The proposed cut does not strengthen employment or improve working conditions: it shifts the adjustment to the most vulnerable sectors and deepens the health crisis. In this context, the CATT Secretariat for Social Action condemns this attempt at reform and the defunding of the national health insurance system, as it attacks the solidarity model of health coverage for workers. It should be warned that the defunding of the health insurance system is not a collateral effect, but a political decision whose responsibilities must be assumed by those who promote and apply it. Adjusting on Social Security Funds is not an innocuous or technical decision: it is to erode a solidarity model and advance on structures linked to the collective organization of workers.
From an institutional perspective, it is unacceptable for a labor reform to be financed at the expense of the health system. Far from being a neutral or merely technical measure, this decision directly impacts the financing of the solidarity health system in a context of structural fragility already recognized by all sector actors. The social security system is currently financed through a contributory scheme composed of a 3% contribution from the worker and a 6% contribution from the employer, totaling 9%. The reform proposes reducing the employer's contribution to 5%, bringing total financing to 8% (3% + 5%).
In concrete terms, a full percentage point is subtracted from the system's main support mechanism, which equals an 11.11% reduction in revenue for the health system. This percentage cut is directly replicated in the collection of the Solidarity Redistribution Fund, aggravating the impact on benefits for the most vulnerable populations. The result is a greater individual contributory burden for workers to maintain coverages that, in practice, become more expensive without improving benefits.
Furthermore, it cannot be overlooked that this process of weakening the financing of social security funds is part of a broader offensive against the social security system and against the organizations that have historically sustained it. At the same time, health costs are increasing steadily due to the incorporation of new medical technologies, high-cost drugs, innovative treatments, and a growing level of judicialization. Social security funds are legally obligated to provide comprehensive coverage solely with resources from contributions, leaving them no margin to absorb new cuts without affecting the provision.
In parallel, the reduction in contributions also impacts affiliates who access plans from private medicine companies, now registered as Health Insurance Agents, through the redirection of contributions. When these contributions decrease, the difference between the actual cost of the plan and what is actually financed is passed directly to the affiliate or worker through higher out-of-pocket payments.
Buenos Aires, Feb. 1 (NA) – The labor reform project includes, among other regressive clauses for workers, a reduction of one percentage point in the employer's contribution to the national health insurance system. The lower collection of the Solidarity Fund has immediate health consequences. Fewer resources for disability—one of the most vulnerable populations in the system—fewer funds for automatic subsidies that are today essential to sustain a minimum level of benefits, less support for retirees through the subsidy called SUMA 65, and less compensation for monotributistas (subsidy called SUMARTE), whose minimum contributions are well below the real cost of the PMO that the regulations require to be guaranteed. This adjustment is also applied to a system that is already severely underfunded.
The drop in economic activity, lagging real wages, and the growth of informal employment have reduced the system's real income. All of this without foreseeing any alternative source of compensation. Of the funds collected, the state—through ARCA—retains 15% for the Solidarity Redistribution Fund (FSR), from which benefits for disability, automatic subsidies (SUMA, SUMA 65, SUMARTE and SANO), and part of the costs associated with high-cost and low-incidence benefits provided by Health Insurance Agents through the SURGE system are financed. Taking official data from the last reported collection corresponding to the month of August 2025, the reduction of one point will imply a monthly estimated loss of approximately $16,000 million for the Solidarity Fund and more than $90,000 million monthly for the set of Social Security Funds, figures that must be multiplied by thirteen when considering the Annual Complementary Salary.
We are in a state of alert to evaluate and adopt the relevant constitutional tools in defense of the solidarity health system, striving for the continuity of the quality medical coverage that workers deserve.
