More effective control possibilities in the systems for rot, rut, green technology, and personnel registers

Marie Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! The growing crime in the working life is a serious societal problem. It concerns crimes and rule violations that mean people are exploited and suffer harm. It also leads to serious companies being competed out by unserious companies and criminals.

One of the goals with the rut and rot deductions, when they were introduced, was to reduce undeclared work. Today we are met with more and more testimonies that work-related crime has found new paths. It is unacceptable. Against that background, the previous Social Democratic government commissioned the investigation behind the bill and the report that we are to take a position on today. The purpose was to reduce the fraud with these deductions.

Labor incomes that are withheld from taxation are a major societal problem. The result of missing measures is devastating. State revenues are eroded, serious companies risk being competed out, and workers are exploited. Parallel and undeclared labor markets lead to large economic losses for society. Distorted competition makes it difficult for serious companies to compete, and thus results in increased market shares for unserious and criminal actors. We also know today that gang crime is fueled by labor market crime.

Tax evasion and undeclared work are not just a matter of missing tax revenues. It is actually also a matter of justice and trust. Ultimately, it is about the legitimacy of our common social contract. Every tax krona must be used effectively, and everyone must contribute according to their ability. To safeguard that is a central priority for us Social Democrats.

Madam Speaker! An ESO report – 2026:1 Black Figures – an ESO report on the extent of the criminal economy – shows that the criminal economy turns over approximately 352 billion in Sweden per year. Of those, approximately 224 billion are assessed to be in the black economy, of which 189 billion consist of undeclared work. The ESO report also states that the amounts are likely higher. These are staggering figures we are talking about.

Despite these alarming figures, the Tidö Government has not taken any investigative initiatives in the area of illegal work. The investigation on more effective control possibilities in the systems for rot, rut, green technology, and personnel lists was completed two years ago. It has taken the government two years to produce a bill in this area – that which is so important to tackle parts of illegal work and crime in the labor market.

We Social Democrats support the bill and the proposal in the committee report, but we believe that even this bill shows that the government has not been prepared to take sufficiently far-reaching measures to seriously tackle crime in the workplace.

A well-functioning control activity is an important part of the work to identify a number of problems in workplaces that can also have consequences outside the workplaces. We Social Democrats believe that the proposal that all industries covered by the personnel register act should switch to digital personnel registers is fundamentally good and that it would have needed to be implemented to achieve a more legally secure and difficult-to-manipulate system. Today, it is quite easy to manipulate the physical personnel register, which is actually a physical book. It is possible, for example, to have double books. But for that proposal to work in practice, the Swedish Tax Agency would need to be authorized to produce suitable and well-functioning regulations linked to the digital personnel registers. Digital personnel registers could actually also simplify the administration for the companies. The manual personnel registers, which the Swedish Tax Agency provides today, could be converted into electronic ones. And that the Swedish Tax Agency is granted the right to cross-reference electronic information in the companies' personnel registers against the companies' reporting of employer contributions at the individual level is a very powerful tool, if it were to be put in place.

It is also important that the Swedish Tax Agency is given the opportunity to retrieve personnel register information for selection cases. It is a necessary prerequisite for streamlining the Swedish Tax Agency's work in detecting and combating undeclared work.

We Social Democrats would have liked to go further and, just as the Swedish Tax Agency writes in its opinion, introduce a regular electronic transfer of the payroll records to the Swedish Tax Agency. We believe that the benefit of such a processing of personal data outweighs the privacy infringement that it may be considered to entail for the employees. Such a system already exists in Finland, where it fulfills an important function. In Finland, it has not been judged to violate the General Data Protection Regulation, which should mean that it should be possible in Sweden as well.

Madam Speaker! The Swedish Tax Agency would need to scale up its controls significantly. A prerequisite for achieving the primary purpose of the personnel registers – to counter undeclared work – is that the Swedish Tax Agency also carries out controls. Because so few controls are carried out today, undeclared work is not countered to the extent that would be needed.

We Social Democrats therefore consider that we should have tasked the Swedish Tax Agency with increasing the number of checks of personnel registers to 12,000 checks annually in order to tackle this.

