According to a sample analyzed by the General Audit Office (AGN, for its acronym in Spanish) in a report adopted in 2008, 48% of foreign buyers of land border known as "security zones" do not meet all the current requirements.

For its work, the Watchdog took 68 of the 137 sales that took place between January 2003 and June 2007 in the Andean-Patagonian area. The report noted that in 94% of cases the Secretariat of Environment and Sustainable Development was not consulted if native forests were within the territory, as was established in the Directorate of Technical Affairs Border (DAFT) in 2005.

The "security zones" comprise a strip on the land and maritime boundary, and a belt around the inside military or civilian establishments that are relevant to the country's defense. The widths of the zones are determined by the executive branch but in no case can exceed 150 kilometers of land border, 50maritime border and 30 on the grounds of the interior.

Current legislation states that "it is of national interest that the properties located in safe areas belong to native Argentine citizens." For foreigners to acquire property in those territories, or operating permits and concessions, there is a system of "prior consent" that has a number of requirements checked by the inspection body.

For individuals, these obligations are related to the exercise of citizenship that must prove naturalized Argentine or, in the case of foreigners, their years of permanent residence in the country. If they can not meet those requirements, they must submit the investment project such as legal ones do with the amount of capital to invest included, plus a schedule, project phases and nationality of the workforce to use.

The audit report says the legislation prior agreement is "scattered, outdated and, in general, make regulations issued by organizations no longer exist or have lost competition" on safety zones.

The AGN detected that 15% of sales were not revised or lack a draft investment. In the cases where they did have the projections, the DAFT, precisely the one responsible for examining cases of prior consent, has the necessary structure to inspect "in situ" the actual implementation of the investments.

When requests for prior approval only meet the requirement to submit the investment plan can be approved by "an exception". The sample analyzed by the inspection body, shows that 45.6% of the operations were admitted as exceptions.

Also, 69% of records have no copy writing, "which prevents a proper understanding of the ownership of the property located in safe areas", completed the audit.