Minimum retirement: June salaries were $244,991 lower than an “updated” bonus for inflation

The calculation is simple. If it had been updated in the same proportion as the rest of the retirements, the bonus – frozen since March 2024 – should have been in June of this year $209.994. That is to say, $139,994 more.

In turn, the bonus is equivalent to 50% of the best amount earned in the semester, that is, that of June without considering the bonus in the calculation. So if this updated bonus had been integrated into the current assets, in June it should have been calculated for the payment of the half bonus. Son $104.997.

Adding those $104,997 of the half bonus plus the $139,994 of the difference due to the bonus not being updated and not being integrated into the asset gives a total of $ 244.991 that retirees who receive the minimum pension stopped receiving.

For their part, for those who receive the minimum salary plus $70,000, the readjustment for the first half of 2026 is lower than inflationof 15,2%given the freezing of the bonus. This asset went from $410,879.59 to $473,317.99

This percentage of nominal increase does not compensate for the average price increase of the same period as measured by Indec, which, it is estimated, would be between 17% and 18%.

The reinforcement has been at the same nominal value since March 2024, even though inflation for the period between that month and next June would be – it is estimated – around 120%.

Meanwhile, “since March 2024, the compensatory bonus that 70% of retirees receive was frozen at $70,000, liquefying their purchasing capacity month by month. While salaries increased between March 2024 and June 2026 by 200%, the minimum, with bonus included, only increased 132%. If it had been updated in the same proportion, the bonus should have been $209,994 in June 2026, that is, triple what it is currently,” stated the Center for Political Economy (CEPA).

The consulting firm headed by Hernán Letcher adds: “In the March-May quarter of 2026, the purchasing power of retirements that do not receive a bonus is at lower levels than the last quarter of the previous government (-2.5% for retirements without a bonus and -18.9% for those with a bonus). The quarterly comparison is methodologically appropriate given the dynamics of updating the previous formula.”

The thing is that by having the bonus frozen, the total income of those who receive the retirement is lower than the increase in prices. The same thing happens with Non-contributory Pensions (70% of the minimum asset plus the bonus) and the PUAM (Universal Pension for the Elderly, which is equivalent to 80% of the minimum asset plus the bonus.