The rationale for intervention in favor of economic regulation efforts stems from the presumed inability of the market to deal with particular structural problems. Of course, the details of any program often reflect political force and not reasoned argument. Yet thoughtful justification is still necessary when evaluating programs.[1]The case of water reform in Chile is interesting. First, it allows us to think about a situation in which regulatory reforms face political decision-making through the outcome of proposed legislation. Secondly, the case is not about a lack of political commitment, but rather a situation in which the government is now faced with the important question of passing legislation that directly affects households – the main question is not not whether to privatize, but how to regulate. which will be privatized. Finally, this shows us the importance of having a credible and independent regulatory framework in order to have effective reforms. Despite the success of SENDOS, the government had few problems facing it with public enterprises: - It had to restructure the public entity which was responsible for regulating quality while providing the service. SENDOS did not have the power of economic regulation and tariff control which rested with the Ministry of the Economy. It was only after the reforms that a regulatory agency, the SISS, was created and given, among other things, the right to set prices and audit companies. But even then, its capacity was limited due to high dependence on the government. The regulatory system did not provide the government with a credible system of checks and balances. Besides defining a geographic area that the company was obligated to serve, much remained unclear, including the indefinite duration of concessions, giving companies the right to transfer or subcontract to another supplier which could be revoked by the government in the event of non-compliance with revocation procedures. which were not specified. This adds to the next problem of financing water services. The government relies heavily on national budget funds and loans. Due to the existence of tariffs insufficient to cover operating costs, the government had to make changes in the management and regulatory structure separating the functions of regulating quality and tariffs from those of providing services. Wastewater treatment required significant investments in water treatment, especially in the Santiago metropolitan area. Although the construction of three new water treatment plants was planned under the BOT with EMOS, the goals of treating 100 percent of all wastewater by 2005 set by the Chilean administration did not appear realistic taking into account the increase (up to 80 percent) in the current funding amount. necessary for an annual investment.