Financial stability and financial market issues
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 SD argues that they have implemented reforms to open up the housing market and want to ensure the right to a payment account as well as strengthen the function of cash 1. 2 SD argues that their economic policy has lowered inflation and led to real wage increases 2. 3 SD argues that the previous government pursued a pro-cyclical policy that fueled inflation 3. 4 S argues that the government must scrutinize industries with high economic crime and that sports agents must be covered by the money laundering act 4. 5 S argues that tax cuts for high-income earners are carried out with borrowed money 5. 6 M argues that the government should have stopped the electricity grid monopoly's fee increases 6. 6 M argues that Sweden has a low national debt and good conditions 6. 7 V argues that banks must take greater responsibility for fraud and proposes a British model 7. 8 C welcomes that the strengthened amortization requirement is being removed 8. 8 C argues that banks must take greater responsibility for fraud 8. 8 C argues that it is unacceptable that banks hold money overnight 8. 8 C argues that it is a growing problem that associations and certain individuals have difficulty obtaining a bank account 8. 8 C argues that one must secure both financial stability and everyday banking services 8.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Dennis Dioukarev (SD)
Madam Speaker! Today we are debating financial stability and financial market issues. The Sweden Democrats and the government have implemented several reforms in these areas, and we will implement a further number of them.
Let us begin with the housing market! For a long time, more and more people have been shut out from the opportunity to buy their first home. A change of power has been required to be able to open up the housing market for more people again.
We are now moving forward with reforms that make a real difference: the second amortization requirement is abolished, and the mortgage ceiling is raised from 85 to 90 percent, which in practice means that the requirement for a down payment is lowered from 15 to 10 percent. For a first-time buyer, this can make an enormous difference. The saving time for the down payment for a one-room apartment in Greater Stockholm can be reduced by up to four years. For a single person purchasing a condominium, abolishing the second amortization requirement means that the borrowing cost can decrease by up to 1,500 kronor per month, which can be completely decisive for whether a person passes the banks' "left-to-live-on" calculation and is granted a housing loan. For a family with children with a larger home and a larger loan, the cost can decrease by up to 4,000 kronor per month, which increases the possibility of passing the banks' calculations and moving to a detached house or using the space to build up a necessary economic buffer.
This is good news for those who want to move out from home, and it is good news for those who want to start a family. These are reforms that make it possible for more people to take the step into the housing market, to move where the jobs are, to say yes to a study place in another location, and to plan for the future with greater security. It opens up the housing market for first-time buyers, for single people, and for families with children.
Madam Speaker! But financial market policy is also about something even more fundamental, namely the right to participate in economic life. We are today in a situation where private individuals, companies, associations, and even opinion leaders are increasingly being denied bank accounts or having their bank accounts deactivated. According to information, approximately one-third of companies within fintech have had difficulties obtaining a bank account at a Swedish bank. Furthermore, the number of denied payment accounts has increased by around 70 percent between 2023 and 2024, according to the report from Finansinspektionen. These are figures that are far too high and, in the long run, risk hitting Swedish innovation.
Let me therefore be clear: I have great respect for the responsibility that the banks take regarding the work against money laundering and against the financing of terrorism. It is an important work, and it is absolutely crucial that the payment system is not misused. In some cases, it is therefore completely legitimate to deny or terminate a customer relationship. But it cannot happen arbitrarily. To shut off a person or a company from the banking system without clear justification can mean an indirect business ban for companies and major restrictions in everyday life for private individuals.
In today's society, a bank account is a fundamental prerequisite for participating in the digitized economy we live in. Therefore, several actors – Finansinspektionen, the state payment investigation, and industry organizations – have pointed out the same problem. They argue that banks should be obligated to a greater extent to test alternative measures before an account is denied or closed, document the reasons for their decisions, and ensure legally secure opportunities for review. Banks must be able to combat economic crime, but consumers and companies must simultaneously be protected from arbitrary decisions.
