Enhanced consumer protection against risky lending and over-indebtedness

Mats Hellhoff (SD)

Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of the bill in its entirety.

"He who is in debt is not free" is a quote by and the title of a book written by a former Minister of Finance and Prime Minister. In another book, written several thousand years earlier, one can read in the Book of Proverbs, among other things: "The rich is the poor man's master, the one who borrows becomes the lender's slave."

Fortunately, most of us have not yet ended up in any debt slavery, but last year Sweden ranked third among the countries with the highest debt per inhabitant in the EU, and Sweden's debt ratio is at a high level compared to many other countries. The largest part of Swedish households' debts consists of housing loans, and as housing prices have increased, the loans have done the same. When interest rates began to rise, many households faced problems with high borrowing costs.

But perhaps it is not exactly where the biggest problem for individuals lies, but in the possibility for those already in debt to continue borrowing without collateral at high interest, sometimes at a level that borders on usury. One might think that a lender would hesitate to lend money to someone who is already up to their ears in debt, is a regular customer of debt collection companies, and occasionally also attracts the interest of the Enforcement Authority. In parentheses, the Swedes' total debt to the Enforcement Authority at the beginning of the year was a staggering 119 billion.

But despite this, as has been said, one can continue to borrow, often under usurious-like conditions, and instead of the loan improving one's own economic situation, one digs deeper into the pit that the indebtedness constitutes and becomes over-indebted. Over-indebtedness can be explained as a state in which a person can no longer pay their debts and the problems are long-lasting. It is therefore not about temporary economic difficulties but about a condition that lasts for a long period.

Many in Sweden have, as has been said, debts, for example mortgage loans and student loans, but that does not mean that they are over-indebted. But far too many over-indebt themselves by taking loans for everyday consumption or to pay other loans they have. Over-indebtedness often means that one gets stuck in a vicious circle and takes even more loans to cover their debts.

Over-indebtedness is not just a problem for the individual. It also entails large costs for society in the form of healthcare costs, reduced work capacity, unemployment benefits, sick leave, and sickness benefits.

Over-indebtedness is, according to research conducted at Lund University, also a risk factor for mental ill-health and even suicide. Rising consumption demands, youth unemployment, and an aggressive credit market make young adults a particularly vulnerable group. Some examples of risk factors for over-indebtedness are gambling addiction, consumption on credit, mental and physical ill-health, and violence in close relationships in the form of economic violence.

Madam Speaker! We have a great and important responsibility to do what we can to counteract a development where over-indebtedness risks becoming a new epidemic. We need to get better at identifying individuals in good time to prevent ill health and reduce society's costs for over-indebtedness. Even better, of course, is if the individual never ends up in such a situation.

One would like to believe that we in Sweden have control functions and rules that would make it difficult, if not impossible, to end up in the type of situations we can see in one of our commercial TV channels. You know which program I mean. The individual has fallen into a trap, but it is not particularly luxurious. Instead, we are met with despair, relationship problems, and a future economic desert trek. But we do not have the solid control functions or rules that we would wish for and that would make it impossible to over-indebt oneself, to take on loans and credits that one cannot repay and to continue borrowing despite being sought by both debt collection companies and the enforcement authority.

Even if a lender turns to the credit reporting companies available, it is not certain that all credits, debts, or other payment problems are registered. There is no full obligation for all lenders to report borrowers' debts or lack of ability to pay to a credit reporting company.

It is surely more than I who think it is strange that an over-indebted person can continue to progressively worsen their financial situation by taking out new loans at constantly higher interest rates.

Madam Speaker! Hopefully, we will resolve some of these problems through the rules proposed in the bill. Now we get a reduction of the maximum permitted interest rate for loans, from 40 to 20 percent, and a cost cap which means that a loan may not cost more in the form of interest and fees than the amount borrowed.

I want to particularly emphasize that we can now finally get a register that gives all lenders a complete picture of a consumer's existing credits, with information on repayment time, interest, and what the loan costs in total.

