Reduced alcohol tax for alcoholic products from independent small producers

Kalle Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the report on reduced alcohol tax for alcohol products from independent small producers.

This proposal should be seen in a slightly larger context, where about a year and a half ago in this chamber, we made a decision to lower the tax on beer from independent craft breweries. The bill we are discussing now is a continuation of the same direction, where the same principle is extended to more types of alcoholic beverages.

The purpose of the reform is to improve the economic conditions for small independent producers, which is expected to lead to greater stability in operations and perhaps that they dare to invest and expand. Otherwise, the market for alcoholic beverages is dominated by a few larger actors who have clear economies of scale. Smaller producers, in comparison, have higher costs per produced unit and tougher competitive conditions.

The proposal means that producers who stay below certain production volumes shall be able to receive a reduced alcohol tax. To be covered by the tax reduction, the producer's annual production may be at most 100,000 liters of wine and 1.5 million liters of other fermented beverages, for example cider, 25,000 liters of medium-class products – it could be port wine – or in the case of ethyl alcohol, i.e., spirits, 1,000 liters of pure alcohol.

The reduction itself is differentiated, which means that producers will be divided into five different categories based on their annual production. The smallest producers will receive a tax reduction of up to 50 percent, and the reduction decreases stepwise for larger producers within this system.

Madam Speaker! An important word here is "independent". The tax reduction applies only to independent producers, that is, producers who are legally and economically independent and who do not produce under license.

In the bill, the issue of independence and what it entails is treated with fairly high resolution. I will not mention all the criteria or how the regulatory framework views, for example, collaborations between different producing actors, but it is of course important that no loopholes arise here. On the other hand, it is important that the rules are not made unnecessarily complicated. Here, one can at least note that certain industry organizations have warned against the latter.

For us Social Democrats, it is obviously important to always weigh in public health and not least children's right to a secure upbringing when we deal with these types of issues. Swedish alcohol policy as it is designed with the retail monopoly and the alcohol taxes has a clear public health perspective and a clear social perspective, and that is how we want it to remain. The entire purpose of the alcohol tax is, simply put, to reduce the consumption of alcohol by increasing the price.

At the same time, every individual reform must be assessed based on its actual effects. In this case, we share the assessment that the change does not entail any significant risks in these respects. Small producers' share of the market is relatively limited – according to Systembolaget's sales statistics, there were barely 400 Swedish producers in 2023 with sales of alcoholic beverages other than beer at Systembolaget. The majority of these producers are very small and receive a reduced alcohol tax with this proposal, while a few large producers whose drinks do not receive it have a market share of more than 90 percent.

Just as it was the case regarding the tax reduction for microbreweries, we are talking here about products found in a higher price segment, which means that the impact on total consumption is judged to be small.

The assessment of the reform's public finance effects, with an estimated tax shortfall of – only, one might still say – 20 million kronor per year, also indicates that the effects on consumption will be limited.

Madam Speaker! In summary, this is a proposal that builds on previous decisions and aims to strengthen smaller producers while important societal perspectives continue to be taken into account. The legislative changes are proposed to enter into force on July 1 this year.

I vote in favor of the proposal in the report.

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

Erik Hellsborn (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating a proposal that will make Sweden a little better and a little more fun through a reduction of the alcohol tax on products from independent craft breweries. The Sweden Democrats, of course, stand behind the submitted proposal for a decision.

This is not some revolutionary upheaval of Swedish alcohol policy, but it is a logical and well-considered next step after the reduction of the tax on beer from independent breweries that was introduced in July last year. Now we are extending the same principle to wine, cider, and spirits. It is about giving Sweden's small, independent producers the same chance to compete as we already give the breweries.

The proposal fully follows the EU's alcohol tax directive. The reduction may not fall below 50 percent of the normal tax rate and applies only to small-scale production: maximum 100,000 liters of wine, 1.5 million liters of other fermented beverages, 25,000 liters of mid-range products, or 1,000 liters of pure alcohol per year. The producers are divided into five progressive categories with a reduction of 50 percent for the very smallest to 10 percent for those approaching the ceiling. The requirements for legal and economic independence as well as physically separate premises are clear and strict, as is the prohibition against contract manufacturing. Collaborations between small producers are permitted as long as the total volume remains within the limits. In this way, we protect the small-scale character while avoiding abuse.