Madam Speaker! Financial market policy can sometimes sound technical and remote, but in reality, it is about something very concrete. It is about the opportunity to buy one's first home, the opportunity to start and run a business, and the opportunity to participate in economic life at all. That is why these issues deserve our full attention. We Sweden Democrats in the Committee on Finance will therefore make the right to a payment account a priority issue in our continued parliamentary work.
Madam Speaker! I would like to conclude by saying a few words about the position of cash in Sweden. Sweden is today one of the world's most digitized payment societies. There is much positive in this. Digital payments are fast and efficient, but the development has also gone so far that cash has in practice become difficult to use in large parts of society.
This creates problems. First and foremost, it is about inclusion. Half a million Swedes live in voluntary or involuntary digital exclusion – not least it concerns certain elderly people, people with disabilities, and women at risk of crime – people who are dependent on cash in their everyday lives. But it is also about preparedness and resilience. We live in a time where we can no longer take the stability of our social systems for granted. Cyberattacks, technical disruptions, or crises can knock out payment systems. In such a situation, cash is not a nostalgic relic that some are trying to impose on us, but it is part of Sweden's economic preparedness. This was also the message to us when the Ukrainian central bank governor was on a visit to Sweden in the summer of 2024. He emphasized that during the first weeks of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, banknotes and coins were absolutely crucial for people to be able to carry out their everyday purchases.
That is why the government and the Sweden Democrats are now putting forward the bill Measures to strengthen the functionality of cash, which actually arrived just before this debate. The proposals in the bill mean, among other things, that grocery stores and pharmacies shall accept cash as a means of payment, that banks shall ensure functioning possibilities to withdraw and deposit cash throughout the country, and that companies shall have access to services for daily cash deposits and currency handling.
It is ultimately a matter of politics now putting its foot down and creating the conditions for the payment system to function for everyone and under all circumstances. The Sweden Democrats and the government ensure that cash shall continue to be a real and functioning means of payment in Sweden.
Patrik Lundqvist (S)
Madam Speaker! The financial market is extremely important for Sweden. It affects almost all parts of society, directly or indirectly, and it can both lift and pull us all down. Therefore, it is important not to hinder important flexibility. But we must also not let the wrong individuals exploit the financial market in the wrong way. We want high and steady growth and that the entire population of Sweden should share in the fruits.
But, Madam Speaker, it is also important to have control and to curb problems that can arise on the financial market. The examples of crashes that could have been avoided with the right regulations are many – it concerns both domestic ones and those that have come from outside.
I looked a bit at the previous debates on this area. I can state that one of the dominant issues since a few years back concerns anxiety in the world around us. Wars and crises have succeeded one another for several years. It is like a history lesson in war and financial shocks – from Putin's invasion of Ukraine to trade wars and pandemics. International trade is disrupted by, for example, ships getting stuck. The ship from Evergreen did it. Everyone has probably forgotten that now, but it had major effects for international trade. I am also thinking of what is happening now in the Strait of Hormuz, which has been closed due to the war in Iran.
All this requires order and tidiness here at home and in our local area and that we strengthen ourselves together with our neighbors. It requires that Europe stands united in the face of the unrest coming from outside and that we have clear rules and laws that in a fair way strengthen our domestic financial market and ensure that the profits produced benefit everyone.
One of the world's major problems is that wealth has become concentrated while most people have become poorer and unemployment has spread. The right-wing forces that have dominated the recent years of war and conflict are a result of that. If we do not reverse the development in Europe, we risk the same thing here.
The Swedes' wages have still not recovered from the inflation shock that came with Putin's war and the effects after the covid pandemic. We are currently facing yet another risky situation where prices will soar again due to the war in Iran and all the unrest that comes with war in the Middle East.
Admittedly, the government has lowered taxes to compensate somewhat. But since it is mostly for those who have the highest incomes that it has been since before, far too many have seen their incomes suffice for less and less. Others have fared better than it was before all this started.
This policy has also not worked wonders for employment and unemployment, Madam Speaker. Sweden has fared worse from the shocks than the rest of Europe due to misprioritizations by the sitting government.
