Category: Uncategorized

El Ministerio de Trabajo, Empleo y Seguridad Social (“MTESS”) aprobó el reglamento para la implementación de los Libros de Información Laboral (los “Libros”) en formato digital, estableciendo las reglas para su confección, confirmación y rectificación a través del sistema del Registro Obrero Patronal (“REOP”)

Por medio de la Resolución MTESS N° 462/2026 (la “Resolución”), el MTESS reglamenta el “Libro de Información Laboral” previsto en el Decreto N° 1989/2024, consolidando en formato digital la información laboral que los empleadores deben registrar obligatoriamente

The main aspects are as follows:

1. Sujetos obligados.

La obligación aplica a todos los empleadores inscriptos en el REOP cuya relación con los trabajadores se encuentre regida por el Código del Trabajo y las leyes laborales complementarias.

Los Libros deberán llevarse mensualmente y en formato digital.

2. Plataforma y confección de los Libros.

La confección, confirmación y rectificación de los Libros deberá realizarse a través del sistema REOP.

Asimismo, la Resolución dispone que los Libros serán confeccionados automáticamente a partir de las comunicaciones laborales ya realizadas por el empleador conforme al Decreto N° 1989/2024. El empleador podrá complementar información antes de confirmar los Libros.
 

3. Contenido.

El Libro deberá contener información mensualizada respecto de cada trabajador y establecimiento patronal (casa matriz y sucursales), incluyendo datos relativos a:

• Identificación del trabajador;
• Relación laboral;
• Jornadas de trabajo;
• Remuneraciones;
• Horas extraordinarias;
• Vacaciones, y;
• Aguinaldo.

4. Confirmación y validez.

La confirmación de los Libros será obligatoria para su validez y tendrá carácter de declaración jurada ante el MTESS.

La confirmación podrá realizarse:

• Manualmente por el empleador, en forma mensual o anual, hasta el último día hábil de marzo del año siguiente al ejercicio fiscal correspondiente, o;
• Automáticamente, cuando el empleador haya cumplido con las comunicaciones mensuales de liquidaciones salariales de los 12 meses del año.

5. Rectificación de los libros.

Una vez confirmados, los Libros no podrán modificarse. Sin perjuicio de ello, el empleador podrá presentar un “Libro de Información Laboral Rectificado” para agregar, modificar o suprimir información.

La rectificación deberá realizarse dentro del plazo de 30 días corridos desde la confirmación mensual.

6. Incumplimiento y sanciones.

El incumplimiento se configurará cuando el empleador no haya confeccionado y confirmado los Libros en el sistema REOP, como consecuencia de no haber realizado las comunicaciones requeridas durante los 12 meses del ejercicio fiscal.

La Resolución establece las siguientes multas conforme al artículo 385 del Código del Trabajo:

• 10 jornales mínimos para empleadores con hasta 30 trabajadores;
• 20 jornales mínimos para empleadores con entre 31 y 50 trabajadores, y;
• 30 jornales mínimos para empleadores con más de 50 trabajadores.

El pago de la multa no exime del cumplimiento de la obligación de llevar los Libros.

7. Seguridad y validez legal de los documentos digitales.

La Resolución dispone que los Libros deberán contar con mecanismos de seguridad electrónica que garanticen la integridad de la información.

Asimismo, los empleadores podrán descargar los Libros desde el Sistema REOP y estos tendrán plena validez legal, siempre que se garantice su autenticidad e integridad.

8. Implementación gradual.

La obligatoriedad para el periodo fiscal 2025 será implementada gradualmente hasta el 28 de agosto de 2026, conforme a la terminación del número patronal.

9. Certificado laboral y cancelación del REOP.

A partir del 1 de junio 2026, la emisión del Certificado Laboral exigirá que el empleador se encuentre al día con la confirmación mensual de los Libros de Información Laboral.

Asimismo, los empleadores que soliciten la cancelación de su REOP deberán encontrarse en cumplimiento con dicha obligación hasta la salida del último trabajador.

Consulte la resolución  here.

This content is for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as specific legal advice. Should you require specific guidance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

The Civil and Commercial Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (the “Court”) recently handed down a high-impact decision on distribution agreements, contractual liability, and res judicata, upholding the definitive dismissal of the second damages action brought by Compañía de Petróleo y Asfalto S.A. (“COMPASA”) against Vibra Energia S.A. and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.

