Company: TCMFF
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form Type: 20-F
Source: 0001104659-25-019133
Chunk: 273

Company: TELECOM ARGENTINA SA
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form: 20-F
Item: Item 18
Chunk 273
---
 be subject only to the fee regime provided under LSCA (included in “Taxes and Fees with the Regulatory Authority” of the Statement of Income). Therefore, they shall not be subject to the SU investment contribution or the payment of the Control, Oversight and Verification Fee provided under the LAD.
According to the provisions of SC Resolutions No. 80/07, No. 154/10 and CNC Resolution No. 2,713/07, this is the situation of the Company as of the date:

i)   SU Fund - Impact on the Company with respect to its original license to provide SBT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Telecom Argentina filed its affidavits including the offset amounts related to the services that should be considered as SU services. 
However, several years after the market’s liberalization and the effectiveness of the SU regulations and its amendments, incumbent operators have still not received any offsets for providing services with the characteristics set forth under the SU regime.
The Company has filed its monthly SU affidavits which result in a receivable. The programs and the valuation methodology used to estimate this receivable are pending of approval by the Regulatory Authority. This receivable has not yet been recorded in these consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2024 since it is subject to the approval of the SU Programs and the review of those affidavits by the Regulatory Authority and the confirmation of the existence of enough contributions to the SU Trust so as to compensate the incumbent operators. 

F-

TELECOM ARGENTINA S.A.

Between years 2011 and 2012, the SC issued a serie of resolutions through which it notified the Company that investments associated with certain services and/or programs did not qualify as Initial SU Programs, and that, they did not constitute different services involving a SU provision, and therefore, cannot be financed with SU Funds.
The Company has filed appeals against the above-mentioned resolutions, presenting the legal arguments based on which such resolutions should be revoked. 
In September 2012, the CNC ordered the Company to deposit approximately $208 million. The Company has filed a recourse refusing the CNC’s order on the grounds that the appeals against the SC Resolutions are still pending of resolution.
In November 2019, ENACOM notified that the appeals filed by the Company against the SC resolutions had been rejected, taking them to superior body for substantiation. 
As of the date of these consolidated financial statements, the appeal review body has not yet issued a decision.
While it cannot be assured that these issues