Welfare is being eroded. We have seen this, not least in the debate that has taken place regarding the cuts in healthcare, where both Moderate ministers and regional councillors have blamed others for the problems and portrayed those who highlight the problems with the savings as liars. Then they have had to back down or hide. The employees who highlight the problems should be seen as heroes rather than being accused of lies – even if it happens with Magdalena Andersson as some kind of proxy. Misplaced priorities and constant cuts are the price for the constant tax cuts. That matter should be obvious to most people today.
This government has deliberately used people's finances as an inflation damper. They have kept down their consumption in order to be able to favor high-income earners and capital owners instead of ensuring that everyone can manage a bit better during this period. Unemployment could have been kept down, and investments could have been kept up. That, Madam Speaker, would have been Social Democratic policy for the good of the whole country. It would have been worth borrowing for that instead of borrowing for massive tax cuts, which the government does. The government does that rather to buy votes than to get Sweden back on track.
Another path would have been possible, where more people would have fared better and where Sweden as a country would not have fallen behind compared to our friends in Europe. But that is not where we are, Madam Speaker.
Just a few weeks ago, we in the Committee on Finance had an open meeting about the Riksbank's monetary policy over the recent years. It was very rewarding. Overall, it works well, and it has looked good. But of course, there are things to do to improve the functions and create a better basis for all the decisions that are made. Among other things, Lars Calmfors argued that we have lost approximately half a percent in GDP just because of the last two interest rate hikes, which were carried out to bring down inflation. One might think that half a percent is not particularly much. But with 2025's GDP for Sweden, it is approximately 32 billion kronor – quite a lot of money – that we have lost due to poor basis.
I will not stand here and pretend that these decisions are particularly simple and that it would have been obvious to make other decisions at that time. But with better underlying data, perhaps not as much money would have needed to be lost.
This is a good example of how the decisions that are made can have very large consequences and of how large sums we are playing with for both the country and individuals. For someone with large mortgages, after all, a half percent higher policy rate can make a very big difference. And for the entire Swedish economy, it can make a big difference when it comes to which companies can expand, invest, or be started. Over time, being off by half a percent has huge effects.
Where do I want to come with this, Madam Speaker? Well, I want to say: The better the basis for decisions we can obtain, the better we and our authorities can manage the economy for the benefit of us all. That is why authorities, including the Riksbank, have for a long time requested registers of debts and assets as support for future decisions. We need to know how it looks at a more detailed level in order to be able to avoid this type of loss through more precise decisions. We are fumbling more than necessary in the face of the anxiety that is growing in the world and which also risks affecting us. It is we here in the Riksdag who have the responsibility to remedy this.
To the matter belongs that there is a notice regarding such statistics already from 2019. And an investigation is complete, with a proposal that the government does not seem to want to turn into a bill.
Madam Speaker! There is much to do in this area. We Social Democrats particularly want to highlight the need for a functioning cash management system throughout the country and for everyone. This is important, not least from an equality perspective and in terms of preparedness. There must be a coherent strategy for payment and cash management systems, with redundancy, as a guiding perspective.
That the economy functions in crisis and war is crucial for society to be able to function. The preparations needed to secure the economic system must therefore be well-rehearsed in order to function when it matters.
We also need to improve the banking sector, increase competition, and increase the price pressure on the banks through a bank tax. The banks can certainly pay with their excess profits. But that is not enough, of course. We also want to ensure that we increase the local presence of financial services. When the banks withdraw, the opportunities to run and start businesses go with them. This harms the local and regional development in those parts of the country where the banks disappear. A solution to this would be, for example, to develop the Statens servicecenter and give them more opportunities to be a meeting place between financial institutions and local communities.
The state must also more offensively use its own bank, SBAB, to press for efficiency in the banking sector. This can, for example, occur through changed return requirements and broadened operations with, for example, salary accounts and tailored mortgage loans to those who own their homes and to various rental property owners for energy efficiency measures or the like.
