The National Housing Fund Institute for Workers (Infonavit) has implemented a reform aimed at prioritizing the allocation of as many social housing units as possible, rather than focusing on the profitability of funds. This measure seeks to facilitate access to housing for a greater number of workers, including those with low incomes.
Among the benefits of this new approach is the increase in access to housing credits, the activation of the construction sector by providing more credits, and a clearer social objective that places the right to dignified housing above profitability of funds.
However, this reform also carries risks and issues, such as the potential decrease in the returns on workers' savings, increased financial risk for Infonavit if not managed properly, and deterioration in the quality of housing if not effectively controlled.
The dilemma between maximizing financial returns or prioritizing social housing is not new, and it is crucial to find a balance that satisfies both needs. It is essential for Infonavit to maintain efficient management of funds to ensure good returns without neglecting its social function.
Before this reform, the predominant model at Infonavit focused on maximizing financial returns, which guaranteed security and flexibility for workers, as well as the sustainability of the Institute, but limited access to social housing and excluded low-income workers.
The recent reforms have sparked a debate about the direction that Infonavit should take, and the importance of balancing financial profitability with access to social housing. It is crucial that the reforms are implemented cautiously so as not to compromise the financial security of workers in the long term. In this sense, finding a balance between profitability and the social function of Infonavit presents a significant challenge to ensure the welfare of workers and the viability of the Institute.