We also consider that in this situation we should have included that, if the Swedish Tax Agency considers it necessary, it should be possible for the Swedish Tax Agency to request a supplementary statement regarding which subcontractors and/or staffing companies the requesting company uses to perform the work or service without the Swedish Tax Agency needing to conduct a more extensive audit. This would enable a more time-efficient and accurate control activity and reduce fraud, exploitation, and crime. The company receiving the subsidy should be able to report which company and which individuals perform the service if the Swedish Tax Agency requires it. Tax reductions should not nourish the growing crime in the working life. This is necessary to tackle crime in the working life and should carry more weight than the administration it entails.

Madam Speaker! In addition to that, further measures would be needed to counter fraud and crime in the working life. We Social Democrats believe it is important that there is a requirement that subcontractors hired to perform work must have a valid F-tax certificate for rot, rut or deductions for green technology to be able to be paid out by the Swedish Tax Agency. Today, a valid F-tax certificate is required only from the company that receives tax subsidies, not from subcontractors or staffing agencies.

If it could also be the case that more unserious criminals were deprived of their F-tax certificate and prevented from obtaining a new one, it would make it more difficult for these actors to receive tax funds that they actually have no right to. Continued work is needed to develop a legally secure system for F-tax where fraud and crime lead to the F-tax certificate actually being withdrawn to a greater extent than today. This, in combination with business bans, which should be used to a greater extent than today, would make a real difference when it comes to crime in the working life.

The control fees should be raised and indexed in the future in accordance with the investigation's proposals. The fees have remained unchanged since 2016, and it is fully reasonable that they are raised. One would not need to wait for a general review of the sanction fees before the tax proceedings; instead, one could set an example of raised fees and ensure that they follow the development through indexing.

Madam Speaker! Finally, we Social Democrats believe that stricter requirements should be imposed on companies that wish to offer their services to private individuals who, in turn, can take advantage of tax subsidies. The Swedish Tax Agency should be given the opportunity to set certain requirements, for example regarding seriousness, not to mention trade and conduct.

We believe that it must be reviewed and further investigated how serious and long-term actors who offer their employees safe and good working conditions can compete on fair terms.

We have noted that the government has not proceeded with particularly many of the proposals submitted by the Delegation against work-life crime. There is much to be gained there to further tackle the extremely widespread work-life crime.

The cooperating authorities against crime in the working life could also be tasked with developing further methods and proposals that can prevent fraud and crime within rot, rut and green technology. Sweden's seven crime in the working life centers and the cooperating authorities are experts on crime in the working life and can with great probability provide good proposals based on their operational everyday life.

There are also trade unions that clearly see the crime in working life and whom we should listen to.

There is, therefore, a large collective competence that can produce proposals if we truly want to tackle the crime in the working life, which is extremely widespread in Sweden.

As you can understand from my speech, we Social Democrats are not entirely satisfied with the government's bill or the committee report. We do, however, see that some legislation is finally being put in place. And even though we believe that further reforms are needed in this area, we stand behind the government's bill, move for approval of the proposal in the committee report, and have chosen not to reserve ourselves against the decision.

Videoriksdagen.se

Mikael Eskilandersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! The rot deduction is a very popular and common deduction. The rot deduction was changed several times during the Tidö government, and the effect in the companies' order books was immediate. Many companies can testify that rot directly helped them survive the recession.

The Tidö parties began with an increase of the amount, which the Socialdemokraterna criticized as a "luxury rot." They said that the percentage should be increased instead. The following year, the percentage was increased. Then the Socialdemokraterna said instead that they wanted a green rot deduction.

When we now talk about limiting fraud and about deduction rights, I want to ask the Social Democrats how their green rot deduction is to function without opening up for fraud. According to what I understand, the green rot deduction shall include all energy efficiencies. On Radon Day last year, the Social Democrats' representative there also claimed that all costs for radon remediation shall be included in the green rot deduction that the Social Democrats advocate for, and renovation costs resulting from radon remediation.

The question from me is actually quite simple: What should the regulatory framework for the green root deduction look like in practice? It should enable deductions for, for example, an additionally insulated wall or a new radon-proofed floor. At the same time, it should prevent deductions from being made for, for example, work on a sound-insulated interior wall or a new floor that does not need to be radon-proofed.

Videoriksdagen.se

Marie Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question.