Madam Speaker! In conclusion, I want to highlight the problems with the criminal economy. Fraud, economic crime, and money laundering are increasing problems in Swedish society. Criminals have an almost infallible ability to sniff out those parts of society that provide the most money for the least effort and with the least risk of punishment. There has been a liberalization of laws and regulations, which has meant that one has naively let more and more people into, for example, the welfare system since the 90s and that one has loosened the requirements and the control of companies. This has, of course, been exploited by criminals.
The Swedish Bankers' Association and the banks' voluntary measures against fraud and exploitation of financial services need to be followed up and evaluated to see if legislation is required.
We mean that the government must conduct a review of the industries where economic crime and money laundering are particularly prevalent and increase the protection, especially for entrepreneurs, who today lack much compared to the consumer protection that private individuals have. Sweden's small business owners are today targets for fraud because they do not have the same support from the state that private individuals have and because they are more responsible themselves for not being defrauded than private individuals are. In many cases, it is not a fundamentally different situation other than that they, unlike private individuals, run businesses.
Madam Speaker! We finally mean that even sports agents must be covered by the money laundering law, just as it already covers brokers and other sectors with large sums and high cash flows. This must be done before Swedish football is hit by trust problems and is tarnished by black money and crime.
Madam Speaker! As my party colleague said in last year's debate: 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.
The danger has not become any less real since then. The situation has worsened. We need to take our responsibility for both stability and people's private economic security, trust in the financial market, and preparedness for crises both outside and inside our country.
Madam Speaker! With that said, I move for approval of reservation 7. I waive the other reservations, so that we can avoid voting longer than necessary.
Dennis Dioukarev (SD)
Madam Speaker! Let me remind the members of how it looked when the Sweden Democrats and the Tidö parties took over in 2022 after the Social Democratic government.
We had a per capita growth that was the lowest in Europe, fuel prices at 28 kronor per liter, and four closed nuclear reactors. There were fatal shootings at record levels which have now been halved. There was an inflation of 10 percent. Is that to be considered financial stability? One might ask that.
What happens now? We have gotten inflation under control. It is actually below the Riksbank's target. We have real wage increases that are the highest since the financial crisis, and unemployment is decreasing for the sixth month in a row.
All this is the result of a responsible economic policy. It has made possible the reforms and investments that the Sverigedemokraterna and other Tidö parties are now implementing.
It is about reduced electricity tax, halved food VAT, lower fuel prices and lower taxes for ordinary people. All of this means an extra 5,000 kronor a month for an ordinary family with children. Why is that bad economic policy?
Patrik Lundqvist (S)
Madam Speaker! We have spoken very much about the inflation that was and the fight against inflation that took place at the beginning of this mandate period. I thank you for the opportunity to speak a little about just that.
During the last election campaign, the opposition to our Social Democratic government tried to claim that all of this was due to Magdalena Andersson. It was "Magdapriser" here and other epithets there.
The problem was that the inflation we saw was not caused by domestic consumption. It was subsequently choked back in order to fight inflation.
A misjudgment was made during the election campaign, which was then followed up with practical policy. It was based on the idea that it was domestic Swedish consumption that led to inflation. That was not the case.
That is why Swedish citizens were fought instead of ensuring that the crisis and inflation, which were built on the global situation and the disruptions that existed in international trade, were bridged. That was the core of the inflation. It was about Putin's war in Ukraine, the problems with trade after covid, and so on. That is where we had the problems.
The government choked and held back the purse strings to fight inflation instead of helping the Swedes through the problems that were not created here in this country. We are sitting with the situation that people have fared significantly worse than they could have. We have not caught up yet.
Our European comrades made a different assessment. They ensured that their businesses and their citizens were supported during a difficult time. It would have been a better policy even for Sweden.
Dennis Dioukarev (SD)
Madam Speaker! I can only state that the previous socialist government pursued a pro-cyclical economic policy that fueled inflation.
When it comes to, for example, fuel prices, we removed the reduction obligation, something that lowered Swedish fuel prices. It is unclear where the Social Democrats stand on that issue.
I also note that the member is speaking about everything except what was my question to the member. Why is reduced electricity tax, halved food VAT, lower fuel prices, lower taxes for ordinary people, 5,000 kronor extra per month for an ordinary family with children, bad economic policy? I would very much like to have an answer to that question.