The interest rate cap prevents the interest and costs for a loan from rising to absurd levels and at least keeps them within the debt amount itself.

There will now be control mechanisms that protect those who, for any of many possible reasons, are heading towards or have already become trapped in over-indebtedness.

I cannot overemphasize the importance of increasing protection for those consumers who fall through the safety net that today's rules constitute. Now we are closing these gaps, ensuring that the net is complete and catches those who are rapidly moving towards over-indebtedness.

We have a great responsibility to address the obvious problems that exist in this specific part of the market, and now we are taking an important step in that direction.

With this said, I move for approval of the proposition in its entirety.

(Applause)

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

Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Mats Hellhoff for the presentation, and the report is, in large terms, very good.

In your speech, you said that we should do what we can to minimize the risks for those in debt, and you spoke about suicide, mental health, and so on. I completely agree with you that we should do what we can. But just as the investigation states, the Social Democrats believe that a reversed order of settlement would be a good tool to create better conditions for those in debt to be able to pay their debt when there is some ability to pay.

Since the member and the government do not want to introduce this, I wonder how the member views consumer protection in this context. What other alternatives does the member see as better for protecting our consumers?

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

Mats Hellhoff (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am not quite sure I understood what the member means. Are we talking about what one pays to the Enforcement Authority, interest and so on?

(ANNA-BELLE STRÖMBERG (S): The opposite.)

The opposite, yes.

I find it difficult to answer that question. This is what we have collectively concluded is the best. One can have other opinions on what is good and not good and how to turn different things around. But this is our opinion.

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

Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)

Madam Speaker! A settlement order means that the consumer's needs are prioritized when payments are made. As it is today, it is the entrepreneurs themselves who decide how the payments shall be prioritized even if the consumer were to fall into financial difficulties. My question is: Does the member think it is fair to let the companies decide how the payments shall be prioritized?

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

Mats Hellhoff (SD)

Madam Speaker! If the member's reference to "the companies" refers to the lending companies, I can say that there must be an agreement between the borrower and the lender. That is how it is from the beginning. I do not know whether it is the state that should step in and decide how these agreements should look or not. I mean that the correct thing is to go as far as the bill does.

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

Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Over-indebtedness is increasing, and Sweden is becoming poorer. The increase in unpaid debts affects the indebted persons but also their children and other relatives. Today, Sweden's consumers have it much tougher than in a long time. With higher housing costs, higher energy prices and increasing food prices, the risk of payment difficulties increases.

The number of claims sent to the Enforcement Authority is increasing. According to the Enforcement Authority's statistics from August this year, the total claim amount has increased by 70 percent over two years, and it now stands at 18.4 billion. It concerns bills to collection companies and banks but also costs for housing and electricity. The debt amounts in the claims have become increasingly higher over several years.

Those who have large debts and cannot repay them within a foreseeable time can apply for debt restructuring with the Enforcement Authority. According to statistics from the Enforcement Authority for the first half of 2024, 17,458 people applied for debt restructuring. Compared with the first half of 2022, these applications have increased by 23 percent.

Many elderly people have difficulty influencing their incomes and have been hit hard by the increasing costs of recent years. More elderly people are applying for debt restructuring. Applications from women over 65 years of age have increased by 13 percent compared to the first half of 2023, according to the Swedish Enforcement Authority's statistics from September this year.

Madam Speaker! To reduce over-indebtedness, the Social Democratic government implemented a number of reforms. A cap on interest for high-cost credits was introduced, as well as stricter marketing and information requirements, as well as requirements that credit shall not be pre-selected when purchasing online. The Social Democratic government also appointed the Over-indebtedness Inquiry, with a mandate to review the market for consumer credits and propose measures that counteract risky lending and over-indebtedness.