I think that today we are not debating how the rot deduction should be structured. We are actually debating how we are to tackle the crime in the working life and the fraud within rot, rut, green technology, and payroll.

There we consider that the government has not taken sufficient measures. As I preferred in my speech, there is a multitude of measures that would need to be taken. It is about digitized personnel records. It is about better control of F-tax receipts. There, it does not matter how the rot deduction is structured, but it is about accessing the crime within that and, above all, the black market work. That is what is important for us in this issue. There, it makes no difference if one can get a rot deduction for green technology, for transition, or for renovating kitchens or what one can get a rot deduction for – or rot deductions for that part. It is the crime we need to access. It is to stop gang crime being fed by rot and rot and deductions for green technology, by work-life crime, which is the primary thing in this issue.

(Applause)

Videoriksdagen.se

Mikael Eskilandersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I actually want to assert that fraud within ROT is part of what we are talking about today. It would become a fraud with the deduction if one starts deducting things that are not included in the green ROT deduction.

The Social Democrats argue that a distinction should be made between whether the rotavdrag is for the green transition, that is, energy efficiency improvements, whether it is for radon, and whether it is for ordinary renovation. Ordinary renovation is, according to the Social Democrats, "luxury renovation." I believe that perhaps it is not luxury renovation to lay a new floor.

It is actually set up for cheating with the rotavdrag (deduction for energy improvements) with such special rules that say one should only have rotavdrag for radon remediation, not for redoing a floor that is worn out. What prevents one from then putting in a radon film underneath and saying that they have redone the floor to radon-proof it? Then one has suddenly opened up for being allowed to get the deduction.

I am for us having simple systems so that we do not enable cheating but make it easy for people to actually use the deductions that exist. The usual rot-system has worked so that it doesn't matter whether you do it at the floor to radon-proof it or if you do it at the ceiling because it is worn. You are entitled to the same rot-deduction regardless, and then there is no reason to cheat. But I foresee that when the Socialdemokraterna come forward and change it to their green rot, it will open up for a lot of cheating. Then it is quite simple for a company to write: We did a radon-proofing, not a renovation. Then one suddenly has the right to a deduction that one actually should not have the right to.

(Applause)

Videoriksdagen.se

Marie Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! The question is why there would be more cheating if it becomes clear what one is entitled to deductions for. It is therefore about clarifying what you are entitled to deductions for, and those are the rules that apply. We have also said that significantly more controls than today are needed for us to tackle crime in the labor market and undeclared work.

However, I understand the Sweden Democrats' enthusiasm for deductions. It is not called subsidies here, but deductions. I have full understanding of that. But for us Social Democrats, it is important here that the rot deduction should go towards important things that are needed. It should be clear what one can get a deduction for, and that is what we have said.

I therefore do not understand the question at all. Instead, see to it that you work to tackle illegal work, because this government has totally failed at that. Present some such proposals so that we can tackle this – then we will likely agree on these issues.

(Applause)

Videoriksdagen.se

Alexander Svensson (M)

Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the government's proposal on strengthened control of the ROT, RUT, and green technology deductions, as well as improved opportunities to follow up on personnel registers in vulnerable industries.

Let me start with the most important point. The root and rut deductions are not just tax reductions but reforms that have changed the Swedish labor market, led to an increased labor supply, and opened up for new opportunities.

Today, over 1.3 million Swedes use the RUT deduction. During 2025, the total deduction amounted to almost 9 billion kronor, which is the highest level to date. Usage has almost doubled during the last decade. For families with children, it is about being able to make everyday life function. For an older person, it can be the difference between being able to manage at home or not, an opportunity that is also being utilized by more and more elderly people – 41.2 percent of all RUT purchases during 2025 were made by persons who have turned 65 years of age or older. For those who run businesses, it is about being able to focus on their work instead of on things that take time and energy.

Above all, these reforms have contributed to turning black jobs white. The reforms have created a growing service sector, given people a way into the labor market and opened doors to entrepreneurship and business.

Madam Speaker! For the Moderates, this is an important principle. We believe that work should pay off and that more people should be able to support themselves. We believe that companies that create jobs should be encouraged and not opposed, and therefore we have been defenders of the rot and rut reforms.

