Paraguay’s Senate has opened an investigation into a possible Ueno Bank monopoly over loans issued by the Social Security Institute (IPS), which administers the country’s mandatory social security system. Two requests for information, submitted by Senator Rafael Filizzola of the Progressive Democratic Party, require the Central Bank of Paraguay (BCP) and IPS to detail the contracts and rules that require beneficiaries, retirees and pensioners to open accounts at the private bank to receive their loan funds.
Filizzola questioned the concentration of public resources at the institution, which absorbed Visión Banco’s operations in 2024. According to data cited by the senator, Ueno Bank manages about ₲5.1 trillion (US$863 million) in state and social security funds—more than twice the bank’s net worth and four times its paid-in capital. Of that total, IPS holds ₲2.2 trillion (US$356 million) in certificates of deposit, securities and available funds.
The IPS loan portfolio moves between ₲1.6 trillion and ₲2.1 trillion (US$263 million to US$345 million) a year. Filizzola argues that conditioning access to these funds on opening an account at Ueno Bank violates users’ freedom of choice and turns IPS into a “customer acquisition channel” for the private institution. “IPS does not exist to get customers for a bank,” he said in a post on X.
The requests for information seek full copies of the contracts between IPS and Ueno Bank, as well as its predecessor, Visión Banco, along with statistical data since 2020 on the number of loans approved, average amounts and accounts opened as a result of the mechanism. The BCP must clarify whether the Paraguayan Payment System (SIPAP) has the technical capacity to process direct interbank transfers without mandatory intermediaries, and whether the current practice violates consumer protection rules.
IPS and the BCP have 15 days to respond. If the requirement is confirmed, the case could constitute the illegal channeling of public funds, affecting banking competition and beneficiaries’ rights. In a video posted on social media, Filizzola described the situation as the “systematic concentration of social security funds in a single financial institution.”