Financial stability and financial market issues

Ida Drougge (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by expressing my support for the committee's proposed decision, that is, the rejection of the motions and that we lay the communication addressed in the report to the records.

In the government's communication, the activities carried out by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank Group, and the regional development and investment banks during 2023 and 2024 are described. It simply addresses the issues concerning financial and monetary stability in these activities, in which Sweden is included. It highlights matters that have been of particular importance during 2023 and 2024.

The report also covers motions from the general motion period concerning financial stability and financial market issues. It concerns issues of macroprudential supervision, money laundering, competition in the financial market, mortgage loans, fraud, a sustainable financial market, cash, and much more. The Government does a lot of work in these areas. It is therefore why we move for the motions to be rejected.

A good deal of what is stated in the motions, both in the reasoning and in the proposals, is such that we Moderates and the government agree with. But since work is already underway, or in some parts is already being carried out, we find no reason to announce for the government that it shall work on it. Work is already being done on it, quite simply.

Last month, Trump's tariffs came into effect. Approximately 60 countries have received significantly increased import tariffs to the USA. Sweden and other EU countries have received increased tariffs of 20 percent. China wakes up to 104-percent tariffs. China and several other countries have also announced countermeasures. The risk of a global recession has thus increased significantly. Falling stock markets indicate this and confirm the concern.

We find ourselves in a very turbulent time. It should not be like this. It would not have to be like this, because there are no winners in trade wars. But it is like this. The government and we in Sweden will need to handle this, and we will need to get through this.

Sweden's position in the midst of all this is strong. We have strong public finances. We have had that for a long time, and we therefore have a low national debt. When the national debt for other countries in the EU is at 80 percent on average, ours is 32–34 percent. We therefore have the possibility to act if needed.

We also have well-capitalized and profitable banks. We should be glad about that in these times, because it means that they are resilient. The Government has intensified market monitoring and maintains a close dialogue with relevant authorities and relevant actors, central market actors. They continuously assess whether there are measures that need to be taken. They have preparedness if there are any negative surprises in this area.

Our current order for macro-prudential supervision in Sweden is based on broad agreements where Finansinspektionen plays a very central role. That we are in agreement on those issues is an additional strength in these times of turbulence, where we may need to handle negative surprises and things we cannot foresee. In that case, it is of importance and a security that we have regulatory frameworks that we have a broad consensus on.

The goal is, of course, to minimize systemic risks and to ensure that any issues that individual actors happen to experience, which hit them hard, do not have spillover effects on the rest of the economy. In that regard, we benefit greatly from the regulatory frameworks and from the work that this government and previous governments have carried out over a long period.

In conclusion, I would like to say a few words about the work being done to counter money laundering and fraud. This government has made 14,000 decisions so far. The government that we Moderates lead gets things done, step by step.

We have a new anti-money laundering law in place. Finansinspektionen has received new mandates to strengthen its supervision of money laundering. Measures have been taken to counter abuse in our payment systems. The clearing companies that facilitate payments between banks have become obliged to monitor the payments and to report suspicious payments to our supervisory authorities and to the banks. We have appointed an IDA group, meaning that we have increased the coordination between the different departments in the government, which need to steer and work together to counter the criminal economy, money laundering and fraud and strengthen the supervision.

The Swedish Post and Telecom Authority has received new assignments. The Financial Supervisory Authority has received new assignments. The banks have taken and are taking a number of measures. Today, the government announced that it is sending out another bill for consultation. It concerns monitoring how e-identifications are used, in order to counter fraud and money laundering.

It is too early to say what the result of this will be. We can be happy – I am happy – that last year, 2024, was the first time since 2020 that the crime profits from fraud decreased. They decreased by 16 percent, from 7.5 billion. This is obviously good, but we also know that in this type of activity, they are skilled at finding new ways to make money at the expense of honest, ordinary people and business owners. This in itself is therefore no guarantee that the fraud will continue to decrease in the future. We will need to continue working on the issue. So will our government.

With those words, I once again move to reject the motions.

(Applause)

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! The financial markets are of great importance for the economy's functioning – that money can be moved, that goods and services can be sold and bought, that companies can obtain capital to expand and that small investors can take part in the growth.

Sweden is a prominent country here – with high participation, trust, and transparency. We also have a large financial sector, which is good for our business life and our competitiveness. Therefore, it is important with stability in the financial markets and that there are clear rules that are fair, so that the profits come to the citizens and the country as a whole.

Mr. Speaker! Right now, the news is dominated by the extremely uncertain and serious situation that we have been thrown into. First, it is Putin's war, and now the world is also being shaken by Trump's right-wing populism – politically and economically. Here, of course, Europe must hold together – for our values and for the economy. It is of great Swedish interest. However, this does not reduce the responsibility for Sweden to hold together, achieve good politics, and have the resilience to withstand this crisis – on the contrary. Ultimately, it is about people's security – about jobs, wages, savings, and pensions.

But the starting point in the country is that people are struggling with everyday finances. The price increases have eaten up ten years of real wage increases, and prices continue to be high. That ordinary households have received insufficient and in important areas non-existent economic support from the SD government has contributed to the difficult economic years dragging on.

The SD government has even worsened the housing allowance for those who need it most. More and more single parents testify that they cannot put enough food on the table. The children are hit hardest, who, in addition to the material need, are also deprived of their sports and leisure activities.

This and the cuts to welfare that Kristersson and Åkesson are making in order to instead finance large tax cuts for the wealthy in the country. Reliefs and stimuli are primarily directed towards the wealthy but are paid for by ordinary people through thinner wallets and poorer school and healthcare. It is an unjust policy that pulls Sweden apart. It is also bad for growth, and it strains the economic resilience.