It is precisely for that reason that we must defend the trust in these systems. Every krona that is paid out incorrectly is a krona that does not go to its intended purpose. Every company that cheats harms the competition for the serious entrepreneurs who do the right thing. Every criminal scheme risks undermining the legitimacy of reforms that fundamentally work well. It is against that background that we should view the government's proposal.

Madam Speaker! The bill means, among other things, that companies requesting payment shall provide information on which subcontractors or staffing companies they have hired. The information shall be provided on honor and conscience. The Swedish Tax Agency will also have improved opportunities to check the information provided and to obtain relevant information from third parties when necessary to ensure that the supports are used in a correct manner.

Then we also have the changes concerning personnel records, something that has been mentioned here earlier, where it becomes easier for Skatteverket by the personnel record being able to be directly transferred and read by Skatteverket.

For the Moderates, these are well-balanced proposals. We know that crime in the working life, tax evasion, and unfair competition are real societal problems. I believe we all agree on this across party lines. We know that criminal actors seek out areas where control is weak and that they always succeed in finding loopholes in the systems. When the criminals strike, we know that the serious companies are the first to be affected, and therefore we need tools that allow fraud to be prosecuted and countered.

Madam Speaker! We want strong reforms that create jobs and entrepreneurship. We shall also have effective controls that target those who cheat. The goal shall be smarter controls and not more complications. The vast majority of the country's entrepreneurs are honest people who go to work every day, create value and employ others. They should not have to compete with companies that obtain advantages through rule-breaking and outright cheating.

When we strengthen the control, we also strengthen the serious companies. When trust is strengthened, deductions for rot, rut, and green technology can continue to contribute to more jobs, more companies, and greater freedom for Swedish households. We believe it should be easy to do the right thing, and we will fight those who do wrong.

The government has done a lot when it comes to working against crime. This is another step to tighten the rule control so that we can maintain the credibility of the systems and ensure that they function better.

With this, I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

Videoriksdagen.se

Mikael Eskilandersson (SD)

Madam Speaker! The rot- and rut-deductions are two of the most popular tax reforms that have been implemented in Sweden. They are appreciated by ordinary people and are utilized to a very large extent by ordinary workers. It concerns everything from the family with children who need help to make everyday life work, to the retiree who needs help with cleaning, and the homeowner who can afford to renovate the bathroom.

From the beginning, the deductions were introduced with the direct aim of making black jobs white. I am old enough to remember the 80s and even the beginning of the 90s, before the deduction existed. Back then, it was hardly unusual for the craftsman to be asked what it would cost without a receipt – a beautiful euphemism for black work. A high general tax burden probably also contributed to people willingly seeking cheaper solutions.

I want to assert that rot and rut have fundamentally changed society. Thanks to these deductions, it is today both simpler and more attractive to do the right thing. Jobs have become white, more serious companies exist within new sectors and, above all, there are fewer reasons to hire black labor or refrain from taking a receipt.

These are actually such successful reforms that not even Social Democratic governments have wanted to abolish them. On the contrary, they have maintained the deductions over the years and even at some times extended the ROT deduction. As recently as after the January agreement, the ROT deduction was expanded. It can therefore be stated that these deductions have broad support here in the chamber.

Madam Speaker! When taxpayers' money is used to finance deductions, the money must naturally go to the right things. We must not have a system where criminals can enrich themselves on ordinary people's tax money. Therefore, the Sweden Democrats support that the Swedish Tax Agency is given better opportunities to detect fraud and control payments.

But here we must also keep two thoughts in mind at the same time. That is, there is a big difference between fighting criminals and making life difficult for ordinary honest business owners. Sometimes that difference seems a bit difficult to understand in this chamber.

Madam Speaker! When we come to the question of personnel registers, the differences perhaps become extra clear. The Centre Party expresses in its special statement a concern that the rules will create more administration, technical problems, and unreasonable control fees for small businesses. This is something that the Centre Party has also motioned about, but one chose not to support its own motion in the committee.

Centerpartiet is, however, completely right that new rules risk causing problems, especially for small companies that are important for maintaining competition. Someone who runs a small construction company is already fully occupied with managing their work, paying their taxes, and following all the regulations that already exist. They do not need additional forms, complicated systems, and agency requirements that take time away from the real work that they are actually paid to perform.

