Suppliers and contractors of Fábrica Argentina de Aviones Brigadier San Martín are considering taking legal action to collect debts amounting to US$22 million. The situation unfolds after almost two years of reduced activity, lack of working capital, and delays in state contracts considered essential for generating income. No class action lawsuit has been reported as filed, nor the opening of a court-supervised restructuring proceeding: both scenarios remain possibilities.
The company's budget projects a total liability of ARS 152.003,8 million for 2026, higher than the operating income expected for the fiscal year. The debt with suppliers is especially sensitive because it includes goods, components, and services that support the aerospace chain. When these payments are postponed, the creditor firms end up involuntarily financing the operation and reduce their own margin to maintain personnel, inventories, and investment. The comparison between liabilities and expected income indicates financial tension, but it alone does not prove insolvency, because assets, maturities, and support from the state shareholder must also be considered.
Among the mentioned suppliers are national and foreign companies linked to critical sets: Elbit, Israel Aerospace Industries, Liebherr Aerospace, Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, Prodismo, MBA, Inmeba, DTA, AOG, and ADE, in addition to members of Cámara Argentina Aeronáutica y Espacial. The enumeration shows a complex network, but it does not allow knowing how much is owed to each company, which obligations are overdue, or which could be subject to contractual disputes.
FAdeA is a corporation controlled by the national State and depends on Ministerio de Defensa. Its main historical client is Fuerza Aérea Argentina. The company brings together infrastructure, qualified personnel, and maintenance, modernization, and manufacturing capabilities that exceed the balance of an ordinary company. The prolonged interruption of workloads can cause the departure of technicians whose training requires years and public resources. Therefore, a liquidity crisis can interrupt defense programs, degrade industrial knowledge, and transfer difficulties to specialized small and medium-sized enterprises.
The version about a possible court-supervised restructuring describes a possible tool to reorganize obligations under judicial supervision; it is not equivalent to a bankruptcy or a closure. For that process to exist, a filing and a judicial resolution of opening must take place, aspects that were not reported. Similarly, suppliers considering litigation does not mean that there is already a judgment, a precautionary measure, or a request for liquidation against the factory.
The immediate bottleneck is in contracts capable of restoring cash flow. The sources mention pending decisions within the Defense area, although they do not specify schedules, amounts, advances, or work volumes. Without those details, it is not possible to estimate how much additional income FAdeA would need or whether the planned state transfers would be enough to cover arrears. The liability projection is also an annual estimate and must be compared with the actual approved financial statements. A signed contract would not automatically resolve cash flow either if it does not include sufficient advances and a schedule compatible with the purchase of imported components.
The evolution must be verified on three levels: payment to suppliers, signing of contracts, and productive continuity. It will also be necessary to know the workforce, the programs that remain active, the due dates of each obligation, and any judicial proceedings. If bankruptcy proceedings begin, it will be necessary to distinguish between application, initiation, verification of credits, and any eventual agreement. If only individual lawsuits proceed, the impact will depend on their amounts and measures. The current warning is serious because it exposes a supply chain without liquidity; presenting it as the closure of FAdeA would be incorrect. The verifiable fact is that creditors are considering going to court while the state-owned company projects a high liability and maintains limited activity.