Patrik Lundqvist (S)
Madam Speaker! I will, in any case, answer some of the myriad of questions. We can begin with the reduced tax on electricity.
What I tried to say in my speech just now was that the government has prioritized completely wrongly. During the first three years of the mandate period, they raised the tax on electricity. Now they are lowering it when inflation is down.
That is what is being done now instead of doing something when people had the need, when it could have supported Sweden and ensured that we did not end up where we are today. It is a misprioritization. One stands here now and is proud that one has finally landed on doing it too late.
Furthermore, the lowered taxes on electricity have not made electricity cheaper today than it was then. One has only removed the tax increases that were made earlier during this mandate period.
I don't know how one can even beat their chest over that matter. One has actually zeroed the tax in the same place it was when it was taken over, with a sharp turn that has harmed Sweden in the meantime.
One can also mention the 5,000 kronor for an ordinary family with children. If one looks at who actually receives the money, it is true that some receive 5,000 kronor. But it is only the 10 percent with the highest incomes in Sweden who receive that money. One can also try to beat oneself up for that.
The fact is that very many have it harder today than they did three or four years ago. It is a problem. Those people have not been helped by massive tax cuts for high-income earners, which we will then have to pay for because they are carried out with borrowed money.
There is not much for most Swedes to be particularly happy and proud of here. It is somewhat regrettable that we have ended up there, Madam Speaker.
Ida Drougge (M)
Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision and that the communication be added to the records.
When we began the mandate period, Sweden's inflation was double-digit, 10 percent. The electricity price was higher than it is today. Unfortunately, it is still too high.
There is an incredibly large amount that is difficult and turbulent in the world we live in now. We in Sweden cannot influence all of it. But we can look at what we can influence. What is that then?
We could have had an electricity price that was 35–40 percent lower than it is today if we had not shut down nuclear reactors prematurely.
We could have had lower inflation if we had not let energy prices rise to the high levels we are at now. It is quick to ruin things that work well. It sometimes takes time to build them up again.
This government has begun the work of rebuilding Swedish energy production and the Swedish electricity system. Unfortunately, it will take a little more time. I understand and know that this may not be a great comfort in a difficult time.
What can we do then to facilitate things now? We can lower taxes on work. We can lower the food VAT. We can lower the fee for childcare. The government is doing all of that. But what does it have to do with financial stability, which we are debating today? Well, that households – all of us – should be able to have a certain buffer. It is one of the parameters that gives us financial stability. Another is banks that do not run large deficits. A third is strong and good regulations against money laundering and that type of activity. Customers should have the opportunity to change banks to get better terms. That is something more the government has delivered.
It is easier today to move a fixed-rate mortgage without paying high interest rate difference compensations. It is also easier today to apprehend gang criminals who commit fraud. The clearance rate has increased, and this crime and the criminal profits from the frauds have decreased significantly during this parliamentary period.
Sweden is heading in the right direction, and we also have extremely good conditions. There is much to be grateful for when things work as well as they do in Sweden. During this difficult time with high inflation and recession, we have – which is unique – economic opportunities and much greater room for maneuver than other countries, thanks to our low public debt. There are large countries in the EU that have a public debt level of up to 80 percent. Some countries have a debt level of over one hundred percent. We are at 32–35 percent in public debt.
The truth is that our national debt today as a share of GDP is lower than when Magdalena Andersson pushed through her latest budget here in the Riksdag. As a share of GDP, the national debt is lower today than it was with the Social Democrats' latest budget. Our interest costs have also decreased, to mention one further positive parameter.
We have a large capital market with strong innovative power. This provides enormous good conditions and foundations for companies and entrepreneurs in Sweden to work from. They stand more stably when the world around them is turbulent.
There is always more to do, and we will need more time, but much is also finally heading in the right direction now.
Andreas Lennkvist Manriquez (V)
Madam Speaker! In recent years, we have seen a worrying development in Sweden. Fraud linked to BankID and digital payment services has increased significantly. Finansinspektionen has already established that the supervision of BankID and similar services needs to be reviewed. Clear rules and stronger controls are needed, but above all, higher security requirements are needed.