The construction industry is already extra vulnerable when it comes to complicated rules and constantly new requirements for more administration and more forms. More and more detailed requirements are being included in the procurements, and to that are added amounts of different certifications that must be followed. Even the climate declaration must be correct, preferably already before the company has structured a project proposal and knows if they are even the contractor.

Now, other questions also arise that the companies are expected to be able to answer. When does it involve a construction project that requires personnel lists? When does it involve a smaller repair job? Who is responsible for what when several companies are working at the same site? This is more the rule than the exception when it comes to construction in Sweden.

It can be difficult enough for someone who is specially trained and daily works with the issues at a large company to keep track of all the boundaries. We cannot expect that also an ordinary craftsman should be half lawyer and half tax expert in order to be able to do their job. In that case, we have failed to create a functioning system.

Madam Speaker! Then we have the Social Democrats, the Left Party, and the Green Party. They obviously think that more bureaucracy is needed: more mandatory digital personnel records, more electronic reporting, more controls, and higher control fees. They do also write that the administration should be limited for serious companies, but it is a rather strange equation. First, they want to introduce a lot of new requirements, and then they write that the companies should not be burdened by the new requirements. It is a bit like telling the craftsman that he should fill out ten additional forms but that it must not take any extra time.

A few years ago, they at least advocated for a green rot deduction – it is a bit unclear if they still do. They didn't really know then where the limit for this green rot deduction was, and they still don't seem to have much of a grasp on it. For example, it was made clear that it would work perfectly well to use green rot even to remediate radon, but it was highly unclear what the difference was between a regular renovation of the floor and a measure to reduce radon. And it still is, as we heard in the previous exchange of remarks.

For the Sweden Democrats, the starting point is different. Our starting point is that there should be clear and simple rules. We want a society where it is easy to do the right thing, without detailed requirements and endless forms. It is not the amount of forms that determines how effectively we combat crime. Sweden does not become richer by our small business owners spending more and more time in front of the computer instead of out with their customers. Therefore, it is good that the government does not proceed with the most far-reaching requirements on digital personnel logs and ongoing reporting.

Madam Speaker! Root and rut show that it is actually possible to use the tax system to make it more efficient to work illegally. That should be the lesson we take with us. Sometimes the best way to tackle illegal work is not to introduce even more controls and forms, but to make it easier and more profitable to do right from the beginning. That is the path the Sverigedemokraterna want to continue on.

With this, I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

Videoriksdagen.se

Frida Tånghag (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to Member Marie Olsson for a good overview of the matter! I was not present during the original preparation of the matter.

From the Left Party's side, we originally had a follow-up motion. I have chosen not to raise this in favor of the special statement from S, V and MP.

In principle, we see no problem with the bill as it stands today. It contains many essential parts and reasonable proposals to strengthen the work against tax evasion, fraud, and crime in the working life and gives Skatteverket more and expanded opportunities for control.

However, the proposal is somewhat watered down compared to the original committee report. We would have liked more of the original proposals to be included. Simply put: we would have wished for the proposal to be a bit sharper and to have given Skatteverket more tools for follow-up and control.

Madam Speaker! The use of subcontractors in multiple tiers is a widespread problem that exists within all sectors working with construction, technology, and installations. These are industries where work-related crime is unfortunately frequently occurring, which has major economic consequences for society with a financial loss of hundreds of billions of kronor. This includes tax evasion and pure black labor.

It would have been desirable to provide more tools for control so that serious companies and unserious companies that do not compete on the same terms can be separated. This also applies to actors who work with household services and works covered by ROT, where the use of staffing agencies is frequently occurring.

Madam Speaker! Unfortunately, the proposal on digital personnel registers for all affected industries, with requirements for regular electronic transmission, has been dropped. These are two tools that could have made the system both more accurate and more legally secure.

Mr. Speaker, with this said, I nevertheless wish to vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision. We see that the work so far is reasonable, but we hope that the work with this does not stall but preferably proceeds at a higher tempo than this preparation has had. It is also important that the rules are followed up so that they do not affect smaller companies with unexpected costs.

It is reasonable that information regarding subcontractors and the use of staffing agencies must now be provided. More information shall be submitted in personnel registers, and inspection visits will be able to be carried out for more purposes. Sometimes it does not need to be harder to curb fraud than to issue a request that information be provided on honor and conscience.