This is a leading case whose origin dates back to 2002, when COMPASA filed a first action for damages and obtained a judgment against Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. and Petrobras Distribuidora S.A. (now Vibra Energia S.A.), both foreign companies—a judgment that was duly satisfied. Years later, however, COMPASA brought a second damages action against the same firms, giving rise to the proceeding that culminates in the Court’s recent ruling, which sets out high-impact criteria for contractual and procedural practice.

The Supreme Court’s decision

The Supreme Court rejected the motions for annulment and appeal filed by COMPASA and upheld the Ruling and Judgment (Acuerdo y Sentencia) of the Court of Appeals, which had reversed the trial-court judgment—exceeding USD 40 million—and dismissed the claim.

The ruling concludes that the distribution agreement was no longer in force at the time COMPASA filed its second claim. In that context, the Court reaffirmed that seeking damages under the parameters of Law No. 194/93 means, by its very nature, taking a legal position within the realm of contractual termination, which renders inadmissible a subsequent action for damages arising from a non-existent relationship.

Res judicata and consistency

The decision also offers a relevant analysis of the scope of res judicata, clarifying that it attaches only to the operative part of the prior final judgment—the damages award already enforced—and does not automatically extend to the grounds or to the argumentative premises that were not an autonomous object of the dispute.

The Court likewise dismissed any breach of the principle of consistency (congruence), validating the lower court’s assessment of the first claim as relevant evidentiary background in order to interpret its legal effects on the validity of the agreement and on the parties’ subsequent conduct.

Vouga Abogados’ involvement

Vouga Abogados acted for Petróleo Brasileiro S.A., one of the co-defendants, at the trial-court stage. At that stage, the central arguments of the defense were outlined and the legal and evidentiary foundations were laid that were subsequently adopted by the higher courts to dismiss the claim.

On the basis of varied grounds, which weighed the defense’s arguments and the evidence produced in the proceeding, the Court unanimously adopted the final ruling, rejecting the appeal and, consequently, the claim—which was confirmed by the Supreme Court., lo cual fue confirmado por la Corte

A high-impact precedent

This ruling stands as a significant precedent for contractual and litigation practice in Paraguay, in that it:

• Reaffirms the legal effects of bringing an action under Law No. 194/93, holding that its invocation means taking a position within the realm of contractual termination.
• Precisely delimits the scope of substantive res judicata, confining it to the operative part of the prior judgment and excluding any binding force for argumentative considerations.
• Confirms the inadmissibility of damages actions where the party’s own prior conduct leads the contract to be deemed terminated, ruling out the possibility of claiming damages on the premise of a contractual validity incompatible with that framing.
• Strengthens the coherence between procedural conduct and the doctrine of estoppel (one’s own acts), preventing a party from maintaining, in successive proceedings, legally irreconcilable positions.

Foreign companies with distributors in Paraguay are protected by this ruling, which will discourage abusive practices invoking Law No. 194/93.

At Vouga Abogados, our litigation team, with extensive experience in highly complex disputes, supported this proceeding from its initial stage, actively participating in building the legal and evidentiary arguments that proved decisive to the outcome of the litigation. The ruling confirms the importance of a procedural strategy that is consistent, technically sound, and sustained over time, especially in complex contractual disputes with significant economic impact.

Ref.: Supreme Court of Justice, Civil and Commercial Chamber, “COMPASA v. Vibra Energia S.A. et al.,” judgment dated March 30, 2026.

First recommended actions for the company and protection of the brand

Key message:

“The health and safety of individuals are the highest priority.”

“Statements must be truthful and based on verifiable facts.”

General considerations

Consumers are increasingly filing complaints with the Consumer and User Protection Secretariat (SEDECO), which means companies must be prepared to act with speed, precision, and responsibility in addressing the situation.

Prompt and precise initial actions help in responding effectively to the consumer and to the administering agency, while also protecting the brand’s reputation by complying with the requirements of the governing regulatory framework, Law No. 1334/98, which establishes consumer rights in Paraguay and regulates suppliers’ obligations.