Madam Speaker! When we use digital IDs, we should be able to feel secure. BankID has become a key to almost our entire economic life. For that very reason, the security must be at an absolute highest level. The responsibility cannot be placed on the person who has been deceived. Today, consumers usually have to bear the consequences of unauthorized withdrawals via BankID, bank cards, and Swish themselves. It is not reasonable. When systems are exploited by criminals, the victims should not be left alone with the cost. At the same time, phone scams are reaching new record levels, and the dark figure is large.
The police are clear that the banks must take greater responsibility to prevent crimes. In the United Kingdom, they have chosen to act. There, they have introduced legislation that forces the banks to share the responsibility when fraud occurs. The customer's bank normally replaces half of the loss, and the bank where the money is transferred must cover the other half. Furthermore, the banks must openly report how many of their customers are affected by fraud. This creates responsibility, and it creates transparency. It also creates incentives for the banks to actually stop the crimes. Sweden should learn from this. Vänsterpartiet believes that the government should promptly return with legislative proposals inspired by the British model.
The problem with fraud does not only affect individual people. It also affects companies on a very large scale. Every year, around 40,000 entrepreneurs encounter these fraudsters. A quarter of the entrepreneurs state that they have suffered economic losses from this. It is unacceptable. The banks must take greater responsibility to protect their corporate customers. Security cannot be something that the entrepreneurs themselves have to demand. It should be self-evident. It should be strong, and it should be in place before the crimes occur.
Martin Ådahl (C)
Madam Speaker! These are uneasy times, but Sweden has some of the best financial markets in the world. We have leading fintech companies, as they are called, and fantastic entrepreneurs. But in financial market issues, which is the subject of today's debate, we are under high stress. Ordinary individuals face unreasonable obstacles.
There is extreme uncertainty in the global markets in connection with the war that Trump has started but does not really seem to know how to end. It affects commodities and stock markets today, and we are waiting for the Swedish government to show the decisiveness that others around the world are showing to protect companies and households by lowering their costs. This applies in particular to the costs for electricity, as mentioned here.
It was said that things could have been done better historically, but the simplest thing would have been to not let the electricity grid monopolies raise their fees by 30 percent at the turn of the year. On top of that, certain power fees were also added during a period. The government could have done its best to stop that fee hysteria, as the Center Party wants to do, because it concerns a monopoly.
In the next step, financial markets could definitely end up in the crosshairs. We already see the stock markets being affected, but we also have a highly leveraged population on the private level. It is important to keep an eye on commercial real estate and even on the mortgage market, because it is going to be a restless time ahead.
In everyday life, many still have problems with the Swedish banking system. Centerpartiet welcomes that the reinforced amortization requirement is being removed, as it has neither contributed to reduced lending nor helped vulnerable households, but rather complicated things. It is now finally being removed, which we have asked for. One should also consider what the amortization requirement should look like going forward in these uneasy times with not rising, but rather falling property prices.
The problems also exist in ordinary practical everyday life. The frauds have already been mentioned, and there the banks must take greater responsibility when they have now made it possible for customers to be deceived in a way that should not be possible in our digital era.
We should also be clear that it is unacceptable for the banks to hold the money. Today, one can immediately transfer euros from one Swedish account to another while money laundering checks are performed, which is absolutely necessary in these cases, but it is not possible with Swedish kronor. In those cases, the money is held by the banks overnight. They earn more than 1 billion a year on that. This primarily complicates things for private individuals and households.
To be able to function economically, one absolutely needs a bank account, and associations and certain individuals have difficulty obtaining one in our digital world. I therefore move for approval of reservation 11, which concerns meeting this growing problem. It has been mentioned in the debate, but the government has not yet done anything about this.
We must manage both the big, that is to say securing financial stability, and the everyday so that it becomes easier to perform banking services, change banks, and feel secure against fraud. Now, great challenges await the Swedish financial market in both large and small matters.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.