Law 25,326. Fintechs must ensure a valid legal basis, typically explicit user consent, for processing personal information. As mentioned, above, the AAIP\u2019s Guide for Responsible AI Use recommends &#8220;explainability,&#8221; requiring firms to provide information on automated decision-making logic while protecting algorithms as Trade Secrets. To minimize risk, data-sharing agreements should include anonymisation protocols to remove data from the personal information scope, ownership clauses ensuring the fintech retains rights to the resulting AI model, and confidentiality measures safeguarding proprietary code.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are regulators treating AI-driven investment or credit-decisioning tools for purposes of fiduciary duty, fair lending, and disclosure obligations under updated consumer protection frameworks?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Regulators have not treated AI-driven tools under a specific regulatory framework, such as the AI Act of the European Union; however, in Argentina, they can be analyzed under general consumer protection lenses. In that sense, AI-driven credit-decisioning tools should be transparent to fulfill fair lending obligations, and for investments, AI tools should adhere to the same professional diligence and loyalty standards as human advisors.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What emerging liability theories (e.g., negligent model governance, failure to supervise AI) could expose fintechs to enforcement or civil litigation in the next 12 months, and how should firms build defensible risk management frameworks?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Although there are no precedents regarding liability theories applied to failures in AI-powered systems in the fintech ecosystem, in Argentina, civil liability arising from the use of artificial intelligence may be assessed under the objective risk-based liability regime set forth in the Civil and Commercial Code, under which the party deploying algorithmic systems is liable for the risks they create, regardless of fault. Key litigation risks include failures to comply with regulatory duties of oversight and control imposed by the Central Bank, as well as joint and several liability for defective services under the Consumer Protection Law. Additionally, the evolving Open Finance ecosystem implies that firms may face increased scrutiny regarding data misuse. Risk mitigation for fintechs would require \u2018compliance by design\u201d, documenting human oversight and AI model traceability, adherence to applicable ethics and transparency standards, and if possible, maintaining insurance coverage for cyber and professional liability.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What notable examples of fintech-driven disruption or embedded finance adoption have reshaped your jurisdiction\u2019s financial landscape in the past year?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The most notable developments have been regulatory rather than purely market-driven. The recent formalisation of the PSAV regime, the launch of the three-phase tokenisation framework and the introduction of Open Finance represent significant structural shifts that are reshaping how fintechs operate and compete within Argentina\u2019s financial system.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Looking ahead, which regulatory reforms or global coordination efforts\u2014such as cross-border licensing passporting or stablecoin reserve interoperability\u2014hold the greatest potential to accelerate fintech innovation?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Looking ahead, the greatest potential for accelerating fintech innovation lies in the consolidation and refinement of existing frameworks. Further integration of the tokenisation regime into mainstream capital markets, clearer implementation rules for Open Finance, and enhanced coordination among regulators could significantly reduce uncertainty and compliance friction and accelerate fintech innovation. In this context, the BCRA has publicly signaled that it is analyzing the possibility of allowing banks to operate with cryptoassets under a regulated framework, further integrating digital assets into the financial system.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">4099<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/130316","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=130316"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}