Indeed, a complaint before SEDECO that is poorly managed represents a legal and reputational risk for any company. A late or inadequate response may lead to penalties, loss of trust, and damage to the brand. When facing events that affect its consumers, a company must have a clear and precise roadmap in order to act effectively and responsibly.

What SEDECO does and the applicable legal framework

SEDECO is the national authority responsible for protecting consumer rights in Paraguay. It receives complaints, investigates, requests documentation, conducts inspections, and may impose penalties. Law No. 1334/98 establishes that suppliers must guarantee the quality, safety, and truthfulness of the products and services offered. Penalties may include fines, corrective measures, suspension of activities, and the publication of public alerts.

Recommended preliminary actions the company should take in response to a consumer claim or complaint (Checklist)

As a first measure, it is advisable to: designate a person responsible for receiving and internally channeling the consumer’s complaint and, where applicable, any notice sent by SEDECO.

• Preserve technical and documentary evidence.
• Immediately notify Management and the Communications or Legal Department, or in-house counsel.
• Activate the incident response plan (staff must necessarily have and be familiar with the steps to follow in a crisis and identify whom to turn to immediately).
• Review the complaint with an expert attorney.
• Apply technical mitigation measures.
• If needed, issue a truthful and empathetic public institutional statement through a single channel.
• Contact affected consumers.
• Prepare the formal report required by SEDECO.
• Document every action and measure taken.
• Review internal policies and train staff on Consumer Law and crisis management in these situations (claims or complaints).

What is the procedure before SEDECO? What to expect? 

The procedure established for handling complaints before SEDECO is conducted electronically, which requires designating an electronic domicile (email address) for both the CONSUMER and the affected COMPANY.

SEDECO admits the complaint filed by the CONSUMER and notifies the company involved, which must submit its detailed and itemized report on the case within a peremptory period of five (5) days. At the same time, a conciliation hearing is scheduled between the parties.

If no agreement or conciliation is reached between the parties (between the consumer and the company), the case, together with all the background, is referred to SEDECO’s Legal Department, which will analyze whether the opening of an administrative proceeding is warranted. Referring the complaint to the opening of an administrative proceeding already constitutes a process that will result in the imposition of a penalty if a violation of the law is established.

What to avoid

• Do not delete evidence or records.
• Do not issue statements without verifying the facts or having detailed knowledge of the situation. Communication must always be through a single institutional channel.
• Do not involve or blame third parties without concrete evidence.
• Do not ignore SEDECO notices or exceed deadlines.

Essential to keep in mind

A complaint before SEDECO in which the company and the brand’s reputation are at stake—even when the dispute is not considered serious—requires a response that is prompt, legally sound, and communicationally responsible. Protecting the brand depends on the ability to act transparently, preserve evidence, and cooperate with the authorities. This guide offers the tools needed to face the process effectively and minimize risks.

If you require further advice on these matters, our Dispute Resolution Department, led by the litigation team, will be glad to support you:

Mirtha Dos Santos, mdsantos@vouga.com.py

Elio Agüero, eaguero@vouga.com.py

Marcela Dos Santos, madsantos@vouga.com.py

Silvia Benitez, sbenitez@vouga.com.py

Sebastián Silva, ssilva@vouga.com.py

Vouga Abogados advised the investor consortium led by Hy24 and comprised of Impact Fund Denmark, IFC, DEG and Sudameris Bank in connection with the acquisition of an equity interest in Atome Paraguay S.A.E., as part of the USD 665 million financing of the Villeta Project in Paraguay.

The project represents the world’s first large-scale industrial facility dedicated to low-carbon fertiliser production, with a projected annual capacity of 260,000 tonnes.

Our assistance included legal due diligence under Paraguayan law, corporate and transaction structuring advice, review and negotiation of transaction documents, regulatory analysis, advice on local law aspects related to the financing, and support through closing.

Paraguay continues to advance its strategy to attract foreign investment. In this context, the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, together with the National Directorate of Migration, has announced the launch of the “Paraguay Investor Pass”, a regime aimed at simplifying access to permanent residency for investors.

1. What changes under this new regime?

Traditionally, the immigration process involved a prior stage of temporary residency. According to the authorities’ announcement, this new framework would allow those who meet the investment requirements to directly obtain permanent residency through a more streamlined and centralized process.

