You have to make sure you use the same source of tax data for a meaningful comparison because it matters what is included in that total tax revenue and what isn't.
1muflon1 suggested using OECD data which at least on that page doesn't have Argentina. The IMF data available through World Bank does have it, but my point is that if you compare the two graphs below on the common countries (US, Denmark) you'll immediately see the problem that can happen if you source the tax data from different data sets...
(Black line is OECD average in the latter graph.)
OECD does have the data for Argentina in a table somewhere and it's around 30% for 2017 using their methodology (somewhat above the US). Caveat lector. A bit more digging even found an OECD-produced graph that has both the US and Argentina, but it's only for one year (2017). From the OECD table (as well as IMF data graphed above) Argentina indeed has experience and increase in taxation in the past decade. (I guess they "learned how to tax", which was often a complaint (that they didn't) against Argentina a decade ago.)
As discussed in the OECD page that has this last figure, countries with low GDP per capita tend to have lower taxation (as share of GDP). Relative to its GDP per capita bracket, Argentina does have a bit higher taxes (and the opposite is true for the US).
(The GDP of Ireland and Luxembourg are inflated with some corporate tax scheming, in case you wonder why they are so far to the right in that last graph...)
Also from that source, Argentina doesn't rely on personal income taxes much for its tax revenues. What Argentina is famous for (not sure if this has been reformed in the lastest packages)...
Taxes have always been a major concern for businesses in Argentina. According to the
World Bank Enterprise Surveys, in the year 2017 over 36% of the firms in the country, three
times more than the Latin American average, chose Tax Rates as their biggest business
obstacle, and almost 80% of them identify taxes as a major constraint. For the subset
of firms in the City of Buenos Aires, these numbers are even larger. The World Bank
Doing Business Indicators also report taxes as the least friendly factor in doing business in
Argentina. Nominal and effective rates are much higher than the region’s median, and total
taxes and contributions (i.e. social security) are estimated to exceed 100% of the profits. Half
of this burden is attributable to municipal taxes, led by the Gross Income tax (in Spanish,
and henceforth, Ingresos Brutos).
Ingresos Brutos emerged in 1948 to simplify and modernize the tax system, but rapidly
evolved into a policy instrument: a response to the Argentine federal government dictating
and changing the revenues from national tax collection that each province would get. It is
today the main source of income for the provinces and the City of Buenos Aires (henceforth
City), an autonomous municipality similar to a federal district. It accounts for over 70% of
tax revenues in both the City and the Province of Buenos Aires (henceforth Province), is
quite invisible to the final consumer (as opposed to a sales tax), and easy to collect. Ingresos
Brutos is, however, like gross income tax anywhere else, very unpopular for being a cascade
tax, regressive, and not indexed for inflation. It is also non-neutral and distorts economic
incentives, like promoting vertical integration for fiscal motives.
So this explains why Argentina seem among the top countries in that indicator (total corporate tax as percent of profit--a gross income tax allows over 100% of the profit to be taxed.)
An OECD assesment agrees:
the provincial turnover tax (Impuesto sobre los ingresos brutos) is under the full responsibility of the provinces. This turnover tax is particularly distorting because it is levied on sales at every stage in the supply chain, without any deduction for the tax paid in earlier stages. This creates incentives for vertical integration and for avoiding the inter-provincial addition of value, and it acts like an interprovincial tariff barrier.
So yeah, you can have "bad" taxes in other ways than merely overall burden... (This latter source also discusses the export taxes as having mixed effects.)