Bioceres Crisis: The Bankruptcy of the Parent Company Following Trucco's Decisions

The bankruptcy filed by Bioceres S.A. triggered an unprecedented corporate confrontation. At the center of the dispute is Federico Trucco, CEO of Bioceres Crop Solutions (BIOX), whom the parent company blames for the financial collapse that led to the legal protection request. The numbers speak for themselves: while in 2024 the company recorded losses of $6 billion, during the fiscal year 2025 (ended June 30), those losses skyrocketed to $157 billion.

The asset deterioration that forced the bankruptcy

Bioceres S.A. maintains that the bankruptcy was not a strategy but an unavoidable outcome. “The extent of the asset deterioration does not allow for retrospective reinterpretations. Faced with the objective impossibility of meeting payable obligations, the bankruptcy filing was not a strategic choice but a necessary measure to manage the situation within the current legal framework,” the company explained in its official statement.

The company reaffirms its commitment to transparency and to the judicial resolution of the issues, trusting that audited and verifiable documentation will allow an assessment of the decisions made and their impact on assets. The current shareholders of Bioceres S.A.—Bioceres Group Limited and Bioceres LLC, which hold 90% of the shares, plus 41 minority shareholders with the remaining 10%—are now seeking to initiate a social liability action. This legal tool allows a company to sue its own directors if it believes their decisions caused economic damage, potentially even claiming against the personal assets of the accused.

Losses multiplied: from $6 billion to $157 billion

The jump in losses is the central focus of the conflict and accusations of mismanagement. This gap of approximately $151 billion between the two fiscal years is, according to Bioceres S.A., conclusive evidence of poor management decisions within the group.

For the parent company, the key lies in how the corporate restructuring was organized after the merger of Bioceres Group Limited with Moolec Science in mid-2024. When BIOX—considered “the jewel of the group”—was expected to contribute approximately $285 million in net assets to the consolidated balance sheet, that contribution never materialized. The clear accusation is that Trucco deliberately separated BIOX from the Argentine structure, transferring its main operational assets to the international company and leaving Bioceres S.A. as a “shell” burdened with most of the financial obligations.

BIOX, Rizobacter, and Pro Farm: assets in dispute

The battle over operational assets explains much of the crisis. Rizobacter and Pro Farm are the two main pillars of BIOX, and around them, the controversy revolves.

In early 2026, the shareholder fund Jasper Lake, affected by payment defaults, acquired Pro Farm for just $15 million— a tiny fraction of the $247 million it originally cost. This minimal payment covers only a small part of the debt owed to this shareholder, leaving approximately $90 million still outstanding. The pressure has focused on Rizobacter, which acts as collateral for that remaining debt.

According to sources close to the company, BIOX’s current operational reality is critical: the company is on the verge of losing Rizobacter as a result of decisions that fragmented the group. This loss would mean the collapse of BIOX’s most valuable asset.

Cross accusations: structured financial weakness or control strategy?

From close circles to Trucco, the narrative is entirely different. They claim it is a “coercive move” led by Juan Sartori, the main shareholder of Moolec and current controller of Bioceres S.A. According to this perspective, Sartori’s strategy was to deliberately weaken the group’s financial structure to exert pressure on its key assets—particularly BIOX and Rizobacter—with a view to a potential takeover under more favorable conditions.

Sartori is a Uruguayan businessman and former senator who currently presides over Union Group International Holdings, a private investment firm that played a decisive role in the structure that enabled BIOX’s IPO. Besides his control of Moolec Science, Sartori has been on the board of Adecoagro, one of the region’s leading agribusiness conglomerates, controlled by the crypto giant Tether, for just over a year. He is also co-owner of the English football club Sunderland and co-founder and president of Union Acquisition Corp.

The convergence of these roles concentrates significant corporate power, which from Trucco’s environment reinforces the thesis of a coordinated maneuver to restructure the group’s control. While Bioceres S.A. awaits judicial resolution, BIOX remains under pressure, and creditors await clarity on the future of their operational guarantees.