2. Investment options

The program establishes different alternatives to qualify, targeting strategic sectors:

• USD 150,000 in tourism projects
• USD 200,000 in the stock market or real estate sector

3. Announced benefits

According to official information, the regime provides for:

• Direct access to permanent residency, without an intermediate stage
• Access to the tax treatment applicable to residents, including a lower tax burden on dividends compared to non-residents
• A mostly digital process, as reported by the authorities
• Physical presence mainly required for the issuance of the national ID card

4. Context

The launch responds to a clear context: Paraguay has been experiencing a sustained increase in interest from foreign investors.

With this program, the country aims to position itself as a more competitive jurisdiction in the region, combining:

• Relatively low costs
• An attractive tax framework
• Simplified immigration processes

5. Practical insight

From a practical standpoint, the regime seeks to facilitate the relocation of investors looking to structure their presence in Paraguay with greater predictability in immigration and administrative matters.

6. Conclusion

The Paraguay Investor Pass represents a relevant initiative in the modernization of the immigration regime linked to investment. Its effective implementation and subsequent regulation will be key to assessing its practical scope and impact on attracting foreign capital.

This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific assistance regarding the application of this regulation, please do not hesitate to contact us.

In many cases, debt disputes do not begin in the courts. They begin with poorly structured or insufficiently documented agreements.

In disputes involving credit and financial obligations, the advice of a lawyer who understands the client’s business and is familiar with the various legal alternatives available is essential. When difficulties arise in the debtor’s performance of an obligation, it is important for the creditor to know the various options available before resorting directly to the courts.

In this context, where there is willingness on the part of the parties, one possible alternative is to restructure the credit so that the new terms reflect the current economic reality of the transaction and allow for effective performance of the obligation.

Many credit-related disputes end up in court. Experience shows, however, that a large share of these disputes could be handled more efficiently through proper preventive legal advice and the correct structuring of payment agreements.

Such instruments allow, on the one hand, the creditor to recover its credit and, on the other, the debtor to reorganize its obligation under terms and conditions that are reasonably capable of being met given its commercial reality.

In the business and financial sphere, it is common for a credit or commercial obligation to fall into default for various reasons. In these cases, the challenge does not always lie solely in initiating a court claim, but in structuring legal solutions that make it possible to order the relationship between the parties, preserve the economic value of the transaction, and provide legal certainty going forward.

Within this context, debt acknowledgments and payment agreements are particularly useful legal tools. When properly designed, they make it possible to transform a default situation into a clear, enforceable, and legally sound scheme that facilitates the reorganization of the obligation and establishes precise rules for its performance.

1. The lawyer as a business advisor

One of the keys to structuring this type of agreement is to understand that the law does not operate in isolation. Contractual obligations develop within specific commercial relationships and financial structures, which must be understood in order to provide adequate advice.

In this sense, the lawyer involved in these transactions does not merely draft legal documents. Their role also consists of understanding the client’s business, its commercial dynamics, its financial structure, and the risks involved in each transaction.

Only on the basis of that knowledge is it possible to properly support commercial decisions and design legal structures that allow negotiations or debt-restructuring processes to move forward without compromising the legal certainty of the transaction.

In many situations, the challenge is to strike a balance between two fundamental objectives:

a) enabling the economic viability of the transaction or the continuity of the commercial relationship;
b) adequately preserving the creditor’s rights

When the agreement is properly structured, both objectives can be achieved simultaneously.

2. The importance of proper legal instrumentation

One of the most relevant aspects of these transactions is the legal instrumentation of the agreement. It is not enough for there to be a commercial understanding between the parties: that understanding must be translated into a legally sound document that complies with the applicable rules.

Proper instrumentation makes it possible to:

1. clearly establish the debtor’s express acknowledgment of the obligation;
2. structure realistic and legally enforceable payment plans;
3. maintain or strengthen in rem or personal guarantees backing the debt;
4. establish clear clauses on default, interest, acceleration, and enforcement;
5. define precise mechanisms for communication, payment, and applicable jurisdiction.

Experience shows that many court disputes originate in poorly documented or incomplete agreements, which create uncertainty about the scope of the obligations or weaken the parties’ legal position.

