The fee to the European Union

Gunilla Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! We have now come to the final budget debate for this year. The debate concerns the Committee on Finance's report FiU5, which deals with expenditure area 27 The fee to the European Union.

In last year's debate, I pointed out that the recent years had entailed major economic and political challenges within European cooperation. It has been the same this year as well. We see that many countries in Europe are suffering from tough economic deficits. The US president has, during the year, threatened and introduced increased customs duties. Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is still not over.

Almost a month ago, the European Council and the European Parliament reached an agreement on the EU's budget for 2026. We Social Democrats supported the government's direction to, just as in previous years, work to ensure that the financing of the increased costs, including in the form of increased interest costs, would occur through reprioritizations in the budget. Unfortunately, the government failed to gain support for its views, and Sweden therefore voted no to the proposal.

During the year, discussions regarding the new long-term budget, the MFF, which is to span from 2028 to 2034, have started. The EU Commission presented its proposal in July this year. The proposal focuses on defense, competitiveness, and strategic investments.

When the previous long-term budget was negotiated, the Social Democratic government succeeded in keeping down the Swedish EU fee and, for the first time, established a conditionality mechanism that links payments from the EU budget to respect for the principles of the rule of law. These were important successes both for Swedish taxpayers and for the credibility of the entire union.

When entering a new negotiation, we Social Democrats want the same basic objective to be carried forward. We want to see a responsible budget that strengthens the security of Europe and Sweden. EU cooperation is based on democracy, freedom, and an independent judiciary. No EU funds shall go to countries that violate the principles of the rule of law. We want to make it easier to withhold money from countries that undermine the EU's democratic values and introduce a sanction ladder through which member states can be progressively cut off from the benefits of EU membership.

We also want the EU's budget to be kept tight. Swedish taxpayers should not finance other countries' deficits. The Swedish discount is necessary to ensure a fair and proportionate Swedish contribution to the EU's budget.

Joint borrowing should be an exception. Sweden must work to ensure that it does not become a norm.

The budget must also reflect the challenges we face in the coming years. The EU's resources must be used to strengthen defense capabilities, continue the support to Ukraine, and accelerate the green transition. We want new initiatives to be financed through reprioritizations, not through increased spending.

Tax policy is and shall remain a national competence. We oppose common EU taxes that risk undermining the member states' self-determination over tax policy.

During the previous negotiation, we Social Democrats, through cooperation with like-minded countries, were able to push through our most important demands. Therefore, we see that it is important to have a long-term alliance building with other member states – otherwise, Sweden will find it difficult to get its point across in the negotiations.

During next year, the work with the new MFF will be intensified. Therefore, we will have to return to these issues.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I would like to send a reminder and a great deal of luck in the negotiations to Sweden's Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, who tomorrow travels to the EU summit.

Sweden must push forward to, together with other European leaders, reach a decision that the frozen Russian assets held in various countries in Europe can be used to provide long-term financial support to Ukraine and its struggle for democracy, freedom, and security, which is also a struggle for all of Europe's – and thus also Sweden's – security.

With this, Madam Speaker, I would like to wish a Merry Christmas to the members of the Finance Committee and the secretariat, to the Speaker, and to all others who work in the Riksdag so that we members can carry out our important mission as well as possible throughout the year.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Martin Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! In the midst of the debate on the Swedish budget, we are now addressing an even larger budget, namely that of the European Union. Of course, it is important that we do not pay too much, of course, it is important that we are also here disciplined and able to prioritize, and of course, it is important that we continue to send as few resources as possible to those such as Viktor Orbán who live off EU funds while simultaneously mocking the European Union and democratic principles.

