The Urban Development Fund (FODUS) was created as a tool to capture part of the land value increment generated by urban planning decisions and allocate those resources to projects with social impact, territorial integration, and equitable access to public space. However, according to the report, various normative changes and administrative decisions have weakened its redistributive function, reported Noticias Argentinas agency. Among the main conclusions, the study points to an erosion of the fund's revenue collection capacity, resulting from the reduction in the established incidence value in the 2025 Tariff Law, added to the approval of urban agreements and exemptions granted in 2023. According to the Urban Fabric Foundation, the fund is functioning as a complementary source to finance public spending and routine works, instead of consolidating as an additional instrument for transformative urban policies aimed at correcting structural inequalities. Regarding the destination of resources, the report distinguishes between projects aligned with the fund's objectives—such as the Camino de Sirga or Plaza Villa Santa Rita, linked to urban integration and equitable access to public space—and other interventions that raise questions. This combination, the foundation argues, has substantially altered the fund's ability to capture resources sustainably. The report also warns of a "devaluation" of the urban value measured in dollars, due to the decoupling between the official incidence value and real real estate market prices. The challenge, the foundation warns, is to prevent urban rent from being diluted in the maintenance of pre-planned works, to the detriment of policies aimed at reducing territorial inequalities. To illustrate the situation, the report compares FODUS to a "reserve tank" designed to water the driest areas of a garden: if the water is used to fill a pre-planned pool or is lost through leaks, the areas that really need that resource end up being neglected. Among the latter, works in the new buildings of the Olympic Park or the Bulevar de los Corrales are mentioned, which, according to the analysis, seem to consolidate infrastructure already planned in ordinary budgets, without a clear impact on historically marginalized areas. Finally, the document raises a crisis of sustainability and legitimacy for FODUS. The reduction of the calculation base compromises its future financing, while the selection of projects with low social impact calls its political legitimacy into question.