For this reason, the quality of the legal instrumentation is decisive in ensuring the agreement’s real effectiveness.

In this context, preventive legal advice takes on central importance. The lawyer’s involvement at early stages—during negotiation, the restructuring of an obligation, or the definition of its payment terms—makes it possible to anticipate potential conflict scenarios and structure legal instruments that provide greater predictability and certainty for the parties.

3. Preparing today the best document for a possible future court claim

There is also an aspect that is often underestimated: agreements must also be structured with a possible default scenario in mind.

A good agreement not only organizes the payment of a debt; it must also be designed to become, if necessary, an effective legal tool for judicial enforcement.

From a litigation standpoint, this means that the document should address fundamental matters such as:

1. clarity in the express and unequivocal acknowledgment of the debt;
2. the correct determination of amounts, terms, and payment conditions;
3. the preservation of in rem or personal guarantees backing the obligation;
4. the inclusion of default and acceleration clauses.

Under Paraguayan law, proper instrumentation of the agreement may allow the document to constitute an enforceable instrument (título ejecutivo), as provided in Article 448 of the Civil Procedure Code. However, for this to be possible, the document must be carefully structured and drafted so as to meet the legal requirements necessary for its enforceability through executory proceedings, since not just any agreement or document is sufficient to bring an executory action.

In practice, this means that the agreement must contain a clear, express, liquidated, and enforceable obligation, properly documented in accordance with the applicable legal requirements. Otherwise, the document might not meet the conditions necessary to bring an executory action, forcing the creditor to resort first to a declaratory proceeding, with the resulting delays and additional costs.

This means that, in the event of a default, the creditor may directly initiate an executory proceeding to collect the debt, without first having to go through a declaratory proceeding. In practice, having an enforceable instrument can make a significant difference in terms of efficiency and speed in recovering the credit.

4. The importance of preserving guarantees

In many debt restructurings, it is equally important to analyze the maintenance or strengthening of existing guarantees, such as mortgages, pledges, sureties, or joint co-debtorships.

Proper structuring of the agreement should aim to preserve these guarantees or adapt them to the new terms of the credit, so as to maintain adequate legal backing for the obligation.

5. Avoiding unintended legal effects in the restructuring

Likewise, when structuring this type of agreement, special attention must be paid to avoiding unintended legal effects, such as a novation of the original obligation, unless that is expressly sought by the parties.

In many cases, the purpose of the restructuring is merely to modify payment terms or conditions, keeping the originally assumed guarantees and obligations in force.

For this reason, the agreement must be drafted with legal precision, so as to adequately reflect the parties’ intent and avoid interpretations that could weaken the creditor’s legal position.

6. The value of preventive advice

In the business sphere, preventive legal advice remains one of the most valuable—and often underestimated—tools for risk management.

Having sound legal structures in place from the outset of a transaction, or at an early stage of renegotiation, makes it possible to significantly reduce future conflicts or, where they arise, to face them with greater legal certainty.

Clients who incorporate legal advice at the negotiation, planning, and documentation stages of their transactions tend to be in a much stronger position in the face of potential defaults.

Ultimately, a good legal structure not only resolves disputes. In many cases, it begins to prevent them long before they arise.

Asesoramos a una empresa de consumo masivo sobre los riesgos legales de una campaña promocional en redes sociales, que incluía el sorteo de una estadía en un hotel internacional y la utilización de imágenes del hotel publicadas en su página web, algunas de las cuales contenían personas, incluyendo menores de edad.

Durante el proceso, identificamos riesgos legales asociados al uso de imágenes con fines comerciales, particularmente en materia de derecho a la imagen (consentimiento de personas identificables, incluyendo menores) y utilización de activos protegidos del hotel (marca, diseño e identidad comercial). A fin de mitigar dichos riesgos, elaboramos un borrador de carta de autorización mediante la cual el hotel confirmaría contar con los derechos necesarios sobre las imágenes y con los consentimientos correspondientes, otorgando a la empresa un marco jurídico seguro para su utilización en la campaña.

Este caso refleja la importancia del cumplimiento digital preventivo, asegurando que las campañas online se desarrollen de manera segura y protegiendo la reputación de la marca en entornos digitales altamente visibles.

