A federal judge in Manhattan ordered Argentina on June 30, 2025, to turn over its controlling shares in YPF to help satisfy a $16.1 billion judgment stemming from the oil company's 2012 renationalization. Reuters reported that Judge Loretta Preska directed the government to transfer its 51% stake to BNY Mellon within 14 days for onward transfer to the plaintiffs. President Javier Milei said Argentina would appeal. The order was a legal setback, not confirmation that ownership had already changed hands.
The case concerned what Argentina owed minority investors after taking control of YPF from Spain's Repsol. The litigation argued that Argentina failed to make an offer to other holders when it expropriated Repsol's stake. A September 2023 trial-court decision had awarded approximately $14.39 billion to Petersen Energia Inversora and $1.71 billion to Eton Park Capital Management, according to Reuters. Burford Capital, which backed the claims, stood to receive a share of any proceeds. The dispute predates Milei's presidency, but his government inherited its financial and diplomatic consequences.
A state company's unusual exposure
YPF is both an energy operator and a national asset central to Argentina's shale-development plans. An order involving the government's controlling stake therefore reaches beyond a courtroom accounting entry. Losing or pledging that stake would raise difficult questions about who controlled a company helping develop Vaca Muerta and export infrastructure. It would also send a signal to future investors about how Argentina handles obligations arising from changes of ownership. None of those effects required the company itself to be named as a defendant owing the judgment; the suit was against the republic.
Argentina argued that the shares were protected from turnover under US sovereign-immunity rules. Preska disagreed, Reuters reported, finding that a commercial-activity exception applied. The government called the order legally wrong and said it would seek to halt enforcement while appealing. The US Justice Department had opposed the turnover, according to the same report. That alignment underscored how enforcement of a private judgment against a foreign state's core holding could produce wider policy concerns even when a court found a legal route to do it.
For markets, the stakes were large. Reuters reported Burford shares finished the day 22% higher while YPF shares closed down 5.6%. Those were market reactions on June 30, not valuations of the chance that shares would ultimately be transferred. Argentina had to manage the case while seeking reserves and servicing other debts. For taxpayers, the sum was enormous; for shareholders, it created uncertainty around a company that was still investing.
What happened next
The legal outcome changed materially. On March 27, 2026, Reuters reported that a divided US appeals court overturned the $16.1 billion judgment, holding the plaintiffs' breach-of-contract claims failed under Argentine law. Because the judgment was voided, the court also vacated the order to turn over YPF shares. Burford said it expected the plaintiffs to consider further appeals or other legal avenues, so the ruling did not rule out every possible future claim. It did mean the June order should not be presented in an archive as an outstanding requirement to surrender the stake.
The episode shows how state-company policy can remain hostage to decisions taken a decade earlier. Milei did not initiate the 2012 expropriation, yet the litigation complicated his effort to market Argentina as a predictable investment destination. The June event was an enforcement attempt; the March 2026 appellate reversal is essential context for anyone reading it later.