With a Social Democratic policy, we actually would not have been in such a bad situation. With us, ordinary households and families would have received more in their wallets. Welfare would have been stronger. And unlike the SD government, which, when unemployment rises, perversely chooses to cut back on job measures, we would obviously have increased the efforts for jobs. Our growth policy would have favored economic security and resilience in Sweden.

Mr. Speaker! The Social Democrats have in this committee report proposals to make the financial markets better and to ensure that they serve the interests of the people to a greater extent. It is about being able to pay with cash for essential goods and about the entire cash handling chain functioning. This is important for both reasons of equality and reasons of preparedness. It is about young home buyers being given the opportunity for a starter loan. After all, not everyone has wealthy parents, and young people should not be pressured to take expensive and poor unsecured loans.

We also want to improve competition in the banking market. During the times of high prices, the banks have enriched themselves at the expense of households and added further burden. It is inappropriate. We have therefore proposed a bank tax to return some of the excess profits to households and to increase the price pressure.

In addition, we want to strengthen consumers' position towards the banks and make it easier and cheaper to switch loans and to fix the loans for a longer period. To further increase competition in the bank and mortgage market, we submit proposals to utilize the state-owned bank SBAB, give it clearer mandates and also the possibility to provide more services, such as ordinary salary accounts. This would strengthen households' finances and their position towards the banks. SBAB is an important tool.

Another problem in the banking market is the lack of capital supply in Sweden. The development where local bank branches are closing means that people outside larger cities do not get loans for homes and that companies cannot borrow, invest and grow. Sweden is thus missing out on broader growth and is being pulled apart.

The service centers can be used by banks to book meetings, meet customers, and maintain a presence. Several banks have also been positive. Unfortunately, we now see how the government is dismantling the state service in the country and cutting back on the number of service centers – away from the municipalities and further away from the citizens. It is the wrong path.

Mr. Speaker! There is an area where Sweden stands out today, unfortunately in a bad way. It concerns money laundering, economic crime, and tax evasion. It is serious. I therefore want to raise two proposals that we Social Democrats are promoting.

It is partly about the fact that a proper review is required of the industries where economic crime and money laundering are particularly prominent – very important. It is also about tightening the penalties for money laundering and tax crimes. We have proposed that a special penalty should be introduced for so-called extremely serious crimes when it comes to economic crime and money laundering in order to strengthen the deterrent aspect and clarify how harmful that crime is to society.

Mr. Speaker! During this cost-of-living crisis, a discussion has emerged regarding what the financial resilience of households actually looks like. The concern is that we do not know, and the reason for that is that we do not have statistics. However, there is a completed investigation and proposals to introduce full-fledged such statistics. But the SD government is blocking it, even though our authorities responsible for financial stability are requesting it, and even though it is normal to have that statistics in other countries because it is needed in order to be able to conduct a balanced policy.

Sweden needs to obtain statistics on individuals' assets and debts without personal privacy and the protection of personal data being set aside. It is actually our responsibility. What does the resilience look like in the new situation we suddenly find ourselves in? It is not reasonable for politics to grope in the dark here.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion: The world economy and the financial markets are shaking. Anxiety spreads as we feel the effects of right-wing populism. It demonstrates the need for financial stability.

Ultimately, however, there must be improvements in the real economy. Sweden needs a new direction with a policy that creates growth and jobs, that gives ordinary people higher wages, that strengthens our welfare and that increases our cohesion. For this, a new government is required.

I wish to move for approval of reservations 6 and 13.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! You from the Social Democrats often emphasize the importance of stability and international cooperation, not least within the EU, which the member also did from the rostrum.

Against this background, I would like to ask how you view the euro today. We are in a situation where the Swedish krona is weakening and the eurozone's institutions, for example the European Central Bank, play an increasingly important role for Europe's financial stability. Should we not at least investigate the euro question anew so that the Swedish people receive an updated picture of what membership would mean today?

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Cecilia Rönn, for the question!

It is a very interesting discussion, and I appreciate that it is being raised. There are many who predict that this very debate might gain momentum.

We have a congress decision as a party on the issue, and I assume that a larger internal debate and a congress decision are required if we are to change our position on such an issue.

However, the fact is that when the ground shifts, the ideas shift as well. Much has happened in Europe. Brexit caused Sweden's position in the EU to change, and we had to look for new positions. Now that the rules-based world order is falling apart due to right-wing populism, we may have to build up a new bulwark against anti-democratic movements, great power ambitions, and right-wing populism. This also poses the question of cooperation in a new light.

What it ultimately depends on is the popular will. We can think what we want on this issue, but it is both an economic decision regarding the power over our monetary policy and a political decision, where people must feel that they have the power over the development of society. Here, one must be law-abiding and take into account all aspects so that we as a country benefit from a change and so that people feel they are along for the ride.

I therefore think that step one is actually a discussion about what is at stake regarding the advantages of a own currency or of fully entering into a euro cooperation.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, member, for the answer!

It was exactly that question I asked: Should the issue not be investigated again to get an updated picture of the situation?

I cannot [know] the Social Democrats' congress decision in detail, but I wonder if the Social Democrats also have a decision to say no to investigating the issue precisely for the reason the member meant was the first step in the discussion.

Since the 2003 referendum, the entire economic map of Europe has been redrawn. We have a currency union with more cohesion, more crisis preparedness, and stronger institutions, while the krona remains in a corner of Europe. We are vulnerable to financial flows that we cannot control, which affects Swedish households, companies, and our competitiveness.