But why does this matter? Yes, because small-scale producers are a living part of Swedish food and drink culture, rural development, and entrepreneurship. They create unique products with local raw materials. They contribute to diversity at Systembolaget, to tourism, and to jobs, not least in rural areas. Without financial breathing room, many of these companies risk being wiped out by large-scale imports and other large actors. A reduction of up to 50 percent for the smallest gives them exactly the breathing room they need to invest, develop, and grow.

We have already seen the effects on the alcohol area. Small breweries have been able to broaden their range, hire more people, and reach more consumers. Now we are giving the same opportunity to producers of other alcoholic beverages. It is fair, it is consistent, and it is good policy.

Some may object that the alcohol tax should primarily serve public health and financing goals. There is some truth to that, but this proposal does not threaten those goals. The reduction is strictly limited to small volumes and small actors. The total tax base is not affected by more than a marginal amount, while the socio-economic gains in the form of more jobs, increased local economy, and a vibrant countryside are tangible. People with problem consumption do not get drunk on craft products with a still significantly higher price per glass compared to drinks from the larger producers.

In the special statement from the Centerpartiet, important issues regarding long-term tax policy, indexing, and balance between different types of beverages are raised. These are relevant points that may be worth following up on in the future. But they do not constitute grounds to say no to the proposed proposal, on the contrary. By now introducing a reduction for more categories, we take a step towards more neutral and predictable competition conditions on the Swedish beverage market.

Madam Speaker! This is ultimately about showing that Swedish politics can be both responsible and flexible. We safeguard public health through continued high alcohol taxation in general, but at the same time, we create space for what makes Sweden vibrant: small, passionate entrepreneurs who contribute to Swedish drinking culture, growth, and jobs in the countryside. Let us therefore decide in accordance with the submitted proposal and thereby make Sweden a little better and a little more fun!

(Applause)

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

Adam Reuterskiöld (M)

Madam Speaker! Reduced alcohol tax for alcohol products from independent small producers is what the Committee on Taxation's report 28 is about. It is pleasing to hear in the debate that we have such a large common consensus behind the fact that this is a good proposal, for it truly is – for several different reasons, which I will go into. But it is also interesting that this should have been done earlier.

The proposal builds on the reform for small breweries that was introduced in 2025. This means that other smaller producers – for example, vineyards, cider producers, and farm distilleries – also get the same opportunity for reduced alcohol tax that we previously introduced for smaller breweries.

This is fundamentally a reform for more growing companies, more local jobs, and better competitive conditions for the countryside. It is a continuation of the previous changes in the legislation, primarily for the tourism industry, which aim for a freer and easier society to live in.

Sweden has for a long time had a situation where the market for alcoholic products has been dominated by large actors. For beer, for example, five breweries account for 90 percent of the production. Small producers often have higher production costs, smaller distribution chains, and find it harder to carry their investments. Therefore, it is reasonable that the tax system takes these differences into account.

The reform means that wine, cider and other fermented beverages, mid-range products as well as spirits from independent small producers shall be covered by a tax relief. The smaller the producer is, the greater the tax reduction will be. The very smallest producers receive a reduction of 50 percent; after that, it is successively scaled down in five steps.

It is therefore not a general reduction of the alcohol tax in Sweden. It is a targeted reform for smaller companies.

Madam Speaker! This is also about Swedish rural development. In many parts of the country, small producers have become an important part of the tourism industry. Swedish vineyards, cider mills, cideries, and distilleries attract tourists, create local jobs, and strengthen the attractiveness of regions far outside the major cities.

All Swedish vineyards are judged, for example, to be covered by the reform because the production is generally small. The total Swedish wine production is estimated at around 300,000 liters per year, distributed among approximately 200 producers. This clearly shows that this is a reform that hits genuinely small operations and not the large industrial corporations.

The situation is similar even within cider production. Around 90 percent of the producers produce less than 100,000 liters per year and will therefore qualify for the highest tax reduction.

When it comes to alcohol, it is, however, primarily the very smallest farm distilleries that benefit. Several more established Swedish actors are already too large to be included. This shows that the reform is well-balanced and clearly aimed at small businesses.

In the debate, questions have also been raised regarding public health. It is important that these questions are taken seriously. Alcohol taxes naturally have a public health policy dimension. In this case, however, the effect on total consumption is judged to be very small. Small producers account for a limited part of the market, and their products often lie in the higher price segments.

Furthermore, it is far from certain that the entire tax relief will lead to lower prices. For many small companies, the reform will rather be used for new investments, product development, and strengthened profitability. This is long-awaited among the small producers.

So, it is not about promoting increased alcohol consumption. It is about creating more reasonable competitive conditions for small companies that today have difficulty competing with large international producers.