But, and it is an important but, right now the EU faces great challenges. One is the resources for Ukraine. As the previous speaker said, it is extremely important that the EU is able to agree, even if some take a greater responsibility than others, on defending our continent by defending Ukraine. It is about taking the resources that the Russian central bank has parked in a profitable account in Belgium. If you take Ukrainian lives, Ukrainian land and Ukrainian children and go against all European principles and human rights, you no longer have the right to this money, but rather Ukraine has the right to it. May Sweden and Ulf Kristersson stand up for this with all their might and take all the responsibility necessary so that the EU can seize these funds and lend them to Ukraine.

But this is only one of the EU's challenges. Even defense and the climate will be central for the EU moving forward. Then one must ask: Is it the most important thing to get the Swedish fee down at any cost? Or is it the most important thing that the EU stands strong in these issues?

The Center Party's reservation concerns one of these challenges, namely the climate. We want the investments in the power grids in Europe to be doubled in order to reduce emissions there. Now that Sweden is lowering its ambitions and ignoring its goals, the EU must not do so. I hereby move for approval of our reservation.

Europe is more dependent than ever on a strong EU – for Ukraine and for our common defense now that the USA under Donald Trump is failing. We are also dependent on the EU because of the great climate challenge we all face.

I wish my colleagues in the Committee on Finance, the Committee on Finance's eminent secretariat, other colleagues in the Riksdag and the Speaker's Bureau a very Merry Christmas and a good holiday.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Charlotte Quensel (SD)

Madam Speaker! In the budget we will adopt in a moment, 54 billion kronor are budgeted for the EU's annual fee for 2026, and then Sweden's current discount is deducted. The EU's annual budget is based on the long-term budget that started in 2021. During the negotiations preceding this long-term budget, it was primarily two events that affected the EU. On the one hand, it was Brexit, which meant a substantial reduction in budget revenues. On the other hand, it was the ongoing covid pandemic.

The Sweden Democrats wanted to see a budget that took Brexit completely into account, meaning that the budget would become smaller. Unfortunately, the EU's budget went in the exact opposite direction and became significantly larger. The Covid pandemic caused the Eurozone countries' demands for a common, enormous fund to eventually become a reality.

The Sweden Democrats voted against the previous long-term budget precisely because we considered it to be far too large and because the approval of a common, enormous debt would open the door for new demands for even more common debts, and Sweden would then become part of a debt union. Unfortunately, there were few here in the chamber who shared our concern.

Madam Speaker! This summer, the European Commission presented its proposal for the upcoming long-term budget, which will apply to 2028–2034. The Commission always pushes hard, but this proposal is beyond all decency.

The government has conducted an analysis of the proposal. The current fee, based on bni, is 1.13 percent, but in the upcoming long-term budget, the commission bni-part increases to 1.35 percent, including proposed special instruments. It may not sound so bad with increases in the decimals, but it results in a large increase in the fee itself.

In addition to the fee, the commission wants several taxes that the EU itself should be allowed to collect, something that contradicts the very idea of how the EU's budget should be financed. That the EU should be allowed to collect its own taxes may counteract an increase in the fee, but power is increasingly shifting from the member states to Brussels. This shift in power means that we in Sweden will have less opportunity to influence our own domestic policy.

In the upcoming long-term budget, it is proposed that Sweden's annual fee to the EU will amount to approximately 103 billion kronor per year. Even if we manage to keep the discount, which today is 8–11 billion kronor per year, the EU proposes that Sweden should pay significantly more than what we Sverigedemokrater believe Sweden should pay.

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats want to reduce the costs for the EU. We want to see a streamlined EU where the power and the obligations lie with the member states. The EU budget needs to focus on the absolute most important: stopping waste and upcoming new regulations. Unfortunately, the EU is constantly developing in the wrong direction, and the costs are skyrocketing. Furthermore, power is increasingly being shifted from the member states to Brussels. The EU is constantly encroaching on more and more areas and producing a sea of new, tangled regulations that lead to increased administration and thus increased costs. This reduces the union's productivity and competitiveness in comparison with the rest of the world.

The EU has developed in a way that I believe few could visualize at the referendum in 1994. What could have been a strong union with a vibrant internal market and free movement for the EU's inhabitants has become a colossus that, through every budget, moves resources from well-managed member states like Sweden to mismanaged member states that constantly demand more financial support from their neighbors.

Sweden's contribution to the EU for 2026 is expected to be just over 54 billion. The EU wants Sweden's contribution to increase to 103 billion kronor per year from and including 2028. What does that mean in reality?

The Sweden Democrats and the government are finally lowering the electricity tax. I believe it hasn't been done in the more than 70 years that the tax has existed. Together, we have lowered the cost of gasoline and diesel by so much that an ordinary family saves thousands of kronor. We are also lowering the food VAT, which lowers food costs. We are also lowering the costs for preschool. Furthermore, we have lowered and are lowering the tax for wage earners and pensioners. It is nothing more than right. To be able to keep at least half of one's earned salary should be a matter of course. There is, however, still a way to go. But we in the Tidösamarbetet are working on it.

Madam Speaker! If the EU's upcoming long-term budget is allowed to swell to give Sweden a fee that becomes almost twice as large as today's 54 billion kronor, investments and tax reliefs in Sweden will suffer. Swedes' tax payments will be sent to Brussels in ever larger amounts to be distributed to other member states.

With the concluding warning, I would like to take the opportunity to wish the Speaker and the Presidium, as well as my colleagues in the committee and the Finance Committee's eminent staff, a truly wonderful Christmas weekend and a Happy New Year.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jan Ericson (M)

Madam Speaker! The EU currently has major and dramatic issues to handle. This week, discussions are underway, among others, regarding continued long-term support for Ukraine and how frozen Russian assets can be utilized for this. This morning at eight o'clock, we had a consultation with the Prime Minister in the EU Committee and gave support to the government's line in the upcoming negotiations in the European Council. How these negotiations end remains to be seen.

At the same time, the EU continues its ongoing activities. Today, we will therefore make decisions regarding the appropriation in the government's budget bill for the EU fee 2026.

Madam Speaker! The goal of Swedish budget policy in the EU was established by the Riksdag as early as 1994 and means that Sweden shall prioritize common problems that are managed more effectively at the EU level than by the individual member states individually. Sweden shall work for an effective and restrained budget policy within the EU, where expenditures with a clear European added value shall be prioritized. Sweden shall also work for a more cost-effective use of the EU's budget resources. This has been established by the Riksdag and has strong support.

The report we are now debating is part of the government's budget bill and means that the Riksdag decides on an appropriation of just over 54 billion kronor as a fee to the European Union next year. It also authorizes the government to enter into the commitments that follow from the EU budget. I would like to take this opportunity to move for approval of the proposal in the report and for the motion to be rejected.

Madam Speaker! Since our presidency in 2023, Sweden has persistently pushed the issue of strengthening the EU's competitiveness. Rarely has the issue been as pressing as it is now, when tariffs, trade wars, and military wars and conflicts are a reality. Europe needs to both become more self-sufficient and improve its economic competitiveness.

Hopefully the EU member states realize that concrete measures are needed if competitiveness is to be strengthened. The EU has 450 million inhabitants and 30 million companies. It is time to take advantage of the potential that this entails.

At the same time, there is a risk that one will again imagine that one can solve all problems through more EU bureaucracy, higher EU fees, and new borrowed EU funds. But competitiveness cannot be bought with borrowed money. Nor is it usually politicians, whether at the EU level or nationally, who are best at deciding which new companies, industries, or innovations it is worth investing in for the future. The politicians' most important role is to create good conditions for entrepreneurship, productivity, and growth.

If the EU is to succeed, the EU's member states must carry out national reforms. They cannot expect the EU to solve everything that is difficult and reform nationally. The membership fees for Sweden and other net contributors must simultaneously be kept at a reasonable level in order to achieve popular acceptance among the inhabitants in the countries, including Sweden, which are net contributors to the EU.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is a large net payer to the EU. It is Swedish taxpayers who provide the money. It obliges us to closely monitor how the EU's funds are used, to work to ensure that the EU's budget frameworks are respected, and to be restrictive regarding new large, unfunded expenditures.