Executive Summary

Marzo 2026
Regulación	Date	Content
General Resolution No. 47/2026	March 10, 2026	It is hereby established that it is mandatory to provide information to the DNIT regarding transactions conducted with cryptoassets.
General Resolution No. 48/2026	March 23, 2026	Due to system failures in Marangatú, the filing deadlines for final and informational tax returns have been extended on an exceptional basis.
General Resolution No. 49/2026	March 24, 2026	Provisions are established for the disclosure of information on earnings, reserves, and distributable earnings in the Notes to the Financial Statements of obligated taxpayers (Obligation 948).

► General Resolution No. 47/2026 – Obligation to report transactions involving cryptoassets.

The National Tax Revenue Directorate (“DNIT”) issued General Resolution No. 47/2026, dated March 10, 2026, establishing for the first time in Paraguay the formal obligation to provide information on transactions involving cryptoassets. The measure does not create a new tax, but rather an information reporting obligation aimed at strengthening transparency and tax oversight in a sector of growing economic importance.

The regulation broadly defines the concept of a cryptoasset, encompassing any digital representation of value based on distributed ledger technology (“blockchain”), including value tokens, utility tokens, stablecoins, and NFTs, among others. Digital currencies issued by central banks (“CBDCs”) and financial instruments regulated by securities market laws are excluded.

The following are required to file the Informative Affidavit on Cryptoassets (“DJI – Cryptoassets”): (a) the owners, administrators, or managers of cryptoasset platforms operating in the country; and (b) individuals, legal entities, and other entities resident or incorporated in the country that trade in cryptoassets, when the annual transaction amount exceeds USD 5,000, whether through non-resident platforms or without the intermediation of any platform.

The minimum required information includes, for each transaction: date and time, identification of the parties involved—or wallet addresses—type of cryptoasset, amount traded, gross value in dollars, fees, and the transaction hash. The filing must be made annually through the Marangatú System, within three months following the close of the fiscal year. The first filing will correspond to the 2026 fiscal year and must be submitted in March 2027 for taxpayers with a fiscal year-end of December 31.

Reportable entities must include Obligation 959 – DJI Cryptoassets in their RUC. Late filing will be penalized with a fine of ₲ 1,000,000 for non-compliance. It should be noted that the resolution is not retroactive. If you would like to learn more, we have prepared a more detailed article, which you can find here.

► General Resolution No. 48/2026 – Exceptional extension of deadlines due to system failures at Marangatú.

On March 23, 2026, the Marangatú system experienced significant outages due to cuts in the fiber-optic network, which affected connectivity at the DNIT data center. The outage coincided with a day of high tax volume, with multiple filing deadlines scheduled for that day.

In response to this situation, the DNIT issued General Resolution No. 48/2026, which exceptionally extended the filing deadlines for final and informational tax returns from March 23 to March 24, 2026, in order to avoid harm to taxpayers who were unable to complete their filings on time.

According to Internal Revenue General Manager Éver Otazú, the system did not go down completely, but it did experience slowness and intermittent outages. Cuts were detected at two points in the fiber-optic network, allegedly linked to acts of vandalism, which were repaired during the day. This is not the first time the DNIT has faced this type of issue, as thefts of fiber-optic cables have also been reported on previous occasions.

► DNIT General Resolution No. 49/2026 – New requirements for disclosing information on profits, reserves, and distributable earnings in financial statements.

Through General Resolution No. 49/2026, issued on March 24, 2026, the DNIT ruled that Corporate Income Tax (“IRE”) taxpayers required to file financial statements under Obligation 948 must include in the Notes to the Financial Statements detailed information on the composition and allocation of retained earnings and accumulated results.

The measure applies to financial statements for periods ending on or after December 31, 2025, and aims to strengthen control mechanisms and transparency in the accounting information submitted to the tax authorities. Specifically, the Notes to the Financial Statements must contain, at a minimum: (a) a reconciliation of retained earnings (net income for the year, prior-period results, and adjustments); (b) an identification of distributable earnings; and (c) a breakdown of the allocation of earnings, including dividends distributed, capitalized earnings, established reserves, and amounts pending distribution.