Madam Speaker! The Government has now chosen to present a number of proposals from the Over-indebtedness Inquiry in the bill being discussed in the report we are now debating. We Social Democrats welcome that the Government proposes that the current interest rate cap of 40 percentage points be lowered to 20 percentage points. A lowered interest rate cap will limit the lenders' opportunities to earn money on the credit interest. We also welcome the proposal to introduce a cap on establishment fees. This means that the borrower is not required to pay an establishment fee for a credit that is higher than 1 percent of the price base amount applicable at the time the credit agreement is entered into. The cap shall apply to all credits according to the Consumer Credit Act except for housing credits. Special information in marketing shall be expanded to cover all credit agreements.

Madam Speaker! There are more proposals for very good concrete measures from the Over-indebtedness Inquiry. But unfortunately, we can state that the government has not chosen to follow the inquiry's proposal for a changed main rule for the order of settlement. The change would create better conditions for debtors to be able to pay their debt when there is a certain capacity to pay. In accordance with the inquiry, we Social Democrats propose an order where funds that come in through distraint shall primarily be settled against the principal amount of the claim and thereafter against interest and other ancillary obligations. This, in turn, could motivate the individual to pay back their debt and get out of their debt situation.

Many people in debt lack the financial room to pay the interest costs on their debts each month. This causes the debts to increase due to the accruing interest, even though the consumer has some room to pay down the total debt. Information from the municipalities' budget and debt counselors has shown that this applies to many of the debtors they encounter in their daily work and in their everyday lives.

Madam Speaker! The Government also chose not to proceed with the proposal to introduce a system for registers of debt and credit information, even though many heavy referral bodies were in favor of such a system and, according to the investigation, there are no strong reasons that speak against it. Registers are a prerequisite for being able to place greater demands on unscrupulous lenders. We Social Democrats propose in our motion that a debt and credit lending register be established. It is important to address the deficiencies we have in the current order. We believe that this is a powerful tool to ensure that those who are granted loans also have the ability to pay them back. It should be a register under state administration.

But pleasingly, we now have in the Civil Affairs Committee a proposal for an announcement stating that a debt register is fair because it gives all lenders the same conditions to assess credit risks. It reduces the possibility for certain lenders to exploit unclear information about debts to grant unsecured loans. In this way, it contributes to a fairer market where consumers are protected from unethical business practices.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I move for the approval of reservation 1.

In this speech, Denis Begic (S) agreed.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Anna-Belle Strömberg very much for a well-delivered speech. Much of it I, as a Christian Democrat, can stand behind. I also think that many of the issues contained in the bill are important in order to address the over-indebtedness.

I am, however, a bit surprised by the joy and emphasis with which the Social Democrats speak about the Over-indebtedness Inquiry, whose report has been submitted to the government. A part of the inquiry's proposals is now being implemented. The Over-indebtedness Inquiry speaks of a debt and credit register, but not a full debt and credit register, for which there is now a proposal for announcement. The government has proceeded with policy from the Social Democrats and the Green Party, who commissioned an inquiry and received the answer they wanted. We are trying to deliver on that. But then the Social Democrats have changed policy. My simple question to the Social Democrats is: Why have you changed policy?

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

Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)

Madam Speaker! We have absolutely not changed our policy. We vote for stronger consumer protection and take responsibility for preventing over-indebtedness in society. We co-author across party lines when we have motions that have the same purpose, and this time it is about strengthening consumer protection. We have always fought to create a safer economy for everyone and reduce the risk of over-indebtedness.

Other parties also support these principles. It shows that we are on the right track to make it harder for unserious lenders to exploit vulnerable people. We put these people in the foreground. But apparently, perhaps the members of Parliament do not.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would then like to remind the House that this investigation was commissioned by the Social Democratic and Green Party government. They had full control over the directives for the investigation, and they were quite clear: The investigation was not to propose a full debt and credit register, but there were to be reasonable limits in this.

The Social Democrats have now presented a proposal together with SD. Or rather: the Social Democrats have agreed to SD's policy in this. This means that SD is leading the opposition in this part.