For us liberals, the euro issue is not about nostalgia or prestige, but about future stability and growth. If we are to be able to make wise decisions moving forward, we need to have facts on the table.

Investigating the issue is not making a decision, but it is taking responsibility. My question to the member therefore remains: When our own currency is now weakening and the economic landscape is changing rapidly, would it not then be the right time for the Social Democrats to look up and support us in pushing to have the issue investigated?

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! This discussion is interesting!

I do not know if I share the view that an investigation is the first step. I mean that the debate is the first step. It takes place, and it is important.

There is also a difference between an investigation, which is something that experts carry out based on certain variables, and a debate conducted by the people. It is not like some institution sits and knows best, but it is people who take a stand on what we want Sweden to be and what we want for Sweden's future. It is a democratic debate. There is a difference between a popular debate and an investigation when it comes to who has the answer to the question.

Of course, this is an economic issue that concerns our interest rates, where fiscal and monetary policy decisions should lie, and how they relate to each other and Sweden's independence in a currency area where we position ourselves in different ways. That is one thing, and there are advantages and disadvantages to a small currency.

But it is also a political decision, and it is a bit different. It is a bit harder to investigate what we in Sweden want for a position in a European cooperation, what role we want to drive, and what development we want to see, ranging from something intergovernmental to something more centrally controlled.

I simply cannot get away from the fact that the debate is there, and I appreciate it. One can certainly investigate things, but I do not believe that is where we will get the answer, rather I believe that the answer will be found in the popular debate and in the fact that many are getting involved. Klas Eklund has, for example, predicted that the issue will gain momentum.

Just that I am asked is evidence that the debate will gain momentum. I welcome the debate, but it is the people who must decide. It is ultimately a political question, and we Social Democrats do not shy away from debates but take them on with joy and enthusiasm.

(Applause)

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! A state wealth register, as the Social Democrats call it, would be detailed down to the individual level even if it were de-identified. Then the question is why one wants such a register down to the individual level. There is information today at an aggregated level, for example, when it comes to households' debts in relation to disposable income.

This is therefore not about the Social Democrats taking the side of the authorities, but it is as usual about having a different agenda.

Ultimately, it is about wanting to find new ways to tax the population. That is why they want to know exactly what income everyone has, exactly what car one drives, and exactly what other assets the households hold.

In order to be able to introduce, for example, a wealth tax, one must introduce such a state register over all citizens in Sweden. If you think that sounds like a bad development, the Sverigedemokraterna are a guarantee that it will never happen.

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the question – it is an important discussion!

The committee was in the United Kingdom last winter and discussed, among other things, financial stability. There, they were very surprised that we, so to speak, have no idea what the situation looks like, from the perspective of financial stability.

The need to know which policy is good for financial stability and to be able to make well-balanced decisions is a discussion that we have had in Sweden for a long time. Not least, we have had it in the discussion about an amortization requirement: What resilience do households actually have? How has the recent cost crisis hit this resilience? We do not know, and the researchers therefore engage in guesswork.

Many of these aspects call for statistics. What has been requested and what several agencies say they want in order to be able to make assessments is, just as in many other countries, anonymized statistics at the individual level that are completely safe when it comes to privacy and personal data. This is what they are requesting.

For us, financial stability is the focus. That is what we are looking for – so that we can take political responsibility for ultimately maintaining stability for the citizens. We know what happens if we do not do that. I think it is also a political responsibility to ensure that one provides oneself with the relevant facts needed to be able to make these decisions, and in that case, it is about statistics.

What concerns me rather is the reluctance – that there is resistance when it comes to these statistics. What is the basis for that reluctance, when there are so many examples in the world that this works and that it can be done in a good way?

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The basis for this reluctance from us Sverigedemokrater is that we safeguard the citizens' privacy-sensitive data. It is not self-evident for Sverigedemokraterna to serve politicians and authorities privacy-sensitive information on a silver platter simply because it is requested. As Björn Wiechel himself says, a political assessment must always be made, and here Sverigedemokraterna makes the assessment that the risks outweigh the potential benefits of a wealth register, precisely because it concerns privacy-sensitive information.

Again: This is not about the Social Democrats taking the side of the authorities and the expertise, but it is about finding new ways to tax the population. Such a register would therefore contain information about which cars and other assets one has and what income all people have. It is a way to eventually be able to introduce a wealth tax.

Björn Wiechel and others also mentioned the amortization requirement and that we do not know how it has affected households. I want to assert that we do know it, at least with regard to the pandemic, when quite a few experts believed that we would see a decline of approximately 30 percent in Swedish housing prices. We did not get that. Relatively speaking, Swedish households with housing loans are faring better than many perhaps thought, at least initially.

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Dennis Dioukarev, for the discussion!

This type of statistics has been requested very clearly by many instances because it is needed for us to be able to make good decisions regarding financial stability. It is actually not much more difficult than that. As Social Democrats, we feel that our ultimate responsibility is to maintain financial stability. We must have a grip on what the resilience of households looks like.

What I have noted, however, is that it is starting to bubble in parts of the business community. They are thinking: What if we find out what the wealth actually looks like and it becomes known how it is distributed. They fear a general debate on how the wealth in this country is actually distributed. One can wonder why there is such fear within the business community regarding a debate on how the wealth in this country is distributed.

I believe that if one is to consider who has intentions here or there, one can consider who it is that is defending themselves against this debate and for what reason, rather than why someone is pushing for us to have full-fledged statistics in order to be able to maintain financial stability. That is probably my point: Look at who is defending themselves against this debate and what reasons they have! Our reason is to want to maintain financial stability.