The Moderate-led government has a significantly greater commitment to these issues than the previous government. We also have clear support in the Committee on Finance and the EU Committee to drive the line that the EU must respect the financial frameworks in the multiannual budget, counter fraud and negligence with EU funds, and work for realistic forecasts. If more money is needed, priority should first be given within the existing budget. The Swedish government is pushing strongly in this direction together with other budget-restrictive member states.

The start of negotiations on the EU's next long-term budget will require skillful craftsmanship and good negotiating skills. Just as Charlotte Quensel mentioned, very large fee increases are threatening. We must have a strong ability to create alliances with like-minded countries so that the Swedish EU fee does not spiral out of control in the future. It will be a challenge.

Madam Speaker! I am now in my 20th year as a member of the Swedish Parliament and have for a number of years had the honor of being a regular member of both the Committee on Finance and the EU Committee. I would therefore like to conclude by wishing both the members and our fantastic and knowledgeable officials in the Committee on Finance and the EU Committee a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. This also applies, of course, to the Speaker and the officials in the Chamber.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Madam Speaker! Today, the EU Committee met, as stated, to give the Prime Minister a mandate for the European Council. A question that has overshadowed almost everything else recently and which will also be addressed tomorrow when the heads of state and government meet is Ukraine. How can Ukraine be supported, and how will the support be financed?

Russia's warfare against Ukraine is creating deep holes in both Ukraine's and the EU's economy. In the long run, it could affect our contribution to the EU. But here in the Riksdag, we agree on a large and strong support for Ukraine. Peace must be achieved on Ukraine's terms, for both Ukraine's and all of Europe's future.

The Middle East also occupies a large part of the European Council's agenda. The humanitarian suffering in Gaza is enormous. Since Hamas's brutal attack, Israel's bombings have killed more than 65,000 people. The UN has established that Israel's war against Gaza's population is a genocide. The ceasefire in Gaza has not resulted in any stop to the violence and killing. Hundreds of people, including children, have been killed in Israeli attacks while Israel claims that the ceasefire still applies.

Internationally, we must consolidate forces to ensure a peaceful development in Gaza. All talks about peace must be conducted on the terms of the Palestinian people. Here, the EU has taken an all too passive role towards Israel and should set clearer demands and use the tools at its disposal, such as cooperation agreements, trade, and sanctions.

Madam Speaker! Sweden has now been a member of the European Union for 30 years. During these years, the union has developed and gained new members, and more and more power has been transferred over to the EU.

At the same time, the EU's administration and budget are swelling. Europe has never been so wealthy and at the same time so unequal. The inequality between those who have and those who do not is spreading both within countries and between countries in Europe. The growing inequality has created a breeding ground for the nationalists and racists who now want to restrict democracy.

For Vänsterpartiet, democracy, human rights and the principles of the rule of law are non-negotiable. Respect for the principles of the rule of law is central to every democratic society and to human rights.

Madam Speaker! We now see how the Commission and, not least the Parliament, use regulatory simplifications as an excuse to weaken climate goals and deteriorate workers' rights. The signs of the right-wing policy's deprioritization of climate work have been clear ever since the Commission took office. We have seen how it has moved from an EU that took the lead in climate work to an EU that backs down. Yesterday came the announcement that the Commission wants to withdraw the decision that no petrol cars shall be sold after 2035.

The EU's environmental goals need to be sharpened, not weakened. The climate crisis is acute, and we only have a few years to transition. Quickly adapting our societies so that we live better and develop a deeper welfare within planetary boundaries is a matter of destiny.