Then my simple question is: Is it more important for the Social Democrats to secure announcements than to push through their policy? Had one wanted to push through their policy, one could have joined the government on this issue. It is a simple question that I would like to have an answer to: Do you think it is more important to join SD and secure an announcement to slap the government on the nose than to actually stand up for your own policy, which does not involve a full debt and credit register?

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

Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank Larry Söder for the question.

To claim that we vote with SD is an attempt to divert attention from a very important issue. We have always fought to create a safer economy for everyone and reduce the risk of over-indebtedness. Our motion is a concrete proposal that is about protecting consumers and creating a more responsible credit market. It is unfortunate that one chooses to focus on party-political labels instead of discussing the concrete advantages of introducing a debt register.

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

Jennie Wernäng (M)

Madam President! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of reservation 2.

Today we are debating risky lending and over-indebtedness. This is a very topical subject that is being debated broadly, even outside the chamber.

First, I want to say that we consider the ability to take out loans to be something positive. Having the opportunity to own your house or your car, or getting help to distribute your costs over the year, is positive. Today, I want to target all the unserious intermediaries and focus on the areas where the problems exist.

Today we live under great pressure, not least in social media with a focus on perfection. This leads to an increased consumption that people actually cannot afford. For the individual, it can mean a long-term and unmanageable indebtedness, where far too many take out additional loans to rectify their situation and thus end up in a debt spiral that is very difficult to escape.

Madam President! The Government is now balancing this with measures that hit where it is needed and is working to achieve broad solutions. In that case, one needs to strike at everything from the marketing of loans to unscrupulous loan brokers.

Parallel to this bill, the government has given several assignments to different agencies, assignments that have a connection to precisely debts.

The problem with over-indebtedness is partly rooted in a lack of care for borrowers by certain lenders. Nearly half of all those with payday loans have an income below 15,000 kronor per month before tax, and they borrow from lenders with the absolute highest interest rates. Therefore, the government proposes tightening for payday loan companies and strengthened protection for consumers through proposals for a potential licensing requirement to be able to mediate loans, as a bank does. This proposal is being prepared in the Government Offices.

The Swedish Enforcement Authority (Kronofogden) has also been tasked with taking preventive measures against extra vulnerable groups to reduce the risk of over-indebtedness and strengthen the possibilities for debt restructuring.

The Government tasks the Consumer Agency to carry out measures to continue strengthening and developing the support for municipal consumer guidance as far as possible and to report on the effects of them.

Madam President of the Council! A broad palette in this bill will hopefully make a big difference with a lowered interest rate cap, sharpened rules on cost caps, limited credit extensions, and clearer information when marketing credits.

But we will not be finished here. I look forward to the government's proactive work on the issue so that fewer people end up in over-indebtedness.

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

Alireza Akhondi (C)

Madam Speaker! Honored members! I would like to begin by saying that I think this is a very good bill, the first sensible one we have received in the Committee on Civil Affairs during this parliamentary term. It feels great to finally be able to delve into something that actually means something to someone.

Let us begin with some facts. We have approximately 420,000 people who have active debts with the Enforcement Authority today. Their debts are increasing. The Swedish debt pile, which was up to 129 billion at the beginning of August this year, is increasing by 50 million kronor per day. Hear and behold - 50 million kronor are added every day!

In economics, one speaks of household debt as a share of GDP. It is now 88 percent. But sometimes one forgets to mention that the share of assets of GDP is 320 percent, so perhaps that is not the biggest problem.

What can be problematic and well worth noting is that the debt share has increased from 44 percent to 88 percent in barely 30 years. The question is whether it is a development that is solely positive. I noted that my Moderate colleague thought it was good to borrow - yes, absolutely, if it goes towards good things.

To go back to the proposition itself, the interest cap and the cost cap are very good. From the Center Party's side, we would have liked to see that the interest cap was lowered further. Something tells me that 20 percent above the reference rate is still far too high. This should be considered and evaluated.

The cost ceiling is very good. One should not pay more in interest and fees than the capital debt itself. It speaks for itself.

