Opposition lawmakers in Argentina have filed bills to ban citizenship by investment, days after the government announced that its program will open in the fourth quarter of 2026 at a price of $350,000. Two bills went to the Chamber of Deputies in early October, and a Senate bill with the same aim was already in committee.
None of these bills is law. All of them are at an early stage, and the government has pressed ahead, announcing the program's price three months after a court ruled against the decree behind it. Together with that June 2026 ruling, they add real legal uncertainty for anyone considering an application.
Key takeaways
- Deputies Agustín Rossi and Kelly Olmos filed a bill to prohibit granting citizenship in exchange for payments or investments.
- Deputies Florencia Carignano and Paula Penacca filed a second bill to repeal the investment route and the decrees that set it up.
- Senator Jorge Capitanich's bill, filed in August 2026, would ban citizenship by investment and is in committee.
- A court declared the underlying decree null in one case in June 2026, on constitutional grounds.
- To become law, a bill must pass both chambers, and a presidential veto can only be overridden by a two-thirds vote in each.
The Rossi and Olmos bill in the Chamber of Deputies
Agustín Rossi, a former cabinet chief, filed the first bill in the Chamber of Deputies after the October 2 price announcement, with Deputy Kelly Olmos as co-signer. According to Parlamentario, the bill would:
- prohibit naturalization in exchange for payments, contributions, donations, investments, property purchases or the purchase of public or private securities;
- state that no investment or payment can replace or shorten the residence period required by Article 20 of the Constitution;
- bar the issue of public bonds that give buyers a right to apply for citizenship or related migration benefits;
- bar the state and its agencies from hiring or partnering with firms to design, promote or run such programs, and end existing agreements of that kind;
- repeal the changes that Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) 366/2025 made to Citizenship Law 346.
The sponsors argue that Congress, not the executive, has the power to legislate on naturalization under Article 75 of the Constitution. They also warn of money laundering risks, damage to the credibility of Argentine passports, and the possibility that bought citizenship could be used to get around limits on foreign ownership of rural and border land.
A second bill from Carignano and Penacca
On October 5, Deputies Florencia Carignano and Paula Penacca, of the Unión por la Patria bloc, filed a further bill. Parlamentario reports that it would repeal the changes DNU 366/2025 made to the citizenship law and the decrees that created the investment agency and its procedures. The sponsors say the aim is not to discourage investment but to keep investment policy separate from the rules on who becomes a citizen.
The Senate bill from Jorge Capitanich
In the Senate, former Chaco governor Jorge Capitanich filed a bill titled "Regime for the Protection of Argentine Citizenship and Prohibition of its Granting by Investment" on August 24, 2026, before the price was announced. The Senate's record shows it was referred on September 4 to three committees: Constitutional Affairs, General Legislation, and National Economy and Investment. No committee report has been recorded.
The court ruling behind the push
The bills build on a ruling by the National Electoral Chamber. On June 30, 2026, in the case of Liping Yang, an applicant for citizenship, the court declared DNU 366/2025 absolutely null. It held that citizenship is the legal basis for political rights such as voting, so its rules fall within electoral matters, which Article 99 of the Constitution bars the president from regulating by emergency decree.
The ruling was made in an individual case, though the court ordered it sent to all federal judges with electoral jurisdiction. On July 2, Deputies Maximiliano Ferraro and Mónica Frade of the Coalición Cívica filed a draft resolution asking the Chamber of Deputies to declare the decree null as well.
What would have to happen for a ban
Filing a bill is the first step of many. Each bill must clear its committees, pass a floor vote in its own chamber, and then pass the other chamber. The president can veto a bill passed by Congress, and a veto can only be overridden by a two-thirds majority in both chambers.
There is also a separate route. Under Law 26.122, Congress can reject an emergency decree, but repeal requires rejection by both chambers. The Ferraro and Frade resolution itself calls for reform of that law so that rejection by one chamber would be enough, which shows how hard the current route is.
The courts may move faster than Congress. The government's position on the electoral court ruling, and any decision by the Supreme Court, could shape the program's future more than the bills do.
What it means for prospective applicants
For now, the program is still scheduled to open in the fourth quarter of 2026, with a $350,000 contribution or an $800,000 bond for the main applicant. Our report on Argentina's citizenship by investment price and launch sets out the terms.
The open question is what would happen to people granted citizenship under the decree if a court or Congress later ends the route. That would depend on the final text of any law and on how the courts treat rights already granted. Our analysis of citizenship by investment revocation risk explains how program-wide challenges have affected investors in other countries.
People who want a foothold in South America without this uncertainty often compare residence routes instead. See golden visas in Latin America and the differences between residency by investment and citizenship by investment.
Frequently asked questions
Has Argentina banned citizenship by investment?
No. As of October 10, 2026, the bills to ban it are proposals in committee. The government still plans to open its program in the fourth quarter of 2026.
Who filed the bills?
In the Chamber of Deputies, Agustín Rossi and Kelly Olmos filed one bill, and Florencia Carignano and Paula Penacca filed another. In the Senate, Jorge Capitanich filed a bill in August 2026.
Why do critics say the program is unconstitutional?
They argue that the Constitution gives Congress the power to legislate on naturalization, and that an emergency decree cannot regulate citizenship. The National Electoral Chamber accepted a version of this argument in a June 2026 ruling.
Important: This article is general information, not tax, legal or financial advice. Rules change often and depend on your personal circumstances. Speak with a qualified professional in each relevant country before you act.