Madam Speaker! This is also an example of a policy that combines growth with proportionality. We often see how regulatory frameworks and tax systems are designed from the perspective of large companies with large administrative resources. But for a small family business in the countryside, every tax crown and every regulation can have very significant consequences. In that case, the policy must be able to be flexible and create better conditions even for these entrepreneurs.

The reform costs the state relatively limited amounts. The tax effect is estimated to be around 10 million this year and 20 million in the following years. At the same time, the effect for individual entrepreneurs can be very significant through better margins and increased opportunities to grow.

Sweden needs more companies that dare to grow. We need more local producers, more tourist destinations, and more entrepreneurs who invest in the entire country. The proposal in the Committee on Taxation's report 28 is therefore well-balanced. It strengthens small-scale companies, improves competitiveness, and makes it possible for more Swedish producers to develop, while taking into account public health and order and clarity in the tax system.

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

(Applause)

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Madam Speaker! What we are debating today may on the surface be a technical tax issue, but at its core, it is about something much larger. It is about entrepreneurship, jobs, and growth in our entire elongated country, and it is about small business entrepreneurship. Therefore, this report is very welcome.

Centerpartiet stands wholeheartedly behind the proposal to extend the reduced alcohol tax to also include small independent producers of wine, cider, spirits and other fermented beverages.

Today, a small-scale cider producer in Kivik or in Hjulsjö in Nora municipality, where I was at a tasting some time ago, a wine grower on Bjärehalvön or a gin distillery in Västerbotten has worse conditions than a microbrewery of beer. It is not quite logical. All these entrepreneurs contribute with the same passion and entrepreneurship to create unique products, jobs and living rural areas.

Madam Speaker! The large international beverage producers have economies of scale that a small local producer can never compete with. Therefore, differentiated taxes are an important tool to level the playing field and give the smaller actors a fair chance to grow. It is about lowering the thresholds, reducing the regulatory burden, and creating incentives for growth. For Centerpartiet, this is the core of our industrial policy. We know that it is in the small and growing companies that four out of five new jobs are created – still. It is these entrepreneurs who are the backbone of the local economy, not least in the countryside. By giving them better conditions, we strengthen all of Sweden.

The tourism industry also benefits from this. Now that we have finally established farm sales, a lowered alcohol tax creates further incentives for producers to invest in their operations, develop tourist destinations, and contribute to Matlandet Sverige.

Madam Speaker! Our support for the proposal is strong, but it is not entirely without criticism. The Centre Party wants, as we present in our special statement to the committee report, to direct two important joint motions to the government for the continued work.

Firstly, we need long-term and predictable rules of the game. Entrepreneurs must be able to rely on the fact that the conditions do not change from one year to another. We therefore believe that one should consider reintroducing a form of indexing of the alcohol tax to avoid jerky and unpredictable increases.

Secondly – and this is a bit more serious – we have seen a tendency towards a beginning distortion in the taxation of different types of beverages. During 2023 and 2024, the tax on beer was increased by 5 and 7.6 percent respectively, while the tax on spirits during the same period was increased by only 1 percent per year. The tax on spirits was increased less than for other alcohol types, due to the assessment that a larger increase in the tax on spirits would lead to increased smuggling and unregistered consumption. That is true, but this fact should also apply to beer.

This in any case represents a significant relative tax increase for beer producers compared to spirit producers. Therefore, today's decision is good. We want to avoid a development that risks distorting the competitive conditions in the market and disadvantaging an industry that often consists of many small local breweries.

We will follow the developments and ensure that any future adjustments are characterized by neutrality and fairness. All types of beverages shall be treated equally in terms of taxation. In addition to this, we want to be clear that we want to go even further. The ceiling for which producers are covered by the reduction is set according to the EU's minimum levels. Centerpartiet has previously proposed that for beer, the ceiling should be raised from 3 to 5 million liters.

Madam Speaker! This is a good and important reform. It shows that it is possible to pursue a policy that both strengthens entrepreneurship and creates a vibrant countryside. With that said, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report, and I urge the government to take into account the important points that the Center Party presents in our special statement.

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

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is not every day that I get to participate in the tax committee's debates, and therefore this is going to be a bit exciting. It is perhaps a bit strange that a Green Party member is standing here demanding approval for a reduced alcohol tax, but just as the referral bodies have shown, it will hardly lead to any higher alcohol consumption. Just as has been said before, the products belong to a higher price segment, and it is hardly those products one goes for if one wants as much alcohol per krona as possible.