There have been some discussions here in the speaker's chair regarding the order of settlement in the case of distraint. From our side, we think it is quite reasonable that one pays off their debts first. I believe that the debtors also want to be paid first, before a lot of interest and fees start ticking. I also believe that people's will and commitment to pay off the debts can increase if they see that the debt itself is decreasing. Then perhaps one might put in a little extra effort to pay it off.

Both parts regarding interest caps and cost caps target – I am trying to find a friendly word for them – the SMS-loan companies that do not behave as they should and lure people into a trap with far-reaching consequences for both life and health. It is good that we are addressing it.

Then we have the question of a debt and credit register. Someone wanted to be whimsical and claim that we are following SD's proposal. That is not true, which everyone who knows anything about how we work knows. We submit our own proposals in the committee. Then the committee secretariat co-authors the proposals. So, no one has jumped on SD and suddenly started cuddling them.

It is, however, a bit unfortunate that the government does not look more closely at a debt and credit register. We are not to run private credit reporting companies' errands. There is a point to having a state-run such register if it is used in lending.

I want to make a point about something else. Sometimes one might think that the government is doing good things on its own. I want to emphasize that this is based on an EU directive, which in turn came from another source. Now, it has been chosen to address it. Furthermore, we just heard that the investigation was initiated by the previous government. The current government is, however, doing something good by continuing with the Consumer Credit Investigation's work. It is to submit its proposals, and the legislation will therefore enter into force on November 20, 2026.

I believe I have said everything that is worth saying. I naturally stand behind all our proposals but move for approval of reservation 3 under point 5.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam President! I move for the approval of reservation 2.

In debates like these, one can sometimes think that we are all cast in the same mold. We find our information in roughly the same places, and there may be some repetitions. But I do it anyway, because repetition is the mother of knowledge.

The total debt at the Enforcement Authority is 119 billion kronor, which is the highest amount ever. It is an increase of 18 billion, or closer to 50 million kronor per day, since last year. Over ten years, the mountain of debt has grown by almost 50 billion kronor.

The median debt per person stood at 78,800 kronor at the turn of the year, which is an increase of 11 percent compared to the previous turn of the year. The most common debts are maintenance support, vehicle-related debts, tax debts, and debts related to consumption, including loans and credits. Municipalities with the highest proportion of indebted individuals are Ljusnarsberg, Perstorp, Eda, Högsby, and Filipstad. Municipalities with the lowest proportion are Lomma, Danderyd, Vellinge, Täby, and my dear Kungsbacka.

Swedish over-indebtedness is thus a fact. The extensive debts affect not only the indebted person but also their children, other family members, and surroundings. The consequences of debt traps are visible at the individual level where the over-indebted are burdened with high mental and physical ill health. At the societal level, the quick loans curb material consumption with an already high ecological footprint, and on the economic side, the debts create a risky instability.

The market for consumer loans, both with and without collateral, has grown rapidly in recent years. In terms of kronor, the largest part consists of so-called unsecured loans, that is, loans without collateral. At the same time as household consumer loans have increased, the debts at the debt collection companies and the Swedish Enforcement Authority have increased even more.

To counter the problems with over-indebtedness in society, the government intends to propose that the right to deduct interest on unsecured loans shall be phased out. The government will also appoint an inquiry to counter over-indebtedness and initiate a review of risk taxes. In the work that the government is currently undertaking, a debt and credit register is in the pipeline as a possible measure that it could eventually result in. The measures included in today's proposition, I see as part of the government's toolkit to reduce over-indebtedness.

The legislative changes mean that the rules which today only apply to high-cost credits, including interest and cost caps, shall be extended to apply to a majority of consumer credits. The interest cap is lowered from 40 to 20 percentage points above the current reference rate. These measures are obviously not taken out of thin air, as we know that an interest cap has had an effect. But the vast majority agree that the interest cap that exists today is set all too high.

