Company: TCMFF
Filing Date: 2025-05-19
Form Type: 6-K
Source: 0001104659-25-050264
Chunk: 89

Company: TELECOM ARGENTINA SA
Filing Date: 2025-05-19
Form: 6-K
Chunk 89
---
2788, setting aside the recommendations of the previous memorandums.

Subsequently, the different chambers of the CNAT
started to adopt new criteria, consolidating a majority position that declared Laws 23.928 and 25.561 unconstitutional, and implementing
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus a pure interest rate of 3% p.a.

Based on these events, and in collaboration with
external counsel, the Company decided to implement a new calculation method starting in September 2024 in all jurisdictions. This
change involves recalculating interest based on the criteria of the Bases Law, applying the CPI from the credit's origin date plus an
interest rate of 3% p.a. In addition, new jurisdictions have been incorporated for updating labor-related claims.

The recalculation of provisions based on these
parameters is deemed sufficient in connection with the liabilities recorded to date.

Second due date of invoices

In 2009, the association Consumidores Financieros Asociación Civil para su Defensa (a consumer association) filed a claim against TASA, a company now merged with TMA, and Telecom
Argentina S.A., claiming (i) to limit the collection of interest in cases of payment arrears for billed services, instead of maintaining
the generic 10-day period; (ii) to apply the passive deposit rate of the Argentine Central Bank, stating that the active rate is
inappropriate; (iii) to reimburse late payment charges to the affected consumers; (iv) to verify the possible existence of calculation
errors leading the defendants to require excessive payments; and (v) to apply the fine set forth in Section 52 bis of Law 24.240.

TASA argues that this is a charge or surcharge
for late payment, similar to a default interest or penalty clause for non-compliance, as referenced in Decree No. 2332/90 and as
outlined in Decree No. 1246/75.

On December 22, 2023, the first-instance
ruling was issued rejecting the claim, with the plaintiff paying court costs. The decision was appealed by the plaintiff, and on August 29,
2024, the Court of Appeals overturned the first-instance ruling upholding the claim. Upon this, the Company filed an extraordinary appeal,
which was rejected by the court, for which it filed a petition in error with the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation.

TMA’s Management and its legal advisors
believe they have solid arguments