For the climate transition to be possible, Sweden and other EU countries must be able to implement a policy of large green investments that de facto reduce the demand for carbon in the economy. The investments required have long been hindered by centralism, detailed regulation, and requirements for market adaptation from Brussels. High prices for clean electricity, expensive and privatized railways, and obstacles to a broad and modern housing policy mean that we cannot effectively transition from fossil to renewable.

The EU rules that hinder or counteract the necessary transition, such as the energy market rules, railway liberalization, and rigid state aid rules, must be abandoned or reformed.

Our tax money should go towards increased equality within and between countries and towards solving environmental and climate challenges. We oppose increased militarization and an inhuman asylum policy with border police and camps for asylum seekers in the EU's neighboring countries.

The Swedish Riksdag cannot influence the expenditure within the EU budget any more than through the negotiations that the government has with other member states. In that regard, it is positive that we in the Swedish Riksdag agree on the broad strokes, such as the size of the fee, borrowing, and own resources, even if we may disagree on the content of the budget itself.

Together we work to keep down next year's fee. It is, as said, positive that we do it together.

Madam Speaker! I have no other proposal for a decision than the committee's, but I would like to take the opportunity to wish a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to the Speakers, the Committee on Finance, as well as the committee and Speaker's chanceries.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Hans Eklind (KD)

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats' and the government's position is that the EU budget should primarily be financed through reprioritizations, not loans or tax bases. Our government shall therefore be – and is – clear on this, and it is pleasing that there is a broad consensus around this in this Riksdag.

The basic position for us Christian Democrats is that the EU's budget shall be financed by membership fees from the member states. There is, in fact, a not insignificant nuance in doing it this way: When the member states have to foot the bill, there is a natural brake on the eagerness to try to make the EU budget larger and larger.

I vote in favor of the government's proposal that we in the Riksdag allocate approximately 54.2 billion kronor to this specific expenditure area.

Madam Speaker! There is something called the Maastricht debt. It means that the member states commit to not having a public debt exceeding 60 percent. It has existed since 1999. It was removed during the corona crisis and returned in 2024, albeit slightly more flexible.

The main reason for the invention of the Maastricht debt was that the national debt of an individual member state should not spill over and create unrest in other countries. Despite the rule, the development has not gone in the right direction.

Three countries, Greece, Italy and Belgium, have not managed to meet the Maastricht debt in any single year. I looked at this this evening. In 2024, Greece had a government debt of over 153 percent of GDP, Italy just over 135 percent, France 113 percent, Belgium 104 percent and Spain just over 101 percent of GDP. Sweden had 33.5 percent in the same year.

Madam Speaker! It is getting close to Christmas, and that is pleasant. But I would still like to warn against this development, because this is truly disgusting.

The IMF, International Monetary Fund, issued just such a warning a little over a month ago. If this continues, the IMF writes, it will force the government to fundamentally reassess its role in providing basic interventions and services to its citizens.

So, despite the Christmas season, there is every reason for us in Sweden to be attentive to this.

But the EU is naturally much more than money and fees. I want to end with that, Madam Speaker, because we Christian Democrats are fundamentally pro-Europeans. There is a reason for that. It was three Christian Democrats – Schuman, De Gasperi and Adenauer – who created the EU once upon a time. Their idea was to bind countries and people together, closer and closer, to make war impossible. In the ruins of the Second World War, they charted a completely new course – a course that would mean hope and security, not hopelessness and fear.

Just in this time, a least restless time with war on our own continent, one can still say that so far the Christian Democratic statesmen who wanted to create a Europe that will be able to handle times of unrest and crises have been right – Putin has been wrong. We hope that it will continue in that way.

With this, Madam Speaker, I would like to wish the Speaker but also the chair here in front, my colleagues in the Committee on Finance and you who are now starting to fall in for the final vote a blessed and peaceful Christmas weekend and a happy New Year.

(Applause)

In this speech, Lili André, Gudrun Brunegård, Ingemar Kihlström, Camilla Rinaldo Miller and Larry Söder (all KD) concurred.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 11.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)