With this, I want to say that the proposed measures in the reservations are in no way out of the picture, but the work must be done methodically. The measures proposed today will have an effect. We do not know, however, how large. Therefore, the government is prepared to take further measures in the future. Yesterday, we discussed that children have the right to grow up in a safe environment. A safe economic environment is also an important aspect.

It is interesting that the Social Democrats and the Green Party, who appointed the inquiry into over-indebtedness and thus had full control over the directives to the inquiry and received exactly what they ordered, now say they want to go further and have a complete debt and credit register. In that case, one should know that the only party that had a motion for a complete debt and credit register was the Sweden Democrats.

Have the Green Party and the Social Democrats bowed down to the SD policy in order to be able to pinch the government on the nose? In that case, one could speak of the SD-led opposition as slavishly following SD's policy. It would be interesting to hear from S and MP what has changed after they commissioned the investigation, received the investigation's proposals, and submitted their motions. What is it that has happened that has caused them to now see the light of day and say that we now need a complete debt and credit register? Or is it the case that they have aligned themselves with SD's policy on the issue? In that case, I say congratulations to the Sweden Democrats.

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

Alireza Akhondi (C)

Madam Speaker and Larry Söder! I heard how the member exerted themselves to get a reply, even if not primarily from the Center Party. But what wouldn't one do for the sake of harmony!

(LARRY SÖDER (KD): Extremely kind!)

It would have been very good if Minister Erik Slottner had been in the chamber. He is, after all, the minister who received the investigation and presented the bill. The minister would surely have been happy to receive a little praise.

One should be a bit careful when expressing that the Sweden Democrats were the only party that wanted a complete debt register, whatever that means. One can use different words but still mean the same thing, which has been the case for at least the Center Party's part. It was not actually for this that I requested the floor.

Larry Söder is my favorite member on the other side. He spoke about the importance of doing more to tackle the over-indebtedness. The lives of ordinary families with children are being ruined. Many are being evicted; we are also responsible for the housing policy and the consequences of people ending up in that hamster wheel.

What do Larry Söder and his comrades at the Government Offices intend to do to further ensure that we do not end up in a situation where the debt mountain grows by 50 million kronor a day?

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! I exerted myself to get a reply, and I thank you very much for that.

In this matter, it is quite important that as many parties as possible see the same picture, that is to say that we have a problem with over-indebtedness. It is nice to buy nice things. But one must also be able to pay for them.

I believe that this applies to a great extent to families with children today. Parents may feel a rather great pressure to be able to give their children such things as other children have. In that case, I believe that the government can do quite a lot.

I believe, for example, that something such as not being allowed to make deductions for interest on unsecured loans in the future can make one think one extra time before actually taking out a loan. The interest ceiling can help, but I believe that more things need to be done.

We are in no way against there being a debt and credit register. However, we see the problems. If one is to have a full-fledged debt and credit register, the investigation that exists today is not sufficient; instead, a new investigation must be conducted, which will take even longer.

It is not what was requested in the investigation itself. That is my point. When one enters a piece of work with an investigation, referrals and propositions must then be made. This means that one must know approximately where one wants to land.

Unfortunately, that is how politics is. It takes a long time. In that case, it does not work to change one's mind halfway through unless one has a specific opinion, has found an error, or it is something that one does not want to complete in one way or another. That is my point in this.

I agree with the Centre Party that one should mind one's words and one's parts. But I have read through the motions that exist. There is a difference between wanting a debt and credit register and wanting a complete debt and credit register. It requires significantly more work to know how it could function.

I mean that it is important to see the difference between the various proposals. I do not see that the four parties can join together on one proposal, as has been done in the government's proposal.

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

Alireza Akhondi (C)

Madam President! Thank you for the answer, Larry Söder!

I want to remind Larry Söder that miracles can happen in this chamber. An unholy alliance came together and defeated the proposal on coastal protection with exactly the same justification that Larry Söder is now giving. It was not complete.