I think this is a step in the right direction, and I will explain why. It is about wanting to see more producers, more in production, all around the country and increased production in the food chain. Now, alcohol might not be counted as food, but I will return to that question.

The fixed costs become disproportionately large and high for smaller producers, which means that their products have a harder time competing with large producers. We are, of course, aware of that. We can compare it with how we view the water supply in the country.

Drinking water production is vital for all of us, and there are different views depending on how large the production of drinking water is. Micro waterworks have lower requirements regarding, for example, sampling, which can often be expensive. Smaller municipal waterworks do not have the same requirements at all when it comes to maintaining redundant systems during larger crises or wars, which larger municipal waterworks have. Regarding a certain part of our society, we have the view that we allocate the cost based on how large the production is.

As has been mentioned earlier, we already made a decision last year regarding differentiated alcohol tax for microbreweries. There are further steps to be taken. I do not know whether it is the Committee on Taxation or some other committee that could take on the issue of spent grain. It is a byproduct from beer production, that is to say, brewing, and it is perfect as animal feed. Today, it is extremely expensive for micro-producers to leave the spent grain to farmers because it requires sampling of the grain, for example for salmonella. Most brewers do not understand how salmonella could enter the brewing process. One could review the type of sampling that exists for waterworks also regarding micro-production of beer. Many micro-producers of beer are forced today to destroy their spent grain instead of giving it to pigs and cows that can eat it.

Why is it important that we maintain alcohol production throughout the country? It contributes, among other things, to maintaining and increasing the profitability of agriculture in the country. We also know that the production of alcohol can have positive benefits in different types of crises and wars. We know, for example, that during the corona pandemic, there were some distilleries around the country that pivoted and began producing hand sanitizer. There are also positive societal effects, and of course, we want to favor and facilitate for individuals and small businesses to start their operations.

I vote in favor of the proposal.

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

Anders Ekegren (L)

Madam Speaker! Today's debate in the Committee on Taxation concerns a reduced alcohol tax for smaller independent producers, including of wine. This is hardly a traditional alcohol policy debate. The bill will hardly change the total extent of sales in Sweden. It is, however, an important industrial and rural policy issue.

Wine has been cultivated for a long time in Sweden. Fragments of viticulture in Sweden are said to have been found several thousand years back in time. I encountered greenhouse viticulture a bit here and there in Västergötland long before the viticulture boom. Swedish viticulture took off around the year 2000, when the grape variety Solaris, which can handle the Swedish climate, was introduced. The year before, Sweden was approved as an official wine country by the EU. Today, Swedish wine is of international class, served at the Nobel Banquet and sold for export to ten countries.

There are different figures regarding how many vineyards there are in Sweden today; I have seen figures ranging from 50 to 200 producers – it perhaps depends on how one counts. It is cultivated on 150 hectares in Sweden, and approximately 400,000 bottles of wine are produced per year. The vineyards are primarily located in Skåne, but also in Halland, on Öland, on Gotland, and at least as far north in the country as in Mälardalen. Given the warmer climate, it is entirely possible that wine will be able to be cultivated in more locations than today. Even my summer resort Lysekil has received a vineyard, which I visited during Ascension weekend. There, approximately 5,000 bottles of wine are produced per year.

Madam Speaker! Swedish viticulture is small today, but it is growing and becoming increasingly important. In many places, viticulture is combined with restaurant and hotel activities, which means that more people than those who directly grow grapes get jobs. It strengthens the local tourism industry. Previous decisions regarding exemptions for farm sales also facilitate things for local wine producers.

The government is positive about supporting local small-scale production. Last year, the Riksdag decided on a tax reduction for small-scale breweries. From July 1, 2026, a reduced alcohol tax will be introduced for small-scale and independent producers of wine, spirits, cider, and other fermented alcoholic beverages in Sweden. The smaller the production, the lower the tax.

Everything indicates that domestic wine production can increase in Sweden: better quality of the products, more producers, a better climate for viticulture, and more people daring to invest in viticulture. We have the land. I have personally visited Ästad winery in Halland, which today produces 40,000 bottles of wine per year. Around the operations, there is a spa, hotel rooms, a restaurant, and a gift shop, right out in the countryside. The wineries that are emerging around the country will strengthen local businesses and the tourism industry and create new jobs, especially in the countryside.

Madam Speaker! This is therefore in many ways a good bill. I therefore move for approval of the proposal in the committee's report.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 26 May.)

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