Videoriksdagen.se

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Madam Speaker! For the Centre Party, the starting point is that the tax system shall contribute to three things: more jobs, a viable business environment, and green transition. But the tax system must also have legitimacy. Tax money shall be used in the right way, and companies that follow the rules shall not have to compete with companies that cheat.

The ROT and RUT deductions have an important role in this context. They have contributed to work that previously could be carried out "black" now being carried out as "white" work to a greater extent. They have also created markets for companies and facilitated everyday life. ROT and RUT can contribute to more people actually working.

For the Centre Party, rot and rut are therefore not only about a tax reduction for the person who purchases a service. It is also about the entrepreneur who can hire, about the person who gets their first job, and about the employee who receives a salary, insurance, and pension-qualifying income instead of working illegally. We have previously highlighted that the rut deduction can open up the labor market for people with weaker ties to it, including newly arrived women.

Madam Speaker! The green deduction is another important part of the Center Party's policy. A core idea of the green transition is that households should be given simpler and better opportunities to invest in solar cells, energy storage, and charging infrastructure. The green deduction is simply a way to make climate-smart investments simpler, faster, and more predictable.

At the same time, we must naturally be honest that reforms must be followed up. It is not possible to defend every part of a system just because it has existed for a long time. We need to be able to discuss costs, accuracy, and actual results. But that discussion must be conducted with respect for the jobs and companies that have grown in the industries covered by rot and rut.

Madam Speaker! It is against this background that we shall look at today's report. Root, rut, and green technology means that public funds are used through tax reductions or payments to contractors, and in that case, the control must also function. When incorrect payments are made and criminal actors use the systems, both the taxpayers and the trust for the reforms are damaged.

Centerpartiet therefore supports the direction to strengthen the Swedish Tax Agency's control possibilities. This includes, among other things, that contractors shall state whether subcontractors or staffing companies have been hired. Information in a request for payment shall also be provided in good faith. In addition, possibilities for third-party orders are proposed, expanded control possibilities regarding personnel lists, and electronic transfer of data to the Swedish Tax Agency. These are, in large terms, reasonable measures.

In many parts of the construction and service sectors, the work is carried out in several stages. If the authority can only audit the company that formally requests the payment, but lacks information on how the work was actually performed, the control becomes insufficient. At the same time, the control system must not be built on the assumption that all companies are potential criminals. The Center Party's position is that it should be difficult to cheat but easy to do right. New requirements must be understandable, proportionate, and manageable even for small companies.

Madam Speaker! This is particularly important because many companies within the root, RUT, and construction sectors are small companies. They do not have large finance departments or specific lawyers who can interpret every new reporting obligation. If the rules become unclear, they risk creating unintended errors, increased costs, and uncertainty without the control necessarily becoming better.

This is an important milestone. The reform should not be seen as finished when the legislation enters into force. The main legislative changes are proposed to enter into force on 1 January 2027. After that, the government that is in place or will come to power, and the relevant authorities, need to follow up on whether the rules actually lead to more accurate controls, fewer incorrect payments, and less crime in the labor market.

Centerpartiet also considers that the control must be risk-based. Information on subcontractors shall give Skatteverket better opportunities to identify operations where there are grounds for an in-depth review. But the control should not mean that all companies are met with the same extensive requirements, regardless of risk level.

There must also be a reasonable distinction between systematic fraud and an unintentional mistake. Those who deliberately provide incorrect information or use schemes based on white-collar crime shall face powerful measures. But the rules must simultaneously be legally secure and the sanctions proportionate.

Despite the absence of clear proposals regarding follow-up in the bill, we nevertheless welcome the legislation. We therefore stand behind the government's bill and have chosen not to reserve ourselves, but instead refer to our special statement. We will, of course, follow up to ensure that the legislation hits the mark in the future.

Videoriksdagen.se

Marcus Friberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! It must pay to do right. It must pay to run a serious company, pay tax and treat one's employees well. But then we must also ensure that it does not pay to cheat.

When unserious companies compete through black market work, tax evasion, and crime in the working life, the state does not only lose tax revenue. The serious companies lose assignments. People risk being exploited, and the trust for our common tax system is damaged.