Now the government chooses, according to its own statement, to do exactly in that way. It presents the proposal that the Centerpartiet had worked out. Then one appoints an inquiry to get the parts that one perhaps was not satisfied with and wanted in place.

It is clear that one must then hold the line all the way and not start to shift. It is actually there that, from my horizon, I can think that words can mean different things.

But when we, on our part, speak of a debt and credit register, we are speaking of a debt and credit register. We are not speaking of anything else. Then the proposal should reasonably be complete when it is presented.

It was very good that I received an answer from Larry Söder on the other questions regarding what is being done and intended to be done to resolve the other issues.

That one is reviewing the right to deductions is fantastically good. One should not be allowed to receive tax subsidies on any kind of purchase that one furthermore cannot pay for.

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

Larry Söder (KD)

Madam Speaker! When it comes to the shore protection, the member is absolutely right. Sometimes one has to patch and repair as the situation arises. That is what we are trying to do in one way or another. A proposal regarding shore protection shall be submitted.

When it comes to unsecured loans, it is not entirely easy to say: We do not allow any interest deductions on unsecured loans. Many of today's home purchases are made with the help of unsecured loans. That means our home purchases will become more expensive.

We believe that in the long run it will be much better if people do not have unsecured loans, but instead that the mortgage ceiling is raised rather than accommodating loans in what one already has for collateral.

It is not an entirely easy balance to strike. But I still believe that it is right to go that way. I believe that one can find many such parts that the Riksdag is entirely in agreement on.

We can conclude the discussion on debt and credit registers. We have slightly different views. But we will stop there.

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

Katarina Luhr (MP)

Madam President! Most of us sitting here today are acquainted with someone or have a close relative who is over-indebted. But many of us probably do not know about it.

That one cannot manage their finances or has lost control over their debts and bills is something that one preferably does not talk about. The shame and anxiety over it are often overwhelming when the debts begin to grow beyond one's control.

The link, as we have heard, is also strong between over-indebtedness and ill health. For those living with economic stress, the risk of suffering from cardiovascular disease or mental ill health is significantly increased.

As has also been mentioned several times, suicide is more common among those in over-indebtedness than among the rest of the population. One simply feels that one has ended up in a situation from which one has no other way to get out.

For society and not least for the indebted and their relatives, over-indebtedness is a very serious problem. The number of indebted individuals who end up with the Enforcement Authority is increasing in Sweden. We have heard those figures many times.

About a year ago, we had 417,000 Swedes who were registered with debts with the Enforcement Authority. The number had increased by 6 percent in a year, which was the largest increase since the 1990s. The total debt at the Enforcement Authority was then up to 119 billion and increased by approximately 50 million per day.

It is quite incomprehensible figures to be able to take in. But what is understandable is that it is a large problem that affects a large number of Swedes, and many more than we perhaps think.

The most common debts at the Enforcement Authority are debts for maintenance, vehicle-related debts, tax debts, and debts related to consumption, including loans and credits.

That the government is now proceeding with parts of the Over-indebtedness Inquiry's proposals is important to protect more people from different forms of debt problems.

The interest rate cap is lowered and shall cover all credits except for housing loans. The cost cap, meaning the rules that regulate the total cost of a loan, is expanded to cover more credits than today.

For all credits other than housing loans and interest-free credits, there shall also be a special notice that the credit entails costs for the borrower.

I am convinced that all of this, especially the tightened interest and cost caps, will provide increased protection for borrowers. But Miljöpartiet had desired more measures.

Many over-indebted individuals have a risky behavior or find themselves in a more or less desperate situation. This means that we have several measures that would need to be taken.

Madam Speaker! The committee has, as we have already discussed, a notification that we want to see the government investigate a more comprehensive debt and credit register as an additional tool to be able to ensure that information exists on borrowers' total debt issues, including loans, late payments, and collection debts. The investigation highlights such a register, but we have also taken into account that very many referral bodies emphasize the great importance of a register. Such a register is something that exists in most countries, and many referral bodies advocate for it as one of the important tools that are needed. Therefore, all parties in the opposition have submitted follow-up motions regarding the introduction of a debt and credit register.