(Applause)

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

Yusuf Aydin (KD)

Mr. Speaker! We live undeniably in a time characterized by great uncertainty in the world around us, with geopolitical tensions, war in our vicinity, and economic transitions that affect both households and companies. Just as we have fought off inflation and won that battle, we have instead ended up in a tariff and trade war that affects Sweden, the EU, and the entire world economy. In such times, financial stability is a fundamental prerequisite for security, trust, and stability in the entire society. At the same time, it is gratifying to be able to state that Sweden has a stable financial system and strong resilience.

We welcome that the report addresses proposals on mortgage caps and amortization requirements. Kristdemokraterna want to see a balance between financial stability and the households', especially young people's and families with children', opportunities to buy a home. The role of politics should be to promote secure ownership without pushing so that people end up in debt. Kristdemokraterna has therefore long fought for the increased amortization requirement to be removed. It punishes people in the middle of life who struggle the hardest to build up their lives and their families. We will continue to push for the increased amortization requirement to be removed.

We also want to emphasize the importance of safeguarding cash handling in society. Cash is a necessary security for many, especially the elderly and people who do not have full access to digital services. This is particularly important in times of crisis or as a preparedness measure to strengthen the resilience of our payment systems. Therefore, cash needs to continue to be available throughout the country and be able to be used as a means of payment when purchasing certain necessary goods such as food, fuel, and medicines.

Mr. Speaker! Over-indebtedness is a serious social problem that affects many people and households that are vulnerable, not least when interest rates rise rapidly, as we have seen in recent years. It is usually families with small margins that are affected first. Therefore, we must create better conditions for stable and responsible lending environments.

In recent years, consumer credits have increased rapidly, and private individuals' debts to the Enforcement Authority have increased. At the end of 2024, 437,000 people were in debt, and the total debt was 138 billion, an increase of 16 percent in just one year. This corresponds to an increase of 52 million per day. In ten years, the debts have almost doubled.

This is worrying and serious, both for the affected individuals and families and for society as a whole. The development is alarming, and therefore various measures are needed to strengthen consumer protection.

Mr. Speaker! Therefore, it is welcome and important that the government has presented a number of proposals to strengthen consumer protection and counteract indebtedness.

In September 2024, the government submitted the bill Enhanced consumer protection against risky lending and over-indebtedness, which, among other things, aims to ensure that interest and cost caps apply to more consumer credits. At the same time, the interest cap was lowered from 40 to 20 percentage points above the reference rate.

In January 2025, the government submitted a bill on new rules for interest rate differential compensation, which aim to strengthen consumer protection, increase competition in the mortgage market, and reduce the obstacles for consumers who need to fix their loans.

In March 2025, the government submitted another bill stating that consumer credit institutions, so-called quick loan companies, shall no longer be allowed to grant or mediate credits without applying for a license for banking or financing activities. This too aims to protect consumers from over-indebtedness and to counteract unsound lending.

In November 2024, the government received an investigation in which macroeconomic risks associated with household indebtedness were examined. According to the investigation, a gradual adjustment of the current regulations on mortgage caps and amortization requirements is possible without the risks to financial stability increasing in an unacceptable manner. These proposals are now being prepared in the Government Offices.

The biggest problems with over-indebtedness are not on the mortgage side. Instead, it is primarily about unsecured loans and consumer credits, which have increased explosively in recent years. Therefore, the Christian Democrats view tightenings of unsecured credits positively. At the same time, we should be able to ease the increased amortization requirement to enable more families to own their home, which is a place to call their home and where one can feel security.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I want to focus on another important area, namely fraud. The fact that criminal networks target the most vulnerable in society must be taken much more seriously. We have seen alarming reports of criminals cynically and systematically exploiting people's vulnerability and loneliness. The victims are, in many cases, elderly people who are deprived of their life savings.

Today we have a high degree of digitalization within the banking sector. This is good, but digitalization also creates vulnerabilities. The protection has not quite kept pace, and an imbalance has arisen. Much responsibility has been shifted to the customer, who now bears the risk. We therefore welcome that the banks take measures to counteract this.

The government is working very actively to follow up on the banks' measures and to take various measures to prevent these frauds. The Christian Democrats want to have it reviewed whether the banks' financial responsibility should be tightened if these measures are not sufficient to combat the frauds. Countering organized crime is one of the Christian Democrats' and the government's most prioritized issues. Bank frauds, which affect vulnerable people in society, are an important part of this work. Even in terms of value, it is correct to prioritize this.

(Applause)

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating financial stability and financial market issues. These are topics that may appear somewhat abstract and difficult to define. It is not so that the average person in their daily life goes around thinking about how a payment transaction takes place or what the banks' countercyclical capital buffer is. It is something that just exists in the background and is supposed to function.

Briefly, it can be said that the main tasks of the financial system are to facilitate payments, convert savings into financing, and manage various types of risks. It covers everything from traditional insurance activities to so-called derivatives, which are used to manage interest and currency risks.

We need stability in the financial system for the economic wheel to turn and for the economy to have the conditions to grow. With independent central banks, price stability is maintained. With order and discipline in the economy, Sweden stands strong to handle the crises the country faces. With regulation and strict capital requirements on the banks, we arm ourselves strongly against financial unrest.

Both the Riksbank and the Finansinspektionen have important tasks to prevent financial crises. The government and the Riksdag also have an important function in that they are responsible for the regulation of the financial companies. This regulation sets up safeguards and mechanisms that prevent risks from building up in the financial system but at the same time does not set up unnecessary obstacles for private individuals and companies.