If you would like to learn more, we have prepared a more detailed article, which you can find here.

    

El Poder Ejecutivo dictó el Decreto N° 5732/2026, mediante el cual se establece un régimen excepcional y transitorio de regularización para el cumplimiento de determinadas obligaciones laborales pendientes ante el Ministerio de Trabajo, Empleo y Seguridad Social (“MTESS”).

El objetivo principal del régimen es promover la formalización y el cumplimiento voluntario, permitiendo a los empleadores regularizar situaciones omitidas o deficientes sin aplicación inmediata de sanciones, antes de avanzar hacia etapas de control y cobro más gravosas.

A continuación, detallamos los aspectos más relevantes del Decreto:

1. Ámbito temporal del régimen

El régimen excepcional entra en vigencia desde la publicación del Decreto y se extiende hasta el 31 de agosto de 2026.

Finalizado este periodo, el MTESS deberá gestionar el cobro judicial de todas las deudas pendientes.

2. Obligaciones que pueden regularizarse sin multa

Durante este período, los empleadores podrán regularizar obligaciones pendientes sin aplicación de multas por mora, incluyendo:

• Inscripción en el Registro Obrero Patronal (casa matriz y sucursales)
• Comunicaciones laborales obligatorias, tales como:
  • Entrada y salida de trabajadores
  • Licencias y permisos
  • Vacaciones
  • Sanciones disciplinarias
  • Accidentes de trabajo y enfermedades profesionales
  • Ausencias
  • Preavisos

Esto aplica a obligaciones previstas en el marco del Decreto N° 1989/2024.

3. Reducción de multas existentes

El Decreto también establece beneficios para multas ya impuestas:

• 50% de reducción para multas firmes generadas entre el 1 de enero de 2020 y la entrada en vigencia del Decreto, siempre que:
  • Se cancelen o
  • Se inicie su pago durante la vigencia del régimen
• 70% de reducción para empleadores con 1 a 30 trabajadores al 31 de diciembre de 2025

4. Facilidades de pago

Se habilita el pago fraccionado de multas:

• Hasta 10 cuotas iguales
• Con una entrega inicial mínima del 20%

Además, empleadores con planes de pago vigentes podrán acceder a los beneficios de reducción si optan por cancelar el saldo total.

5. Limitaciones del régimen

• El régimen no aplica a otros incumplimientos laborales no expresamente contemplados en el Decreto, los cuales seguirán siendo sancionados conforme a la normativa vigente.
• La cancelación de multas con reducciones no exime del cumplimiento de las obligaciones laborales y registrales previstas en el Decreto N° 1989/2024.
• Finalizado el régimen, el MTESS deberá impulsar el cobro judicial de las deudas pendientes sin excepción.

6. Implicancias prácticas

Este régimen representa una oportunidad estratégica para regularizar obligaciones laborales pendientes, reducir contingencias y alinear la situación del empleador con los sistemas de control del MTESS, antes del inicio de una etapa de fiscalización y cobro más estricta.

Resulta especialmente relevante para:

• Empleadores con registros incompletos o desactualizados
• Empresas con multas acumuladas entre 2020 y la entrada en vigencia del Decreto
• Micro y pequeñas empresas que requieran alivio financiero para normalizar su situación

This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific assistance regarding the application of this regulation, please do not hesitate to contact us.

El Ministerio de Trabajo, Empleo y Seguridad Social (“MTESS”) emitió la Resolución N° 220/2026 (la “Resolución), mediante la cual se reglamentan los aspectos operativos del régimen laboral y de seguridad social aplicable a las Micro, Pequeñas y Medianas Empresas (MIPYMES), previsto en la Ley N° 7444/2025 y su Decreto Reglamentario N° 4535/2025.

La Resolución introduce procedimientos, controles y plazos concretos para la aplicación del régimen especial de contratación a plazo determinado y, en el caso de las microempresas, del régimen salarial especial del 80% del salario mínimo.

A continuación, destacamos los principales puntos de la Resolución.

1. Contratos de trabajo a plazo determinado para MIPYMES

Las Microempresas (MIE) y Pequeñas Empresas (PE) pueden celebrar contratos de trabajo a plazo determinado, con las siguientes reglas clave:

• Duración máxima:
  • Hasta 12 meses, prorrogables
  • Con un tope total de 36 meses, considerando prórrogas.
• Superado ese plazo, o ante incumplimientos formales, la relación se considerará por tiempo indefinido.