A debt and credit register could reduce the risk of loans being granted to consumers who cannot afford to pay them back by providing a more accurate credit assessment. We also want to see an order of settlement in the case of distraint where one starts with the principal amount and then the interest, in contrast to the order that is in place today. This is something that could increase the possibility for the debtor to reduce their debt faster.

With that said, I would like to move for approval of reservation 1.

There is more that can be done to reduce the risk of over-indebtedness besides strengthening people's everyday finances. It is clear that many, not least young people, have poor economic knowledge, which both the Financial Supervisory Authority and various research reports have highlighted in different contexts. Many, for example, have difficulty calculating interest rates. Here, consumer and debt counseling play an important role, but it also becomes clear that it is important that basic education in everyday finances is included as early as primary school.

It is clear that many have difficulty understanding the economic consequences of consuming on credit, while unserious lenders can earn a lot by getting more people to borrow for their consumption. I believe, therefore, that there are reasons to move forward with stricter rules regarding the marketing of credits and a stricter credit assessment. The decisions we make today, including an investigation into a debt and credit register, are, however, an important step on the way.

The Financial Supervisory Authority has previously warned that over-indebtedness could become our new folk disease. I hope that today we make good decisions regarding some of the countermeasures against this.

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

Gulan Avci (L)

Madam Speaker! The disadvantage of standing last on a speaking list is that the speech does not quite resemble what was written before entering the chamber.

I think it is very good to be in a committee where we have a broad consensus on important issues that the Committee on Civil Affairs handles. Yesterday we discussed children's rights issues, and we were very much in agreement on how important the issues concerning children's vulnerability are.

Today we have to debate risky lending and over-indebtedness. I note, as the final speaker, that we are in agreement on the direction of the bill that we are to make a decision on today.

I must say, Madam Speaker, that it was very pleasant to listen to Member Alireza Akhondi, who expressed great joy over this bill. I only wanted to provide a small piece of information because it did not clearly appear in an exchange of remarks between Larry Söder and Alireza Akhondi that a law will come into force at the turn of the year, which means that the interest deduction for unsecured loans and other credit will be phased out over the next two years. This is an important step in ensuring that there is a sensible credit market so that people do not become over-indebted.

Much has been said about this bill, and I agree with my colleagues in the Moderates and Christian Democrats as to why we need to move forward with this bill and take further steps to strengthen the protection for consumers in the credit market.

Madam President! Of course, it is important to remember that the individual always shall have the right to decide over their private finances and themselves shall make decisions about which credits one wants to take. But in a situation where we very clearly see that very many people have become over-indebted, society cannot just stand by with its arms crossed, but then society also needs to take a responsibility for the situation.

In this context, it is important to remind, as speakers before me have also done, that we have actually had a long period of negative economic events. The pandemic, high inflation, skyrocketing food and electricity prices, interest rate hikes and so on have affected very many households. I therefore do not believe that one can take as a starting point that everyone who has ended up with the Enforcement Authority should be blamed, but there is partly an explanation for the situation that has arisen. But of course, it has also been all too easy to obtain consumption loans, and that is something we now need to address.

I think it is good that one of the starting points for the bill is that we are now lowering the interest ceiling from 40 to 20 percentage points. I believe that it will contribute to ensuring that credit institutions cannot make such excessive profits as one previously obviously has been able to do at the expense of quite vulnerable groups.

I will not prolong the debate. These are good and important steps in the work we have ahead of us, and if one has read the bill carefully, one also knows that the government will not be satisfied with these proposals. We are prepared to take further measures if we do not manage to tackle the problems that obviously exist in the credit market.

Enhanced consumer protection against risky lending and over-indebtedness

I move, for the sake of safety, for the approval of reservation 2, even though my colleague Larry Söder has also done so.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 14.)

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