As usual, politics is about making these trade-offs in a balanced and thoughtful manner. The Sweden Democrats' policy in this area is developed year by year. We constantly have our ears to the ground and listen to both experts and consumers to pick up on current issues where there is a need for change. Based on this fact-based approach, together with fundamental Sweden Democrat values of making savings and investments accessible to more people, we design our policy in this area.

In practice, these values have manifested by us implementing many improvements and simultaneously protecting consumers and private individuals – or small savers, if you will – against active deterioration. A couple of years ago, we enabled the right of portability regarding pension insurance capital. Pension savers were previously locked into solutions they might not have been satisfied with. We have long pushed for a reform of the interest rate differential compensation to strengthen Swedes' power against the banks and make it easier and cheaper to change banks if one is dissatisfied with the interest received on their mortgage. Earlier this year, a new model for calculating interest rate differential compensation also arrived.

The Tidö parties have lowered the tax on savings. This is not being addressed explicitly here today, but it is still an adjacent issue that deserves to be raised. When it comes to investment savings accounts, the Sverigedemokraterna were the first to motion to modernize the ISK law so that even ISK holders can participate in so-called special stock market listings with mixed offerings. This has now been implemented.

In this context, it should be mentioned that the Swedish ISK model is, in principle, a success story that has ensured that Swedes perhaps have the best system in the world for savings in terms of simplicity and transparency. It is a model that is now potentially on its way to being exported across Europe in connection with the EU's work to try to get more Europeans to invest their savings, which today to a considerable extent are kept under the mattress.

The Sweden Democrats have secured better conditions for employee stock options. In plain terms, this means that innovative companies, which is what it often concerns, are given better conditions to attract and retain key expertise in the company's early stages. This is something that has long been requested by the industry.

A cap on interest rates has been introduced to stop unserious consumer credit companies' pursuit of people in a financially vulnerable situation. This was also tightened further just recently. This was proposed by the Sverigedemokraterna already in 2016 in this very report.

We received an inquiry regarding state-subsidized cattle farming on-site. We also received an inquiry regarding cash on-site, so that it should be easy to deposit, withdraw, and pay with banknotes and coins for things that are essential for life, for example food and medicine. This is something the Sverigedemokraterna have pushed for for a long time. When we finally got a change of government and a cooperation that took these issues seriously, an inquiry on cash was commissioned. It is currently out for consultation.

Mr. Speaker! Owning one's own home is a dream for many. In order for it to be possible, it is important that unnecessary obstacles are not put up. Obstacles and restrictions in the current regulatory framework today affect primarily young adults, but also recent graduates, single people, and individuals who do not have parents who can help with a down payment. Therefore, the Sverigedemokraterna propose that the second amortization requirement be removed. It would give young adults a better opportunity to enter the housing market and also give them a better opportunity to move to where the jobs are usually located. We assume that the investigation that has been handed over to the Minister for Finance, concerning among other things the second amortization requirement, results in a government bill on the Riksdag's table.

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats' policy in this area follows a clear common thread. It should be simple and cheap to save. It should be simple and cheap to change banks. Young adults should be given a chance to own their own home. More power to small savers and consumers!

I vote in favor of reservation 4.

(Applause)

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the speech.

It is very good that the Sweden Democrats have, in recent years, adopted a more positive stance towards Sweden's EU membership. In the security policy and economic situation we find ourselves in in Sweden, it is absolutely crucial that we are active and reliable in the European cooperation, among other things for our financial stability.

This raises a follow-up question: Since you from the Sverigedemokraterna see an increased value in EU membership, is it not reasonable that you also take seriously how Sweden should relate to the eurozone? The Swedish krona is a small, volatile currency that has lost value over time, and there is a great risk that our restless world will affect Sweden's financial stability even more negatively.

Given the changed global situation and the Sweden Democrats' shift on the EU issue, is it not time that Sweden at least investigates an EU membership so that we make future decisions based on today's and not yesterday's facts?

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! For the Sweden Democrats, an investigation into EU membership is definitely not an option.

In such discussions, a supporting argument for the Liberals and other pro-euro advocates is often that the krona has weakened and that it is a strong reason for EU membership. I note, however, that the krona has strengthened recently, and that means, by the same logic, that the support for EU membership has weakened.

The krona also helps us in economic crises because the krona generally weakens then, which is good for exporting companies and the Swedish economy.

Another argument against EU membership is the theory of optimal currency areas. The core thesis is that if Sweden cannot conduct an independent monetary policy, it will complicate the Swedish economy, for example, if the ECB sets an interest rate that is significantly higher than what is necessary for Sweden – or vice versa.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the answer.

For the Liberals, it is not just about economic arguments, but they obviously become even more relevant when we see that the Swedish krona has weakened successively over more than 20 years. It is also about political influence and community, and about sitting at the table and influencing things that affect us in Sweden, whether we are involved or not.

I hear what you in the Sweden Democrats are saying, but I wonder: What are you afraid the investigation will show? What I am requesting is not a decision to quickly introduce the euro, but that we collect today's facts, analyze the conditions in light of the world we now live in, and let the Swedish people take part in an updated picture of what an EU membership would entail.

To dismiss an investigation simply because one has already made up one's mind is not to take responsibility, but rather it is to lock oneself into yesterday's positions, which particularly surprises me with a party that claims to have changed its view on the EU's value for Sweden.

Let me ask the question again more concretely: What is it in a new, objective and broad euro investigation that it would be wrong to look at?