2. Requisitos formales del contrato

El contrato debe celebrarse por escrito y contener, como mínimo:

• Datos completos del empleador y del trabajador.
• Identificación de la categoría MIPYMES y Cédula MIPYMES vigente.
• Descripción del puesto, jornada y lugar de trabajo.
• Remuneración pactada (con indicación expresa cuando se aplique el régimen del 80%).
• Fecha de inicio y vencimiento del contrato.
• Firma de las partes.

El cumplimiento de estos requisitos es condición indispensable para acceder y mantener los beneficios del régimen especial.

3. Registro obligatorio ante el MTESS

• El contrato debe ser registrado en el MTESS dentro de los 5 días hábiles desde su firma, a través del Sistema de Registro Obrero Patronal (REOP).
• Las prórrogas o adendas deben presentarse con al menos 10 días corridos de anticipación al vencimiento del contrato vigente.
• La falta de registro impide la aplicación del régimen especial.

4. Verificación y control administrativo

El MTESS verificará los contratos y sus prórrogas en plazos breves:

• 2 días hábiles para la revisión inicial.
• 3 días hábiles para subsanar observaciones, en caso de existir.
• Si no se regulariza la situación, no se habilita el régimen especial contractual ni salarial.

5. Régimen salarial especial para Microempresas (80% del salario mínimo)

Exclusivo para Microempresas (MIE):

• Permite abonar una remuneración no inferior al 80% del salario mínimo legal, por un plazo máximo de 36 meses, computados desde la fecha de emisión de la Cédula MIPYMES.
• La vigencia del beneficio está condicionada a:
• Mantener la categoría de Microempresa.
• Tener el contrato debidamente registrado y validado por el MTESS.
• El beneficio no es aplicable a Pequeñas Empresas.

6. Limitaciones y controles sobre el régimen salarial

No se podrá aplicar el régimen del 80% cuando:

• El trabajador ya haya tenido vínculo previo con el mismo empleador.
• El trabajador haya percibido, en los últimos 12 meses, remuneraciones iguales o superiores al salario mínimo legal.
• El trabajador ya haya sido beneficiario del régimen especial durante el plazo máximo permitido, aun con otro empleador.

Los controles se realizan de forma automática, mediante la interoperabilidad entre el MTESS, IPS y MIC.

7. Coordinación con el IPS e interoperabilidad

• La aplicación del régimen salarial especial ante el IPS queda supeditada a la validación favorable del contrato por el MTESS.
• Si el contrato no se presenta, no se valida o se rechaza, el empleador será comunicado como “NO CUMPLE”, y deberá ajustarse al régimen general de cotización.
• El sistema incorpora alertas automáticas para el empleador.

8. Modelos oficiales de contrato

La Resolución aprueba modelos oficiales de:

• Contrato a plazo determinado (MIE y PE).
• Contrato con aplicación del régimen salarial del 80% (MIE).
• Adenda o prórroga contractual.

Su utilización facilita la verificación administrativa, aunque no excluye el control de fondo por parte del MTESS.

9. Régimen transitorio

Para empresas con Cédula MIPYMES emitida antes de la vigencia de la Resolución:

• El plazo máximo de 36 meses comenzará a computarse 15 días después de la publicación de la Resolución, como período de adecuación, a partir del cual comenzará a computarse el plazo máximo del régimen especial.

Implicancias prácticas

Esta reglamentación refuerza los controles formales, los plazos de registro y la trazabilidad de los contratos bajo el régimen MIPYMES.
Resulta clave que las empresas:

• Utilicen contratos correctamente instrumentados.
• Cumplan estrictamente con los plazos de registro y prórroga.
• Verifiquen su categoría MIPYMES vigente.

Todo ello con el fin de evitar la pérdida de beneficios y contingencias laborales o previsionales. En particular, el incumplimiento de los requisitos formales o de registro puede derivar en la aplicación del régimen laboral y previsional general.

This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific assistance regarding the application of this regulation, please do not hesitate to contact us.