Madam Speaker! Today we are addressing the government's proposal on more effective control possibilities in the systems for rot, rut, green technology, and personnel registers. The Green Party welcomes the proposal. Companies shall, among other things, report on whether they have hired subcontractors or staffing agencies. Information shall be provided on honor and conscience, and the Swedish Tax Agency will have better opportunities to carry out controls.

They are important improvements. But we also believe that the government should have gone further. The investigation was commissioned as early as 2022 and presented its proposals in August 2024. It has thus taken more than two years to get the legislation across the line to the Riksdag. During that time, crime in the working life has continued to be a serious societal problem. Therefore, it is regrettable that the outgoing Tidö government acted so late.

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet, together with the Social Democrats and the Left Party, has submitted a special statement. We want to see more controls of personnel registers. We regret that the outgoing government did not proceed with the proposal on digital personnel registers in all affected industries. We want the Swedish Tax Agency to be given better opportunities to use and compare electronic data in order to detect fraud.

Digital systems can make the controls both more efficient and more legally secure. At the same time, we must protect the serious companies. Small business owners should not be faced with unnecessary complications or disproportionate costs. Therefore, the consequences of the rules need to be followed up and the digitalization designed so that it both strengthens the control and makes it easier to do the right thing.

Madam Speaker! It should not be a competitive advantage to ignore taxes, to ignore rules, or to ignore people's working conditions. On the contrary, serious companies should be able to compete on equal terms. The government's proposal is a step in the right direction, but more measures against tax evasion and crime in the working life are needed.

Miljöpartiet supports the bill, while at the same time we will continue to push for a more effective control system where it pays to do the right thing.

Videoriksdagen.se

Anders Ekegren (L)

Madam Speaker! The ROT deduction came into force on 1 July 2007 and the permanent ROT deduction on 8 December 2008, even though there have been temporary ROT supports since the 1990s. The permanent supports were introduced during the first Alliance government.

An important objective has been to reduce black market work, and that has also been achieved. I am just like some others here for years to come. I was there at the time when it was almost impossible for private individuals to get hold of a tradesperson if one could not pay everything black or parts black. So that is no longer the case today. If you use the rotavdrag and white services, you can also complain about services that were not performed well, and if you meet other requirements, you can also deduct the costs when you sell your house.

The rotation deductions have not been as questioned because these have been supported by Byggnads and other trade unions. The travel deductions have been more questioned. By some politicians on the left side, they have sometimes been somewhat condescendingly called "pig deductions" (pigavdrag). Nothing can be more wrong.

Last autumn, I visited Veterankraft in Västerås. It is a company that employs retirees to perform various tasks within administration, crafts, and household services. They offer services such as cleaning, gardening, moving assistance, and simpler crafts and everyday care.

The image that the left side wants to spread is that it is only rich people who make use of rot and rut. That is wrong. Many of the company's customers are pensioners and others with a normal income. Many of the customers use services as a complement to the home care service or because the home care service cannot be used for the services that the elderly are in need of.

For many elderly people, the rotavdrag and especially the rutavdrag are important. It allows them to stay in their house or in their apartment because they can get help with cleaning, snow removal, lawn mowing, handyman work, or whatever they need to have done.

For many, both rot and rut are a freedom reform that the Liberals consider important to preserve. Today's matter concerns control possibilities to streamline the work against tax evasion, fraud, and crime in the working life in the systems for rut, rot, green technology, and personnel lists. It will place increased requirements on those who wish to receive a payment for work performed. The Liberals naturally stand behind the changes. It is important that the systems are correct and counteract fraud.

S, V, MP and C, that is, the opposition – or what we shall call you now since there is still no permanent government in the country even though it has been two months since the election on Friday – I perceive as supporting the proposals. They have, however, submitted two different specific statements. One comes from the three red-green parties, who think the government could have been firmer. I can only state that the left-wing government could have made these changes between 2014 and 2022, but they did not do so. The Centre Party has a somewhat different view. Of course, one should counter tax fraud, but it is important that the regulations distinguish between those who cheat and the many serious entrepreneurs who create jobs and contribute to the green transition.

Madam Speaker! I naturally move, on behalf of the Liberals, for the approval of the Committee on Taxation's proposal.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 13.)

Videoriksdagen.se