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! There are a number of different investigations, and there are a number of experts who have researched this at the university level. We base all our policy on facts, and here the facts we have on the table clearly speak against EU membership. I do not remember the name of the professor who recently discussed this, but it has been pointed out that an EU membership would not have brought any significant advantages for Sweden in recent years, rather the opposite.

The answer as to why we do not want to see an investigation is simply that it would mean a waste of Swedish tax money.

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! I have a small reflection on a serious subject. Sweden has a growing problem with economic crime, tax evasion, and money laundering. We must stop this. It is important, not least for financial stability.

The Social Democrats have proposed the introduction of "particularly serious crime" for economic crime and money laundering as well as increased penalties – this in order to both deter and clarify how socially dangerous this is.

Do the Sweden Democrats also want that?

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats is a party that is happy to increase penalties. We have shown this, not least in the area of criminal policy.

I suspect that this issue borders on the Committee on Justice because economic crime often falls under both the Committee on Finance and the Committee on Justice. I must honestly admit that I do not know what my colleagues in the Committee on Justice have said on this issue if it has been handled there. I can, however, give a general answer: the Sweden Democrats are usually in favor of increasing penalties, and that also applies to economic crime.

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

Björn Wiechel (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is not always easy to answer if one is not a lawyer or sits on the Committee on Justice; I have respect for that. But this also concerns the financial market issues we are now talking about, and money laundering is included in what we have a responsibility to debate. That is why I asked the question.

We see several advantages with increased penalties. In addition to the effects I mentioned earlier, it increases the police's ability to use coercive measures. Sweden stands out when it comes to money laundering, and it is not flattering but extremely serious.

The Social Democrats have also proposed that a mafia law should be introduced so that Sweden gets a new way to tackle this crime and reach collectives, that is to say, criminal organizations. It is a new approach in Sweden but an important approach.

Regardless of the member's previous answer, are you in favor of this approach? Do you want to increase the penalties? The member said that the Sweden Democrats are generally in favor of it. But do you also want to increase the penalties for economic crime, money laundering, and tax evasion?

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

Dennis Dioukarev (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Björn Wiechel can repeat his question as many times as he wants, but he will receive the same answer from me. With all respect for my colleagues in the Committee on Justice, and in the event that these questions have been dealt with there, I dare not give an exact answer to the question Björn Wiechel poses.

Formally, the Sweden Democrats is a party that is in favor of increasing the penalties for various types of crime, and this also includes money laundering and economic crime. Principally, I see no problem with increasing the penalties for that as well, but I do not dare to give a definitive answer here and now and take responsibility for that answer.

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

Cecilia Rönn (L)

Mr. Speaker! We are now debating the Committee on Finance's report on financial stability and financial market issues, and I move for approval of the committee's proposal.

The debate takes place at a time of increased geopolitical and economic uncertainty. We see a restless world, where the shadows of protectionism are growing – most recently through US President Donald Trump's actions to introduce large-scale tariffs, which have caused great uncertainty on the world's stock markets. At the same time, the eurozone is being pressured by weak growth and increasing differences between north and south.

In this reality, Sweden needs to stand up for openness, economic responsibility, and long-term perspective. That is also what the Liberals' and the government's line in the report stands for.

Mr. Speaker! The Liberals see financial stability as a fundamental basis for a free and open society. Without stable banks, strong institutions, and functioning credit markets, both companies and households lose the opportunity to build their future. That is why we defend international cooperation with the IMF, the World Bank, and the regional development banks.

We see that the IMF has played a decisive role in stabilizing economies in crisis, not least through the support to Ukraine. The World Bank Group's efforts to build up sustainable banking systems in low-income countries is another example. These efforts do not only strengthen financial stability, but they also promote democracy, equality and development – exactly what a liberal foreign policy and economic policy should do.

Mr. Speaker! When certain forces want to withdraw from the world, we liberals want to step forward. Therefore, we welcome that Sweden has increased its commitment in the IMF's quota system, even though the USA has not yet ratified the increase. It is important that the institutions have sufficient resources to act, but equally important is that these resources are used effectively. Support should be given to reform-oriented countries and always with a clear added value compared to what the market can achieve on its own. It is a liberal core principle: limited public risk-taking, but strategic where it is truly needed to help.

Mr. Speaker! Financial stability is needed not only in the rest of the world but also here at home in Sweden. Therefore, within the scope of the report, we also discuss issues such as macroprudential supervision and the mortgage market. In the autumn, the Committee on the Review of Borrower-Based Macroprudential Measures presented its report, which, among other things, gave proposals for lowered amortization requirements and a raised mortgage ceiling. From the Liberals' side, we are closely following the work that follows thereafter.

The amortization requirements and the mortgage ceiling have functioned well as tools to ensure financial stability, and it is reasonable that household debt is kept in check through that type of tool. But we also need a functional housing market that promotes mobility and that everyone can take a step into, regardless of background. Therefore, it is correct not to lock oneself into changes before there is a collective basis from the investigation that is currently ongoing.

Mr. Speaker! Our task as liberals is not to get stuck in symbol politics or short-term solutions. Financial stability is not just numbers and regulations, it is trust – trust that the state is in control, trust that long-term rules of the game apply, and trust that money is not lost in inefficiency or waste.

That is exactly why we Liberals not only safeguard stability but also the will for reform. We want to continue to improve supervision, combat financial crime and strengthen competition in the financial market. We want more, not fewer, to be given the opportunity to grow.

Mr. Speaker! When we look towards the future, we see a world where Sweden needs to be more globally present, not less, where growth is created in interaction with the rest of the world, not in confrontation, and where Sweden is an example in contributing to and influencing the international institutions that shape our common economic future. In this context, we need to ask whether Sweden should not take the step into the European cooperation. It is truly high time.

