Argentina made the informal offer after a potentially onerous legal clause in its bonds ceased to apply on Dec. 31. The hedge funds, known as holdouts, had sued Argentina in the United States to get full payments on bonds that the country defaulted on in 2001.

The provision that expired on Dec. 31, known as the rights-upon-future-offers clause, had prohibited Argentina from paying out better terms to the holdouts than it had to investors who had accepted less money in debt restructuring deals in 2005 and 2010. Now, the country can, in theory, strike a deal with the holdouts without facing demands from the other creditors.

Axel Kicillof, the economy minister, said Argentina’s overtures to the holdouts would be on the same terms that it had offered other bondholders, with some sweeteners.

But Argentina is still asking the holdouts to accept a haircut of 65 percent on the bond principal, Mr. Kicillof told a local news website over the weekend. He said it would be “as if the exchange were taking place in 2005.” He did claim, however, that Argentina would offer some extra money, such as all the accrued interest on the discounted bonds since 2005.

The holdouts, led by Paul Singer’s hedge fund, Elliott Management, and other bondholders that did not file suit, are owed a total of $23 billion, Mr. Kicillof estimated. Under the most recent preliminary offer, he said, they would receive $6.5 billion.

The holdouts have already repeatedly refused offers of around 30 cents on the dollar, including in the hours leading up to the default.

The dispute with the bondholders stems from Argentina’s default in 2001. Most investors who held bonds that were in default exchanged them for new ones with so-called haircuts, accepting less than they were owed. But a group of hedge funds led by Mr. Singer did not exchange their bonds and instead took Argentina to court in an attempt to be paid full value for them, gaining the name holdouts.

In 2012, Judge Thomas P. Griesa of the Federal District Court in Manhattan ruled that Argentina could not service its restructured debt if it did not pay the litigating holdout creditors, in full, at the same time. Argentina has so far not done so, and in September, the same judge found the nation in contempt of court.

The latest negotiations seem to be at an impasse.

There appears to have been no formal discussion of the latest offer. A source close to the holdouts said Mr. Kicillof’s remarks represented “simply the same take-it-or-leave-it offer from 2005 and demonstrate that he is not serious about negotiating a resolution.”

“The two sides are so far apart that it is not meaningful,” Siobhan Morden, head of Latin America strategy at Jefferies in New York, said of the offer. “The holdouts want their original par. Argentina is still only offering a fraction of what they are legally entitled to receive.”

The testy relationship between Argentina and the bondholders has been a battle of public relations. Mr. Kicillof has called the holdouts the “Ebola of the international financial system.” They, along with Judge Griesa, have also been called “vultures” in Argentina, seeking to scavenge on the remnants of the nation’s 2001 default.

Mr. Kicillof has previously said that Argentina would not move beyond its earlier offers. Some analysts expected Argentina to budge so that it could regain access to global debt markets to increase foreign currency reserves it needs for servicing debt and energy imports. But it has recently managed to stabilize its reserves by other means, including a currency swap with China.

Ms. Morden said only “extraordinary economic stress,” like a balance-of-payments crisis, which for now seems unlikely, would force Argentina to concede ground to the holdouts.

Peter Eavis contributed reporting from New York.