Right of association
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
S supports the committee's proposal as the questions are already being addressed 1 and believes that the right of association should facilitate administration, ensure order and protect employees 1. SD wants to adapt the Accounting Act to digital solutions, facilitate archiving outside Sweden and replace criminal liability for annual reports with late fees 2. M wants to reduce the administrative burden by adapting the legislation to the digital world 3. C believes that criminal liability for annual reports should be replaced with monetary fines 4. KD argues that bureaucracy hinders entrepreneurs and that rules should be simplified 5. MP wants to legislate that at least 40 percent of board members shall be women 6 to bring in women who have never been given the chance 7. M questions whether quotas undermine a woman's own power 8 and argues that men are better at bringing in men 9. L believes that quotas are the wrong way and that people should sit on boards thanks to their competence 10. L argues that women have created more jobs and increased tax revenues 10.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Speakers (15)
Markus Kallifatides (S)
Mr. Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a parliamentary decision.
Regarding the Committee on Civil Affairs' report number 11, Association Law, we Social Democrats stand behind the committee's proposal to reject all motions in the area, primarily with reference to the ongoing preparation of reform proposals in the Government Offices or to investigations that are to submit their final reports in the very near future. In all material respects, it is now the work of the previous S-led government in the area that is to be completed by the Kristersson government. We Social Democrats will, of course, constructively and critically review the proposals when they finally reach the Riksdag.
The citizens have a right to a certain update on how the work here in the Riksdag is proceeding. That is what I intended to devote my speech to now.
It is naturally good for Sweden that there is broad consensus here in the Riksdag that association law issues regarding corporate forms, corporate governance, accounting rules, etc. should be investigated and prepared carefully before decisions on new legislation are made. Furthermore, I perceive that there is great agreement that association law must be designed with a number of legitimate objectives in mind: the company's need for reasonably smooth administration, the state's interest in order and regularity, among other things in tax collection, the public's opportunities to monitor their interests as employees, customers, or suppliers to, for example, limited companies, as well as the interest of protection against the exploitation of association forms such as limited companies for criminal activity.
I note that a number of motions regarding, for example, changes to the Accounting Act are in this year's handling and that these motions are rejected by the committee for the simple reason that exactly these issues were very recently investigated at the request of the Civil Affairs Committee in the investigation report Simplifications for Micro-enterprises and Modernization of the Accounting Act (SOU 2021:60).
I note that a long series of referral bodies have submitted their views and that the proposals are now being prepared by the government. This concerns, for example, that the requirement to keep accounting records in paper form for four years shall be abolished. The Swedish people should know that everyone is in favor and that no one is against it. Total unanimity prevails on the issue. In my opinion, therefore, no motions and no committee preparation were needed in these matters during this parliamentary year.
Mr. Speaker! I further note that the Sweden Democrats, in their committee motion 2022/23:965 by Tobias Andersson and others, request a declaration that the government should appoint an inquiry to decriminalize late annual reports. The proposers want to see, instead of a criminal system with imprisonment in the range of penalties, a new system with only late fees.
In contrast to the motion currently under consideration, following this committee's announcement, the important Investigation on the company as a tool for crime, with directive number 2021:115, is ongoing, which has been tasked to also consider certain questions regarding the submission of specifically annual reports.
The investigator has, among other things, been tasked with analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of a shortened deadline for limited companies to submit their annual reports, taking a position on whether the deadline should be shortened and, if so, making an assessment of which types of companies should be covered, considering changes to the sanction system in the Annual Accounts Act and the Companies Act, and proposing the legislative amendments that are needed. The assignment shall be reported by June 22, 2023, at the latest.
In the committee, all parties except the Sweden Democrats argue that, among other things, the issue of criminal liability for accounting crimes is already being addressed within the framework of the Inquiry into the Company as a Tool for Crime. All except the Sweden Democrats therefore consider that this work should not be preempted by any action from the Riksdag.
Mr. Speaker! It is still a bit strange. Representatives for the Sweden Democrats speak about tough measures against crime and about the victim's perspective every hour of the day, all year round. But bookkeeping crimes are to be decriminalized. Is it not reasonable to expect that people who run serious business activities can manage to submit the annual report within six months after the end of the financial year? It is about six months, Mr. Speaker, not six days or six weeks. One has half a year.
One is naturally only sentenced to prison if the annual report or the accounting otherwise is intentionally misleading. No one goes to prison in this country for having submitted an annual report a few months late by mistake or due to ignorance.
Mr. Speaker! I hope that the civil affairs committee's important work with the law of associations will also in the future be characterized by the seriousness that issues regarding the conditions of business, the functioning of the tax system, and the fight against economic crime deserve.
Martin Westmont (SD)
Mr. Speaker! We in the Sweden Democrats stand behind all our motions, but I only move for the approval of the Sweden Democrats' reservation number 1.
Mr. Speaker! A good business climate stimulates entrepreneurship and contributes to increased growth and opportunities for more jobs. If we as politicians can facilitate for more to run and start new companies, it is a good idea that we also do so. Against this background, the Sweden Democrats have proposed that the Accounting Act should be reviewed. As the Accounting Act looks today, it is adapted for older conditions that prevailed before digital solutions were developed. The Swedish Accounting Act needs to be adapted to current developments to a greater extent than it is designed for today.
Today's requirement that accounting information must be stored in Sweden unnecessarily complicates things for many companies. The rules allow, under certain conditions, that accounting information on machine-readable media can be stored outside of Sweden and that the location is then reported to Skatteverket and Finansinspektionen. But digitalization has come a long way and is under constant development, and it enables a more efficient and simpler handling of accounting information than today's system. Electronic archiving means that one is not bound to a specific geographical location, which contributes to lower costs and less administrative work for our entrepreneurs.
Enabling digital archiving in a location other than Sweden simply makes it easier for companies and the business sector to focus more on core activities and spend less time on time-consuming administration, which we in the Sverigedemokraterna consider is the right way to go.
Mr. Speaker! Another important issue is the rules on how annual accounts shall be prepared. There is a difference between annual accounts and annual reports; therefore, the same regulatory framework is not required. An annual report is a public document, which does not apply to annual accounts. This creates complicated interpretations and uncertainties about what applies to what, and it is also one of the reasons why we want to see a change.
Many who prepare annual accounts do so in a simplified form. This can apply to non-profit associations, housing cooperatives, and natural persons conducting business activities. Those who prepare annual accounts have extensive and difficult-to-interpret rules to take into account. This leads to a lot of time and resources being spent on interpretations that are uncertain and difficult to manage. Many of those who prepare annual accounts would be helped by simpler and clearer rules that are separated from the regulatory framework for annual reports. This would facilitate the work of, among others, many non-profit associations.
Mr. Speaker! The requirement for share capital has been lowered. The amendment to the Companies Act entered into force on 1 January 2020. The purpose of the amendment was for the limited company form to become more accessible for those who run or want to start a company.
The Sweden Democrats consider that a reduction of the capital requirement is fundamentally good so that more people can form limited companies, but more measures are required if it is to become a successful reform. There is a great need for further investigations and for more and more in-depth changes to the regulatory framework than merely lowering the share capital.
A system with one level for starting capital and a higher level for share capital and liquidation occurs in many countries and could serve as inspiration and constitute the starting point for a Swedish investigation. It is important that the concept of a limited company does not become too diluted by the value of the companies becoming too low. There should be an intrinsic value in limited companies, but at the same time, the obstacles should not be too great to start new companies.
Given that a reduction of the starting capital for limited companies can lead to liquidation problems, a new investigation should be commissioned. The investigation shall demonstrate what constitutes an optimal starting capital at different stages. Assuming that the share capital should be increased after a period of time as an increased buffer against liquidation, the investigation should examine what level for an increased share capital after a certain period would be optimal.
Mr. Speaker! Let us together create a better business climate. Regulatory simplifications, including those I have just described, create better conditions for running businesses in Sweden. The less time companies have to spend on time-consuming administration and bureaucracy, the more time our entrepreneurs can spend on business development and increased growth.
Jennie Wernäng (M)
Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by expressing my support for the committee's proposal in the Committee on Civil Affairs' report CU11. After that, I want to begin my speech by saying that it should be easy to do the right thing in Sweden.
Regulatory complications and tangled systems must be changed. I know that many speakers before me have spoken about simplifying rules, but right here and now it feels as if the winds of change are blowing. The Government has on numerous occasions pointed out that this is what they want to contribute with. This also applies to the broad strokes – that is, not just our committee.
Mr. Speaker! We must assume that as an entrepreneur in today's Sweden, one wants to do the right thing, but many systems are so complicated today that one must receive training for entrepreneurs - a kind of Swedish red tape 2.0.
I am a fan of Swedish companies. We Moderates have companies and entrepreneurship in our blood. Therefore, it feels good that modernizations and regulatory simplifications of our laws are occurring right now.
An area for rapid development should be within the digital world. There, we have not quite kept up. My signature with a fountain pen has been replaced with an e-identification. Finally, some say. No, others shout. It is this that one is torn between as a legislator, namely that a positive digital development that simplifies things for someone leads to a digital exclusion for someone else.
Mr. Speaker! Many of us speak about security, not least in view of the restless world around us. What does our digital vulnerability mean? Can it be compared with our fountain pen that was used for our signatures in the past? Back then, there were forged signatures. The ingenuity to get people to sign on incorrect grounds with the help of their e-identification never ends. But that you are the owner of your signature has probably never been safer.
How do we handle digital exclusion then? Is it reasonable that we must live in a society with both reins and lifebelts, with both paper and the digital? The double work and the administrative tasks are growing in tandem with the costs in Sweden. It is precisely that which makes it difficult to interpret and create new laws. Someone or some people will always get caught in the crossfire. A law must have a good effect, and as few as possible should be affected negatively.
Mr. Speaker! Legislation must develop alongside society and must create opportunities for new social development. The digital world is our new social development, and it moves fast. But for the individual entrepreneur or for the large actors, this will mean less administrative burden in the long run. We are well on our way with broad investigations that are currently being prepared in the Government Offices, which is also the answer to many wise proposals that point out that we just happen to agree on that.
Mr. Speaker! I want to conclude where I began, namely that it shall be easy to do the right thing in Sweden in the future - for the individual human being and for the entrepreneur.
Alireza Akhondi (C)
Mr. Speaker! I begin by moving for approval of the Center Party's reservation number 1 regarding a review of the Accounting Act. Sweden needs a modern accounting law adapted to today's digital possibilities that can facilitate and reduce bureaucracy and control, as well as facilitate auditing. We want the proposals addressed in the report Simplifications for micro-enterprises to be implemented immediately.
I also want to take the opportunity to give some credit to the Sweden Democrats' proposal regarding annual reports. It is not directly a matter of removing all other reports that entrepreneurs need to submit to Skatteverket. The bookkeeping must still be handled. These regulations are not changed just because one removes the penalty for the annual report and replaces it with a fine. The Sweden Democrats are completely right about this.
Larry Söder (KD)
Mr. Speaker! We are speaking, as said, about the right of association. In the report, there are 26 motions and 9 reservations from the Sweden Democrats, the Centre Party, and the Green Party. It may not be the largest report we are to discuss here in the chamber, but it is indeed very important.
Given all the new laws and controls and all the bureaucratic hassle that the administrative Sweden comes up with, I have reflected a bit on who wants to, can, and has the energy to become an entrepreneur. We expect that one knows all the rules from the beginning and that, alongside the main activity for which one created the business, one manages to complete all the administrative parts. The administrative Sweden also consists of us here, I would like to assert.
One might perhaps forget that we set almost the same requirements on all companies, both small companies and large companies. We expect everyone to be able to follow all the rules immediately. I think it is a very high expectation of a person who has an idea and a thought, creates a company, and then is expected to be able to do all of this. No one can know everything that is required right from the start; rather, one is shaped into it.
Entrepreneurship is rather about a genuine interest in what one does and a will to drive and develop a business. Many people have ideas and dreams, but it is far from everyone who can realize them. Being an entrepreneur is about having the drive to be able to turn one's ideas and dreams into action. Most often, these ideas and dreams are crushed by the administrative, bureaucratic parts that we impose on them.
An entrepreneur is often described as someone who sees opportunities before obstacles and is creative and brave. But we in the administrative Sweden set up obstacles so that they cannot be creative and brave.
Research shows that it is common for entrepreneurs to be risk-prone, which does not mean that they are reckless but rather aware of the risks with their investments. Good qualities are also to be goal-oriented and at the same time devoid of prestige and have an ability to change incorrect decisions into correct decisions. But we in the administrative Sweden want them to make the right decision directly. We do not see that people can do right another time.
These people are, I want to assert, those who drive society forward in many ways with ideas, thoughts, and companies. They are the ones who dare to challenge, try, test, and lose; many of these people actually lose their invested capital, their time, and their commitment. But they can also win and create something unique. Many of Sweden's large companies were created as small companies and are today multinational. This is what we politicians and society should encourage and help as much as possible.
It is incredibly difficult to become an entrepreneur today. On one hand, it is difficult to finance the startup of the business as it is difficult to obtain venture capital. On the other hand, we as human beings are not best at everything. The administrative part can be very burdensome for many people.
Only the administrative part of the business have the motions treated in the committee report concentrated on, which makes me happy. It concerns accounting and how it should be stored and managed. It concerns the composition of corporate boards as well as reporting on sustainability and diversity. In total, there are nine reservations that all in their own way want well and want to improve.
The Sweden Democrats have a motion regarding the storage of accounts, and it may seem like a small part. But as companies grow, this part can become an administrative burden that is well worth looking at in order to simplify things for the individual.
I believe that more entrepreneurs are needed in Sweden. It is with them that we build the welfare. The best way to get more entrepreneurs is to reduce the administration for them and simplify the rules that we create.
Katarina Luhr (MP)
Mr. Speaker! Today, on International Women's Day, I naturally intended to take the opportunity to speak about the quota of corporate boards. This day is established precisely so that one can raise issues of inequality.
Quotas are a tool that has been used for a long time, and it has also led to more and more women being able to take positions of power in society. The long-term goal is that an equal gender distribution in the long run should be so self-evident and normative that one should not have to steer in this way. Unfortunately, we still have a long way to go before we are there. In the current situation, there is also a large amount of strong forces working against a diversity of people in all parts of society. It is therefore even more important that quotas can remain as a tool and that we can hold fast to the importance of equality.
The motion that I want to highlight today is about that we should legislate that at least 40 percent of members in corporate boards shall be women. Most often, 40-60 is statistically counted as an even gender distribution. Legislation such as this has existed for a long time in Norway. It can also be compared with a new EU directive which says that listed companies by 2026 at the latest shall have at least 33 percent of the underrepresented gender among the board positions.
According to an industry report from Allbright from 2021, the majority of executive groups in Swedish listed companies are not gender-balanced. Every fifth company completely lacks women in the executive group. The proportion of women on the boards of listed companies has remained stagnant at 34 percent over the last four years, i.e., on average one-third women and two-thirds men. This is obviously not reasonable in 2023. The development is going too slowly.
In order to achieve a more equal business sector, Miljöpartiet wants to legislate on gender quotas for corporate boards so that at least 40 percent of the members in all listed companies as well as municipal and state-owned companies shall be women.
It has been shown that companies with a higher proportion of women lead to more equal management teams and more women in the nomination committee. Furthermore, women at the highest level are more likely to promote and recruit other women to leadership positions, which of course could increase the pace of getting more women into corporate boards.
If we want to strengthen women's empowerment together, we can start by making it easier for women to reach positions of power. Groups with power are reluctant to give up power voluntarily. Some reforms seem to take too long to implement if political proposals and new laws do not push them forward. There are very many examples of this throughout history. I therefore want to, today on International Women's Day 2023, move for the approval of the Miljöpartiets reservation 5 regarding quotas for corporate boards.
Jennie Wernäng (M)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for raising this important issue. However, I have a short question regarding quotas. How does the member view the fact that one might undermine the woman on the board when one can get the feeling that she actually did not get in on her own merits?
My experience is that this has become a negative word. When a new woman joins a board, she might be asked: So, have you been quoted? I think that is an important part of this.
Women have fought throughout all times to break through by their own power. I agree: It takes a very long time. It has been going on for very many years, and I think there should be more women everywhere. But how does the member think regarding the question of the word and the experience of having been forced into it?
Katarina Luhr (MP)
Mr. Speaker! When the Social Democrats started with every other woman, a study was conducted looking at what happened when people were quoted in so that every other person would be a woman. It turned out then that well-educated and professional women replaced mediocre men. There is also an expression that says that if all mediocre women can get such positions as mediocre men have today, then we have achieved equality.
I believe that one can prove quite quickly that regardless of whether one has been quota-hired or not, one can do the job just as well. I therefore do not believe that the problem of being asked whether one has been quota-hired is particularly large.
Jennie Wernäng (M)
Mr. Speaker! Well, it is a bit of both, I get the feeling, and it is very important that we dare to take this fight.
I read the member's motion, and it says there that women in higher positions today are most often more inclined to include women on the board. I think that men are much better at including men than we women are, and therefore I do not believe that a legal requirement will govern this. It is about starting with ourselves, quite simply, with you and me. Together we can see and create a change.
Katarina Luhr (MP)
Mr. Speaker! There are many political reforms that have required that one goes in and actually makes a legislative change or something else to change a norm.
I think it is completely incomprehensible that, on average today, there are one-third women and two-thirds men on corporate boards. Have we not come further? I think it is completely inconceivable.
In the best of worlds we would be equal, but we are not. For example, there have never been more women than men in the Riksdag, even though women have been allowed to be members of parliament for a hundred years. Isn't it going a bit slowly? Don't we need to do something about the fact that there are so few women in positions of power? I am completely convinced that we need to.
Martin Westmont (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I would like Member Luhr to tell us a bit more about how Miljöpartiet has thought about this issue.
If we take an example: We have a successful company where 100 percent of the board members are women. They have received that position because they have worked hard, and they are the most competent for the assignment. Is it then Miljöpartiet's policy that some of these women should have to move aside so that men with lower competence are quoted into the board?
Katarina Luhr (MP)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question, Martin Westmont!
This is actually about gender quotas for women and that at least 40 percent shall be women. Then there is the new EU legislation which says that persons of the underrepresented gender shall enter corporate boards so that they constitute 33 percent.
Then one has to go along with that, if it is so that it can actually benefit women so that we get a better gender distribution in all other companies. It is actually an incredibly important issue, and I believe that in all boards and in all groups, one wins by having a good representation. It is also something that my party has always worked with: It shall be every other person, and we shall have two spokespersons, one of each gender. I do not think that it is any strange thing.
Martin Westmont (SD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the clarification, member!
There is another aspect of this that I am sure the member is fully aware of, and that is that the women who today sit on corporate boards most often have twice as many board positions as men. How does member Luhr reason regarding that? How many board positions can one take on? If women who today sit on boards have an average of six board positions and the men have three board positions, how does Miljöpartiet reason regarding that aspect? Can we pile even more board positions on these women?
Katarina Luhr (MP)
Mr. Speaker! The world is so cleverly constructed that there are approximately 50 percent women and 50 percent men. It is not just a small number of women who can sit on boards.
That is what this is about: that there are many women who never get the chance to have a board position. We aim to get more women in, not for the same woman to work twice or three times as much.
Jakob Olofsgård (L)
Mr. Speaker! Small and medium-sized enterprises represent opportunities for people to realize their dreams and are a fundamental prerequisite for our collective social construction and our welfare. It is through the companies' opportunities to grow that jobs are created and thus also tax revenues for welfare.
We see that in these difficult times of both high inflation and high interest rates, it is very tough for Sweden's entrepreneurs, especially the small and medium-sized enterprises. Many companies are currently on their knees. It is therefore important for politics to constantly live close to these brave heroes and do everything in our power to create the conditions for them to reach their dreams. Politics shall contribute to making things easier.
Having grown up in a small business home on a farm, I remember my father's constant struggle with the bookkeeping. I remember thick binders of invoices. Above all, I remember the high interest rates during the 80s, where we wondered if it would add up. It did not add up, but we managed through hard work. What is the entrepreneur's and the business owner's great gift is to keep fighting on anyway.
Despite the tough economic situation in the 80s, the first computer became an invaluable tool. It was a costly investment in 1987, Mr. Speaker – an IBM 286 with a 2 megabyte hard drive and 1 megabyte of RAM. It cost 25,000, and those were large sums in the 80s. But one still chose to invest there at home on the farm. Digitalization had come to stay and was an invaluable help for my father when it came to getting the bookkeeping in order.
Digitalization is a very welcome tool. It has its challenges, and there are also downsides that we need to look at. Now, an investigation is on the government's desk with proposals to facilitate things for companies through digitalization so that double work can be avoided.
It is the same thing when it comes to digital meetings. Times of crisis drive and force development forward. The pandemic resulted in us now having the temporary law until the end of 2023, and the government is now working on proposals on how this can function in the best way moving forward. There are certainly good lessons to be drawn here from having tested digital meetings in live operation. We will have reason to return to exactly this in another debate.
Mr. Speaker! In today's debate, we have heard that the composition of a company's board is extremely important, even decisive. We agree on that. It is important that company boards also become more gender-balanced. Today, it stands at approximately 35 percent women across all companies, both listed and unlisted, and on International Women's Day, it is self-evident to say that 35 percent is too low. It is clearly not good. It needs to be higher.
Work is ongoing due to the EU directive that the goal should be 40 percent, but I am convinced that a member of a corporate board wants to sit there primarily because of their competence and not because they are quoted. There are incredibly many capable people of both genders within this area. Work needs to be done, but quotas are absolutely the wrong way to go.
When it comes to sustainability and diversity - another couple of important issues, especially for companies today - these are things investors look at. It is a matter of showcasing one's sustainability work to one's investors. Today, it is economically profitable for companies to invest in precisely sustainability, diversity, and equality. Therefore, we in politics should not hinder but instead participate in encouraging this. Naturally, small and medium-sized enterprises should not be affected by excessive red tape, and Sweden has no reason to go further than what the new EU directive says regarding corporate sustainability reporting.
When it comes to women's opportunities to run companies, the development in the welfare sector is very encouraging. There, I meet women who have created more jobs and new life chances for individuals, reduced exclusion, and increased tax revenues, which in turn finance the common welfare and also integration.
It is well worth highlighting this Women's Day that the Liberals have fought and will continue to fight for economic empowerment for women in Sweden - because cash is queen.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.