Since the 2003 referendum, the eurozone has developed significantly, with common stability mechanisms, a stronger central bank, and increased political coordination. At the same time, the Swedish krona has become increasingly volatile and lost in value. This affects households' purchasing power, companies' investments, and Sweden's overall competitiveness.

For us liberals, the euro issue is not about symbolic politics but about economic stability, predictability and European integration. In a world where risks are increasing and currency fluctuations quickly hit our economic conditions, Sweden should move towards the core of the EU, not stand aside.

We therefore consider it high time to update the knowledge base, analyze the pros and cons of the euro, and let the Swedish people receive a modern picture of what a Swedish EU membership would entail today. We need to let the debate take shape and let the political parties take a stand.

Investigating the issue is not taking a stand, but it is showing leadership. I hope that my political colleagues from the other parties dare to do so. Even though the Liberals have taken a clear stand that the euro would be good for Sweden, we want the issue to be investigated in a constructive way.

(Applause)

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! In recent years, we have experienced a situation in Sweden where, above all, food prices have skyrocketed incredibly much. This means that people have to struggle every day just to be able to buy food for their children. We know that one in three single mothers does not eat until they are full because of this.

We also know that this is due to the fact that there is an oligopoly situation when it comes to the food companies, which control 90 percent of the food market. It is clear that there are no special circumstances in the outside world that cause prices to rise, but it is primarily due to the fact that the companies take grotesque profits on what they sell. When the food companies are asked why they do this and if they can justify why it is reasonable for them to take these grotesque profits, they answer: Yes, but the banks take even higher profits.

Mr. Speaker! Similar to the grocery retail trade, the mortgage market suffers from a lack of competition. Sweden has a very high concentration level in the banking market. There, the four major banks SEB, Handelsbanken, Nordea and Swedbank control around 80 percent of the market, while the state-owned bank SBAB controls approximately 7 percent.

The Swedish major banks have a high profitability that holds up well even in European comparison. This is something that the Riksbank notes. The profitability is driven primarily by the net interest income, which accounts for approximately two-thirds of the Swedish major banks' total revenue. In line with the Riksbank's increases of the policy rate, the banks have taken the opportunity to raise the lending rates more. At the same time, they have been able to dampen their financing costs on the liability side by not raising the deposit rates to the public at the same pace. The net interest income has thus been able to increase by the interest rates on the banks' assets having increased more than the interest rates on their liabilities.

A powerful contributing cause to the households' cost increases has thus been the sharply increased interest costs for the households' mortgage loans. The state mortgage institute SBAB has previously had a clear role in this oligopolistic market: to increase competition, to the benefit of the customers. The state determined that SBAB should be operated commercially with a return requirement that is reasonable for the business. In the year 2000, it was decided that the return on equity over time would on average amount to the five-year government bond rate plus 5 percentage points.

A falling trend in the mortgage margin between the years 2002 and 2011 also reflected a falling profit requirement on SBAB, as the five-year government bond fell. This is, however, history now. The change has resulted in increased margins for the banks. The banking market is an oligopolistic market. It is therefore highly justified for the state to own an actor that conducts commercial operations to promote competition. SBAB should therefore regain its previous mandate and return requirement.

With an assumption that it would be possible to press the mortgage interest rate down by an average of 0.5 percentage points, it would mean approximately 20,000 kronor more in the household budget for a household with a mortgage of 4 million kronor and reduced profits for the banks by approximately 25 billion kronor per year. The measure would be as simple as possible to implement with a simple government decision.

We in Vänsterpartiet realize, however, that it may take time before this proposal takes full effect. As long as there is no regulatory framework in place that creates healthier competition in the banking market, Vänsterpartiet believes that the banks' excess profits should be taxed. In line with what has been introduced in several European countries, Vänsterpartiet therefore proposes a temporary bank tax. The proposal means that a tax on 50 percent of the banks' excess profits is introduced during the period 2025–2027. It can be extended if the lack of competition persists.

In short, the Left Party's proposal is therefore the following.

To immediately change SBAB's mandate to contribute to diversity, competition, and price pressure in the market for mortgage loans through an efficient operation.

To lower SBAB's return requirement to that which applied in 2012: five-year government bond interest plus 5 percentage points.

To appoint an inquiry with the mandate to review whether the risk of SBAB's lending truly reflects long-term returns in line with the stock market or if the return requirement should be lowered further.

To introduce a bank tax of 50 percent on the banks' excess profits.

I vote in favor of reservation 13.

(Applause)

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

Martin Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! While we stand here in the chamber and debate, a trade war is raging out there that resembles nothing we have seen since the days of the Great Depression, when President Hoover's Hawley–Smoot Act drove what was a deep economic crisis into the worst economic collapse of the 20th century through a crash in global world trade.

Still, the tariff levels then were lower than those that Trump is setting on the Western world now. Our entire part of the free world is currently paying an incredibly heavy price for nationalism and populism, and it is already clear that Trump's tariff tsunami will have serious consequences not only for American jobs – that is where it will hurt the most – but also for Swedish jobs and for the financial system.

I think we should be clear-eyed here, Mr. Speaker. Our financial system is now under very severe testing. It concerns the stock markets. It concerns the banks. It concerns all financial actors. Right now we do not know where the turbulence will hit hardest, but we know that things will happen during the coming weeks and months.

I believe it is important that we realize here in the chamber and in Swedish politics that the first line of defense to safeguard the financial markets is to safeguard Swedish companies. It is only in that way we can secure Swedish growth and Swedish jobs right now.

We are very concerned that the government, during the years it has been in power, has not listened when we have said that it is not possible to increase the costs for companies, especially the small and growing companies, and their employment, or to at all increase their burdens without it affecting growth and employment. Now we stand at the entrance to the crisis – a rather deep unemployment crisis with record figures – before the tariffs have even hit us, with a growth that is mediocre and a recovery that has stalled.

We must urgently come up with measures that strengthen Swedish business, Swedish companies and Swedish jobs in a fundamental and substantial way, not just patch and repair. It is not enough to increase the subsidy rate in rot even if it is certainly positive in its own way.

To return more directly to today's topic: Households are under a lot of pressure now, also from the financial turbulence. Many are worried, not only for their jobs and their interest rates but also for how they will manage the payments on their housing and, above all, how they will be able to buy a home.

As several speakers have pointed out, it is problematic that the government has still not succeeded in removing the so-called reinforced amortization requirement. It is good that it is the plan. It is good that the mortgage ceiling has been raised. But there is an urgency now, Mr. Speaker. These measures existed to curb a rise in housing prices that no longer exists. They existed to protect savings, which are now unfortunately still being eroded at a rapid pace for many households who perhaps feel a need to save more.

That is why we in Centerpartiet do not only want to abolish the increased amortization requirement, which we have long demanded. We want to pause the ordinary amortization requirement, which has existed for a long time, because it is not the time to continue in that direction. We must ease the pressure on Swedish households.

Young people want to settle down. It has been mentioned in the debate, and it is absolutely true. People want to move to where the jobs are but do not have the means or can not manage to get a new home, because the bank does not provide that opportunity.

Therefore, I want to move for approval of our reservation – it is reservation 5 under point 3.

We must also increase the competition between the banks. The interest margins continue to be too high, and the possibilities to move loans are too small despite changes in the interest rate spread compensation. They are good but not sufficient.

On a macro level, the government must now have the highest state of readiness. We cannot have statements of the type that there is no risk of financial crashes in such a situation from the government's side. Here, one must have maximum readiness. One must look closely at the leveraged commercial real estate market. One must look closely at the banking system and work together in Europe to be able to handle it.

It is extra important now, when the USA or Trump in several ways are undermining the international financial system with the dollar as the reserve currency and the international financial institutions, that we build strong in Europe. And when we build strong in Europe, we must ensure to build on the wise savings culture we have built up in Sweden, not just with ISK but also with efficient markets so that ordinary people can save not only in gold, as many do around the world, but in shares and for the benefit of our business sector and our development.

We in the Center Party also want to mention what has been mentioned by Yusuf Aydin and others in this debate: that gang crime is a major problem in financial markets today.

As we have underlined in our proposals, the fraud epidemic, directed primarily at the elderly, is today a larger source of income than narcotics. There, the government should do more. I believe it is important that we, as the Centerpartiet has proposed, establish a kind of "ekokrim" where we gather the expertise and strengthen it instead of dismantling the authorities we have in the area – so that one can have a much more efficient and closer dialogue with the banks so that they, in turn, take greater responsibility. In times of financial instability, the protection of precisely these issues becomes even more important. Many worry about what is happening on the stock markets. If the banks, in turn, do not protect their customers, there is unfortunately a risk that they become victims of fraud.

Mr. Speaker! Most importantly, whether it concerns the financial markets or our economy as a whole, is that we in Sweden are now safeguarding Swedish competitiveness, Swedish companies and Swedish jobs across the entire country. Time is running out before the full force of the nationalist tariffs destroys much of what we in Sweden depend on and what we have built up over many years.

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

Märta Stenevi (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the opportunity to step in on short notice in place of Janine Alm Ericson. I will begin by moving for the approval of the Miljöpartiets reservation 22, so that I do not forget it.

We live in a very turbulent time. So much in our world around us is shaking, and we see a new world order emerging. It is a world order that is no longer about the common good and long-term sustainability, but about the short-term self-interest that an individual president chooses to focus on.

We see the consequences of a new world order in Russia's invasion of Ukraine. We see it in how the rest of the world chooses to turn a blind eye to Israel's war crimes in Gaza, and we see it in how the newly elected US president Donald Trump chooses to unleash a trade war against the rest of the world.

There are deep crises occurring in parallel. It is a security policy crisis that requires readiness both militarily and civilly, and a fiscal policy crisis that will require a strong readiness from the government and concern the possibility for us to pay with cash.

In addition to these two crises, we also have a climate crisis that continues. It has in no way taken a break because the world order is now upside down. It is a climate crisis that does not allow itself to be influenced by authoritarian leaders joining forces and doing their best to divide the world between themselves in what most resembles a return to the feudal system of the 1700s. The climate crisis continues to expose, above all, women and children in large parts of the world – parts of the world for which the same authoritarian leaders are now withdrawing aid.

Financial stability and financial market issues

In such a crisis, we must manage to let the fiscal system continue to work for stability also in the climate work and the environmental work. We will, in fact, not emerge from the security policy crisis or the fiscal crisis and discover that the climate crisis has solved itself. We will not discover that the tipping points that we are now approaching have passed unnoticed. On the contrary, the effects of the climate crisis and the nature crisis risk instead exacerbating the security policy crisis and the fiscal crisis.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is also necessary in these times to have the strength to hold fast to fiscal frameworks, taxonomy, sustainability reports and the requirements that we have the opportunity to set to ensure that capital goes to those operations that have the possibility to help counteract this climate crisis.

I vote in favor of reservation 22.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 12.)

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