Zayaan Aftab — October 27, 2026
Argentina’s “LIBRA” cryptocurrency scandal initially began in February of 2025, when President Javier Milei made a post announcing he had created a token that would “boost Argentina’s economy by funding small businesses.” That token surged from $0 to almost $5 very quickly and collapsed in value to under $1 a few hours later. Then, the president deleted the post, claiming he was “unaware of the project’s details.” More than 100 fraud complaints were filed against the president as a response, opening up a formal investigation by an Argentine judge.
These accusations have been supported by claims from insiders who benefitted from the scandal. Crypto entrepreneur Hayden David admitted to being a participant in LIBRA’s launch, “sniping” crypto at low costs to sell at massive profits. This tactic is usually considered illegal in regulated markets, which raises concerns about internal connections and/or support for LIBRA that are undisclosed to the public. While close to 86% of traders who bought LIBRA lost money, there were a few who pocketed significant profits.
Later investigations have shown that there may have been connections and/or payments to Milei that motivated this scandal. Call logs and financial agreements show that crypto lobbyist Mauricio Novelli may have paid entities that are connected to Milei a few million dollars to motivate the launching of LIBRA.
Recently, an Argentinian federal judge ruled on whether this incident was fraudulent or not, concluding that the scandal did not “constitute a criminal offense,” as investor losses and Milei’s social media posts are insufficient to establish fraud. An investigation into businessman Hayden Davis, who was a “launch advisor” for the token, has also been dropped.
Amidst rising efforts to spur crypto adoption broadly, this incident may have harmed the reputation of Argentina’s crypto sector, slowing these efforts down. Argentina’s central blank was planned to allow banks to offer crypto services a few months ago, but it has not followed through with any updates. However, given the judge’s recent ruling that this incident is not fraudulent, the reputational harm may be softened.
Read more here:
