The trial against Cristina and Máximo Kirchner will last more than a year and span the entire 2027 election year

Hotesur and Los Sauces are two linked investigations into alleged money laundering involving the Kirchner family's companies, properties, hotels, and rental payments. Prosecutors argue that money originating in public works and tax benefits was returned to the family through apparently legitimate property income. The case matters because both Cristina Kirchner and her son face the same trial over connected financial arrangements.

Máximo became central after Néstor and Cristina Kirchner gave him power over all their assets in 2003. He could buy, sell, rent, and borrow in their names. Prosecutors say he signed documents for the family's properties and deposited rental cheques into Los Sauces, the company he chaired.

The oral trial began reading the prosecutors' indictment in the article's reported proceedings. It is expected to end in the final quarter of 2027. The court will therefore operate throughout the year when Máximo may be considered a political candidate and Cristina is seeking a United Nations ruling against her political disqualification.

The article projects a trial lasting more than one year, with its conclusion scheduled for the final quarter of 2027. The first oral hearing had already begun reading the prosecutors' request to send the case to trial, and that reading was set to continue on Monday. The length places the proceedings inside a major political period.

The overlap is not accidental in political terms. The trial is expected to continue across the whole 2027 electoral year, rather than ending before campaigning and voting dominate public attention. Every hearing, allegation, and defense response could therefore receive political scrutiny while the case remains unresolved.

This schedule could affect both defendants' public positions. Máximo is mentioned as a possible candidate in several scenarios considered by Peronism. Cristina is also seeking a United Nations Human Rights Committee ruling against her political disqualification. The trial may consequently shape debates about leadership, eligibility, and the Kirchner family's political future.

The prosecution's theory is that money from public works awarded to Lázaro Báez and tax benefits received by Cristóbal López's group was made to look legitimate through rents and hotel payments. The alleged laundering mechanism was simple: businesses connected to those men paid the Kirchner family for property use, creating income that appeared to come from ordinary commercial activity.

The indictment cites several unusual deals. Báez allegedly built 18 apartments in Río Gallegos, gave ten to the Kirchners on paper, and rented the other eight to himself through his companies. The prosecution also says companies linked to López paid more than twice the normal price for a Puerto Madero apartment. Báez's companies managed Kirchner hotels through a company that only had a restaurant.

Prosecutors also compare rents. After Báez's companies stopped renting the apartments, ordinary neighbors paid 25% to 41% less and were asked for guarantors. Báez was not. The prosecution says these differences show special trust and certainty that payment would be collected.

Máximo Kirchner's role came from a power of attorney signed by Néstor and Cristina Kirchner on May 31, 2003, six days after Néstor took office. The document allowed him to manage all their assets. For more than a decade, he could sell, buy, rent, and request loans in his parents' names.

That authority appears throughout the transactions described by prosecutors. Máximo signed the paperwork for the ten-apartment building that Austral Construcciones built on his father's land. He also signed cheques paying Lázaro Báez's company for eight apartments built on two Los Sauces lots. More than 27 cheques from related rents were deposited into Los Sauces's account.

Because of this paper trail, prosecutors portray Máximo as a central figure rather than a passive family member. He chaired Los Sauces and handled documents connecting the company to Báez and López-linked businesses. The trial will test the prosecution's interpretation of those transactions and his responsibilities within them.

Lázaro Báez and Cristóbal López were business figures whose companies allegedly provided the financial channel connecting outside money with Kirchner family assets. Prosecutors say public works money went to Báez and tax benefits went to López's group. Their companies then allegedly paid for construction, apartments, or hotel use connected to the Kirchners.

Báez's Austral Construcciones built a ten-apartment building on Néstor Kirchner's land. It allegedly sold five apartments to him for half its construction cost. Other Báez companies rented eight apartments built for Los Sauces, returning about $4 million through rent. A Báez company also managed Kirchner hotels in El Calafate, despite only having a restaurant.

López's group used a similar rental arrangement. In 2012, Inversora M&S rented a Los Sauces duplex in Madero Center for more than twice the normal price. Another López company paid for a second apartment, where Fabián de Sousa's former wife lived. Prosecutors view these links as evidence of coordinated transactions.

The main political consequence is visibility. Because the trial is expected to end only in the last quarter of 2027, it will run through the entire electoral year. The courtroom could become a political showcase, keeping the allegations against Cristina and Máximo Kirchner in public debate while parties choose candidates and campaign.

Máximo's position could be especially sensitive. The article says Peronism is considering him as a possible candidate in several scenarios. Hearings about his management of family assets, his signatures, and Los Sauces could affect how voters and party leaders assess his leadership, even though the trial itself has not reached a final outcome in the reported timeline.

Cristina's political situation could also be affected. She is seeking a ruling from the United Nations Human Rights Committee against her political disqualification. The trial's schedule means that legal proceedings and her effort to challenge that disqualification may unfold together, making eligibility and the family's political future central campaign issues.

Money laundering is the process of disguising the origin of money connected to unlawful activity so it appears to come from a legitimate source. In this case, prosecutors allege that funds linked to public works or tax benefits were transformed into apparently ordinary rental, construction, and hotel income. The allegation concerns the movement and appearance of money, not merely ownership of property.

Prices and contracts can raise questions when they do not resemble normal market behavior. A builder allegedly sold five apartments for half its construction cost. Companies allegedly paid rents above market value, then rented the same apartments to ordinary neighbors for 25% to 41% less. Such patterns may suggest that the real purpose was transferring value rather than earning a normal commercial return.

These facts do not prove laundering by themselves. They become significant when combined with repeated transactions, close relationships, unusual payment flows, and missing commercial safeguards. The prosecution says those features show simulated deals and a trusted arrangement for returning money through family properties; the trial will examine that claim.